Normalising comparative effectiveness trials as clinical practice.
Briffa T., Symons T., Zeps N., Straiton N., Tarnow-Mordi WO., Simes J., Harris IA., Cruz M., Webb SA., Litton E., Nichol A., Williams CM.
There is a lack of high-quality evidence underpinning many contemporary clinical practice guidelines embedded in the healthcare systems, leading to treatment uncertainty and practice variation in most medical disciplines. Comparative effectiveness trials (CETs) represent a diverse range of research that focuses on optimising health outcomes by comparing currently approved interventions to generate high-quality evidence to inform decision makers. Yet, despite their ability to produce real-world evidence that addresses the key priorities of patients and health systems, many implementation challenges exist within the healthcare environment.This manuscript aims to highlight common barriers to conducting CETs and describes potential solutions to normalise their conduct as part of a learning healthcare system.