You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 296 No. 8, August 23/30, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Commentary
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on ISI (6)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related letters
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Statistics and Research Methods
 •Medical Ethics
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Medicare's Requirement for Research Participation as a Condition of Coverage

Is It Ethical?

Steven D. Pearson, MD, MSc; Franklin G. Miller, PhD; Ezekiel J. Emanuel, MD, PhD

JAMA. 2006;296:988-991.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Policy makers agree that the US health care system needs new and better ways to ascertain the risks, benefits, and costs of new medical technologies as they are introduced into practice.1-3 One central policy mechanism to develop such evidence is to link insurance coverage with a requirement that patients participate in relevant research, including registries and clinical trials. Medicare has introduced its own version of this approach, termed coverage with evidence development (CED), and has used it in several high-profile coverage decisions.4 But the policy has been criticized as coercive and unfair.5 The future of CED at Medicare and of similar approaches among private insurers may well depend on whether such approaches are viewed as ethical.

In this article, we argue that CED should not be viewed as coercive because Medicare patients are not entitled to . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Coverage With Evidence Development

Author Affiliations: Department of Clinical Bioethics, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (Drs Pearson, Miller, and Emanuel); and Department of Ambulatory Care and Prevention, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Boston, Mass (Dr Pearson).


RELATED LETTERS

Medicare Requirement for Research Participation
Peter W. Groeneveld
JAMA. 2006;296(24):2923-2924.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Medicare Requirement for Research Participation
Mayer Brezis and Lisa Soleymani Lehmann
JAMA. 2006;296(24):2924.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Medicare Requirement for Research Participation—Reply
Steven D. Pearson, Franklin G. Miller, and Ezekiel J. Emanuel
JAMA. 2006;296(24):2924-2925.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Evidence-informed evidence-making
Chalkidou et al.
J Health Serv Res Policy 2008;13:167-173.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Making a decision to wait for more evidence: when the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence recommends a technology only in the context of research
Chalkidou et al.
JRSM 2007;100:453-460.
FULL TEXT  

Update in Critical Care 2006
Milbrandt et al.
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2007;175:638-648.
FULL TEXT  

Medicare Requirement for Research Participation
Brezis and Lehmann
JAMA 2006;296:2924-2924.
FULL TEXT  

Medicare Requirement for Research Participation
Groeneveld
JAMA 2006;296:2923-2924.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2006 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.