![](/ServeContent?url=http%3A%2F%2Farchfami.ama-assn.org%2Ficons%2Fspacer.gif) |
![](/ServeContent?url=http%3A%2F%2Farchfami.ama-assn.org%2Ficons%2Fspacer.gif) |
![](/ServeContent?url=http%3A%2F%2Farchfami.ama-assn.org%2Ficons%2Fspacer.gif)
Whose Data Are These, Anyway?
David Nowels, MD
Arch Fam Med. 1995;4(11):935-936.
![](/ServeContent?url=http%3A%2F%2Farchfami.ama-assn.org%2Ficons%2Fspacer.gif) |
![](/ServeContent?url=http%3A%2F%2Farchfami.ama-assn.org%2Ficons%2Fspacer.gif) |
Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings. |
|
![](/ServeContent?url=http%3A%2F%2Farchfami.ama-assn.org%2Ficons%2Fspacer.gif) |
![](/ServeContent?url=http%3A%2F%2Farchfami.ama-assn.org%2Ficons%2Fspacer.gif) |
NEARLY A DECADE has passed since the opening of the assessment and accountability "revolution" in medicine.1 This revolution was heralded by reports describing a lack of important information about what physicians really do in practice and the effect that has on patients.2-4 These and other studies clearly demonstrate the need for future research in medical effectiveness. Effectiveness studies are evaluations of the processes and results, or outcomes, of actual medical practice rather than those achieved in carefully selected populations under ideal circumstances. The article by Golden et al5 in this issue of the ARCHIVES is an example of such research. Several factors have propelled the direction of this research, including (1) the documentation of significant variations in the patterns of care across different populations, without discernible differences in medical outcomes; (2) a growing awareness of the finite nature of societal resources for health care; (3) emerging concerns
. . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]
Author Affiliations
University of Colorado Health Sciences Center Denver
|