Normalising comparative effectiveness trials as clinical practice


Comparative effectiveness trials (CETs) represent a diverse range of research that focuses on optimising health outcomes. Specifically, these trials compare currently approved interventions to generate high-quality evidence and, in turn, better inform all decision makers involved.

While it is acknowledged that CETs produce real-world evidence that addresses the key priorities of patients and health systems, many implementation challenges exist within the healthcare environment. Through the work of ACTA’s Embedding Reference Group and sector colleagues, the team identified that there was a lack of high-quality evidence underpinning many contemporary clinical practice guidelines embedded in the healthcare systems. They also recognised that ultimately, this could lead to treatment uncertainty and practice variation in most clinical disciplines.

In a new paper published in Trials, this team highlight the common barriers to conducting comparative effectiveness trials (CETs) and the potential solutions to normalising their conduct as clinical practice and part of a learning healthcare system.

We sincerely thank the many ACTA members and partners who were involved in the development of this manuscript, specifically those from the Embedding Reference Group.

Find out more about ACTAs work in embedding clinical trials in healthcare

This project received grant funding from the Australian Government.

Resource Documents

Download the publication: Normalising comparative effectiveness trials as clinical practice

Type of resource: URL

VISIT WEBSITE (the link opens in a new window)

Latest Resource