by Tomas J. Philipson, Eric Sun
June 28, 2011
Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) has been heralded as a way to reduce health-care costs by picking “winners” and “losers” among alternative treatments for a given condition. Studies that employ CER attempt to determine which treatments provide the most benefit for the largest number of patients. In their new report, Blue Pill or Red Pill: The Limits of Comparative Effectiveness Research, researchers Tomas Philipson and Eric Sun of the Manhattan Institute’s Project FDA find that CER may fail to provide successful strategies for lowering health care costs if politicians and providers restrict access to therapies that aren’t deemed “winners” in CER trials.