FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 330:434-435 February 10, 1994 Number 6 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited Related Article by Tanenbaum, S. J. PubMed Citation

To the Editor: The article by Tanenbaum (Oct. 21 issue)¹ criticizing outcomes research troubled me deeply. Her thesis is that outcomes research attempts to replace subjective professional judgment with micromanagement by insurance companies and government. On the contrary, outcomes research can inform decision makers -- including public and private payers, but especially physicians and patients -- and help them make better decisions. Nobody disputes the fact that most therapeutic interventions have never been rigorously evaluated. Not even Tanenbaum would object, I trust, to evaluating these interventions on the basis of a defined end point or outcome. As long as it . . . [Full Text of this Article]

References

HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  TERMS OF USE  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org Comments and questions? Please contact us. The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.