Health care has been called one of the most complex sectors of the U.S. economy. Driven largely by robust innovation in treatments and interventions, this complexity has created an increased need for evidence about what works best for whom in order to inform decisions that lead to safe, efficient, effective, and affordable care. As health care becomes more digital, clinical datasets are becoming larger and more numerous. By realizing the potential of knowledge generation that is more closely integrated with the practice of care, it should be possible not only to produce more usable evidence to inform decisions, but also to increase the efficiency and decrease the costs of doing clinical research. Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, or PCORnet, is a nation-wide patient-centered clinical research network intended to form a resource of clinical, administrative, and patient data that can be used to carry out observational and interventional research studies and enhance the use of clinical data to advance the learning health care system. The primary goal of the first phase of PCORnet will be to establish the data infrastructure necessary to do such research. In April and June 2014 the Institute of Medicine's Roundtable on Value and Science-Driven Health Care convened two workshops aimed at accelerating progress toward real-time knowledge generation through the seamless integration of clinical practice and research, one of the fundamental concepts of a continuously learning health system, centered on the development of the PCORnet. The first workshop brought together health care system leaders, both administrative and clinical, and researchers to consider issues and strategic priorities for building a successful and durable clinical research network and facilitate progress toward a continuously learning health care system more broadly, including issues related to science, technology, ethics, business, regulatory oversight, sustainability, and governance. The second workshop focused on implementation approaches. Health system CEOs convened to consider strategic priorities and explore approaches to implementation. These workshops will inform the decisions of field leaders moving forward, including PCORI, the PCORnet steering committee, and PCORnet grantees. Integrating Research and Practice is the summary of the presentations and discussions of the workshops.
The Institute of Medicine\'s Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care held a workshop, titled Partnering with Patients to Drive Shared Decisions, Better Value, and Care Improvement, on February 25 and 26, 2013. The workshop, supported by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the Blue Shield of California Foundation, focused on identifying and exploring issues, attitudes, and approaches to increasing patient engagement in and demand for the following: shared decision making and better communication about the evidence in support of testing and treatment options; the best value from the health care they receive; and the use of data generated in the course of their care experience for care improvement. The workshop hoped to build awareness and demand from patients and families for better care at lower costs and to create a health care system that continuously learns and improves. Participants included members of the medical, clinical research, health care services research, regulatory, health care economics, behavioral economics, health care delivery, payer, and patient communities. Partnering with Patients to Drive Shared Decisions, Better Value, and Care Improvement Workshop Proceedings offers a summary of the 2-day workshop including the workshop agenda and biographies of speakers.
Health care has been called one of the most complex sectors of the U.S. economy. Driven largely by robust innovation in treatments and interventions, this complexity has created an increased need for evidence about what works best for whom in order to inform decisions that lead to safe, efficient, effective, and affordable care. As health care becomes more digital, clinical datasets are becoming larger and more numerous. By realizing the potential of knowledge generation that is more closely integrated with the practice of care, it should be possible not only to produce more usable evidence to inform decisions, but also to increase the efficiency and decrease the costs of doing clinical research. Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, or PCORnet, is a nation-wide patient-centered clinical research network intended to form a resource of clinical, administrative, and patient data that can be used to carry out observational and interventional research studies and enhance the use of clinical data to advance the learning health care system. The primary goal of the first phase of PCORnet will be to establish the data infrastructure necessary to do such research. In April and June 2014 the Institute of Medicine's Roundtable on Value and Science-Driven Health Care convened two workshops aimed at accelerating progress toward real-time knowledge generation through the seamless integration of clinical practice and research, one of the fundamental concepts of a continuously learning health system, centered on the development of the PCORnet. The first workshop brought together health care system leaders, both administrative and clinical, and researchers to consider issues and strategic priorities for building a successful and durable clinical research network and facilitate progress toward a continuously learning health care system more broadly, including issues related to science, technology, ethics, business, regulatory oversight, sustainability, and governance. The second workshop focused on implementation approaches. Health system CEOs convened to consider strategic priorities and explore approaches to implementation. These workshops will inform the decisions of field leaders moving forward, including PCORI, the PCORnet steering committee, and PCORnet grantees. Integrating Research and Practice is the summary of the presentations and discussions of the workshops.
Digital health data are the lifeblood of a continuous learning health system. A steady flow of reliable data is necessary to coordinate and monitor patient care, analyze and improve systems of care, conduct research to develop new products and approaches, assess the effectiveness of medical interventions, and advance population health. The totality of available health data is a crucial resource that should be considered an invaluable public asset in the pursuit of better care, improved health, and lower health care costs. The ability to collect, share, and use digital health data is rapidly evolving. Increasing adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) is being driven by the implementation of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act, which pays hospitals and individuals incentives if they can demonstrate that they use basic EHRs in 2011. Only a third had access to the basic features necessary to leverage this information for improvement, such as the ability to view laboratory results, maintain problem lists, or manage prescription ordering. In addition to increased data collection, more organizations are sharing digital health data. Data collected to meet federal reporting requirements or for administrative purposes are becoming more accessible. Efforts such as Health.Data.gov provide access to government datasets for the development of insights and software applications with the goal of improving health. Within the private sector, at least one pharmaceutical company is actively exploring release of some of its clinical trial data for research by others. Digital Data Improvement Priorities for Continuous Learning in Health and Health Care: Workshop Summary summarizes discussions at the March 2012 Institute of Medicine (2012) workshop to identify and characterize the current deficiencies in the reliability, availability, and usability of digital health data and consider strategies, priorities, and responsibilities to address such deficiencies.
As past, current, or future patients, the public should be the health care system's unwavering focus and serve as change agents in its care. Taking this into account, the quality of health care should be judged not only by whether clinical decisions are informed by the best available scientific evidence, but also by whether care is tailored to a patient's individual needs and perspectives. However, too often it is provider preference and convenience, rather than those of the patient, that drive what care is delivered. As part of its Learning Health System series of workshops, the Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care hosted a workshop to assess the prospects for improving health and lowering costs by advancing patient involvement in the elements of a learning health system.
Health care quality and its affordability have become very pressing issues in the United States. All sectors of the country are attempting to push forward initiatives that will improve the health care system as well as the health of the American population in general. Despite the economical dedication to health care, about 1/5, the system remains uneven and fragmented, patient harm is quite common, care is often uncoordinated, and many more mishaps occur. There exists many obstacles to improve the nation's health care system; these include the capacity to reliably and consistently measure progress. In 2006 the Institute of Medicine (IOM) established the Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care which has since accelerated the development of a learning health system- one in which science, informatics, incentives, and culture are aligned to create a continuous learning loop. This learning loop would thus help make the health care system better. In response, the IOM organized a 2-day workshop to explore in depth the core measurement needs for population health, health care quality, and health care costs. The workshop hoped to gain a full understanding of how to improve the nation's measurement capacity to track progress in the health care system. Having this knowledge would help the nation get one step closer to the creation of an efficient learning loop. The workshop was divided into a series of sessions that focused on different aspects of measurement. Core Measurement Needs for Better Care, Better Health, and Lower Costs: Counting What Counts: Workshop Summary includes explanations and key details for these sessions: Vision, Current Measurement Capabilities, Specifying the Shape of a Core Metric Set, and Implementation. The report also features common themes within these areas, the workshop agenda, and information about those involved.
Successful development of clinical data as an engine for knowledge generation has the potential to transform health and health care in America. As part of its Learning Health System Series, the Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care hosted a workshop to discuss expanding the access to and use of clinical data as a foundation for care improvement.
The United States has the highest per capita spending on health care of any industrialized nation but continually lags behind other nations in health care outcomes including life expectancy and infant mortality. National health expenditures are projected to exceed $2.5 trillion in 2009. Given healthcare's direct impact on the economy, there is a critical need to control health care spending. According to The Health Imperative: Lowering Costs and Improving Outcomes, the costs of health care have strained the federal budget, and negatively affected state governments, the private sector and individuals. Healthcare expenditures have restricted the ability of state and local governments to fund other priorities and have contributed to slowing growth in wages and jobs in the private sector. Moreover, the number of uninsured has risen from 45.7 million in 2007 to 46.3 million in 2008. The Health Imperative: Lowering Costs and Improving Outcomes identifies a number of factors driving expenditure growth including scientific uncertainty, perverse economic and practice incentives, system fragmentation, lack of patient involvement, and under-investment in population health. Experts discussed key levers for catalyzing transformation of the delivery system. A few included streamlined health insurance regulation, administrative simplification and clarification and quality and consistency in treatment. The book is an excellent guide for policymakers at all levels of government, as well as private sector healthcare workers.
Recent scientific and technological advances have accelerated our understanding of the causes of disease development and progression, and resulted in innovative treatments and therapies. Ongoing work to elucidate the effects of individual genetic variation on patient outcomes suggests the rapid pace of discovery in the biomedical sciences will only accelerate. However, these advances belie an important and increasing shortfall between the expansion in therapy and treatment options and knowledge about how these interventions might be applied appropriately to individual patients. The impressive gains made in Americans' health over the past decades provide only a preview of what might be possible when data on treatment effects and patient outcomes are systematically captured and used to evaluate their effectiveness. Needed for progress are advances as dramatic as those experienced in biomedicine in our approach to assessing clinical effectiveness. In the emerging era of tailored treatments and rapidly evolving practice, ensuring the translation of scientific discovery into improved health outcomes requires a new approach to clinical evaluation. A paradigm that supports a continual learning process about what works best for individual patients will not only take advantage of the rigor of trials, but also incorporate other methods that might bring insights relevant to clinical care and endeavor to match the right method to the question at hand. The Institute of Medicine Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care's vision for a learning healthcare system, in which evidence is applied and generated as a natural course of care, is premised on the development of a research capacity that is structured to provide timely and accurate evidence relevant to the clinical decisions faced by patients and providers. As part of the Roundtable's Learning Healthcare System series of workshops, clinical researchers, academics, and policy makers gathered for the workshop Redesigning the Clinical Effectiveness Research Paradigm: Innovation and Practice-Based Approaches. Participants explored cutting-edge research designs and methods and discussed strategies for development of a research paradigm to better accommodate the diverse array of emerging data resources, study designs, tools, and techniques. Presentations and discussions are summarized in this volume.
Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are often referred to as the "gold standard" of clinical research. However, in its current state, the U.S. clinical trials enterprise faces substantial challenges to the efficient and effective conduct of research. Streamlined approaches to RCTs, such as large simple trials (LSTs), may provide opportunities for progress on these challenges. Clinical trials support the development of new medical products and the evaluation of existing products by generating knowledge about safety and efficacy in pre- and post-marketing settings and serve to inform medical decision making and medical product development. Although well-designed and -implemented clinical trials can provide robust evidence, a gap exists between the evidence needs of a continuously learning health system, in which all medical decisions are based on the best available evidence, and the reality, in which the generation of timely and practical evidence faces significant barriers. Large Simple Trials and Knowledge Generation in a Learning Health System is the summary of a workshop convened by the Institute of Medicine's Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care and the Forum on Drug Discovery, Development, and Translation. Experts from a wide range of disciplines-including health information technology, research funding, clinical research methods, statistics, patients, product development, medical product regulation, and clinical outcomes research-met to marshal a better understanding of the issues, options, and approaches to accelerating the use of LSTs. This publication summarizes discussions on the potential of LSTs to improve the speed and practicality of knowledge generation for medical decision making and medical product development, including efficacy and effectiveness assessments, in a continuously learning health system. Large Simple Trials and Knowledge Generation in a Learning Health System explores acceleration of the use of LSTs to improve the speed and practicality of knowledge generation for medical decision making and medical product development; considers the concepts of LST design, examples of successful LSTs, the relative advantages of LSTs, and the infrastructure needed to build LST capacity as a routine function of care; identifies structural, cultural, and regulatory barriers hindering the development of an enhanced LST capacity; discusses needs and strategies in building public demand for and participation in LSTs; and considers near-term strategies for accelerating progress in the uptake of LSTs in the United States.
Like many other industries, health care is increasingly turning to digital information and the use of electronic resources. The Institute of Medicine's Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care hosted three workshops to explore current efforts and opportunities to accelerate progress in improving health and health care with information technology systems.
In 2013 the Institute of Medicine (IOM) Roundtable on Population Health Improvement organized a workshop to discuss opportunities to foster a health in all policies approach in non-health sectors such as housing, transportation, defense, education, and others. Much of the discussion focused on public-sector organizations, and roundtable members saw the need for further discussion of the role of the private sector, both as stakeholder and partner. On June 4, 2015, the roundtable convened a follow-up workshop focused on applying a health lens to the role and potential of businesses in improving economic well-being and community health outcomes. Participants explored what businesses can offer the movement to improve population health and areas of potential, as well as models for how businesses can impact the determinants of health, and developed a platform for discussing how to promote and support health in all business practices, policies, and investments. This report summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop.
Recent scientific and technological advances have accelerated our understanding of the causes of disease development and progression, and resulted in innovative treatments and therapies. Ongoing work to elucidate the effects of individual genetic variation on patient outcomes suggests the rapid pace of discovery in the biomedical sciences will only accelerate. However, these advances belie an important and increasing shortfall between the expansion in therapy and treatment options and knowledge about how these interventions might be applied appropriately to individual patients. The impressive gains made in Americans' health over the past decades provide only a preview of what might be possible when data on treatment effects and patient outcomes are systematically captured and used to evaluate their effectiveness. Needed for progress are advances as dramatic as those experienced in biomedicine in our approach to assessing clinical effectiveness. In the emerging era of tailored treatments and rapidly evolving practice, ensuring the translation of scientific discovery into improved health outcomes requires a new approach to clinical evaluation. A paradigm that supports a continual learning process about what works best for individual patients will not only take advantage of the rigor of trials, but also incorporate other methods that might bring insights relevant to clinical care and endeavor to match the right method to the question at hand. The Institute of Medicine Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care's vision for a learning healthcare system, in which evidence is applied and generated as a natural course of care, is premised on the development of a research capacity that is structured to provide timely and accurate evidence relevant to the clinical decisions faced by patients and providers. As part of the Roundtable's Learning Healthcare System series of workshops, clinical researchers, academics, and policy makers gathered for the workshop Redesigning the Clinical Effectiveness Research Paradigm: Innovation and Practice-Based Approaches. Participants explored cutting-edge research designs and methods and discussed strategies for development of a research paradigm to better accommodate the diverse array of emerging data resources, study designs, tools, and techniques. Presentations and discussions are summarized in this volume.
Digital health data are the lifeblood of a continuous learning health system. A steady flow of reliable data is necessary to coordinate and monitor patient care, analyze and improve systems of care, conduct research to develop new products and approaches, assess the effectiveness of medical interventions, and advance population health. The totality of available health data is a crucial resource that should be considered an invaluable public asset in the pursuit of better care, improved health, and lower health care costs. The ability to collect, share, and use digital health data is rapidly evolving. Increasing adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) is being driven by the implementation of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act, which pays hospitals and individuals incentives if they can demonstrate that they use basic EHRs in 2011. Only a third had access to the basic features necessary to leverage this information for improvement, such as the ability to view laboratory results, maintain problem lists, or manage prescription ordering. In addition to increased data collection, more organizations are sharing digital health data. Data collected to meet federal reporting requirements or for administrative purposes are becoming more accessible. Efforts such as Health.Data.gov provide access to government datasets for the development of insights and software applications with the goal of improving health. Within the private sector, at least one pharmaceutical company is actively exploring release of some of its clinical trial data for research by others. Digital Data Improvement Priorities for Continuous Learning in Health and Health Care: Workshop Summary summarizes discussions at the March 2012 Institute of Medicine (2012) workshop to identify and characterize the current deficiencies in the reliability, availability, and usability of digital health data and consider strategies, priorities, and responsibilities to address such deficiencies.
Successful development of clinical data as an engine for knowledge generation has the potential to transform health and health care in America. As part of its Learning Health System Series, the Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care hosted a workshop to discuss expanding the access to and use of clinical data as a foundation for care improvement.
Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are often referred to as the "gold standard" of clinical research. However, in its current state, the U.S. clinical trials enterprise faces substantial challenges to the efficient and effective conduct of research. Streamlined approaches to RCTs, such as large simple trials (LSTs), may provide opportunities for progress on these challenges. Clinical trials support the development of new medical products and the evaluation of existing products by generating knowledge about safety and efficacy in pre- and post-marketing settings and serve to inform medical decision making and medical product development. Although well-designed and -implemented clinical trials can provide robust evidence, a gap exists between the evidence needs of a continuously learning health system, in which all medical decisions are based on the best available evidence, and the reality, in which the generation of timely and practical evidence faces significant barriers. Large Simple Trials and Knowledge Generation in a Learning Health System is the summary of a workshop convened by the Institute of Medicine's Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care and the Forum on Drug Discovery, Development, and Translation. Experts from a wide range of disciplines-including health information technology, research funding, clinical research methods, statistics, patients, product development, medical product regulation, and clinical outcomes research-met to marshal a better understanding of the issues, options, and approaches to accelerating the use of LSTs. This publication summarizes discussions on the potential of LSTs to improve the speed and practicality of knowledge generation for medical decision making and medical product development, including efficacy and effectiveness assessments, in a continuously learning health system. Large Simple Trials and Knowledge Generation in a Learning Health System explores acceleration of the use of LSTs to improve the speed and practicality of knowledge generation for medical decision making and medical product development; considers the concepts of LST design, examples of successful LSTs, the relative advantages of LSTs, and the infrastructure needed to build LST capacity as a routine function of care; identifies structural, cultural, and regulatory barriers hindering the development of an enhanced LST capacity; discusses needs and strategies in building public demand for and participation in LSTs; and considers near-term strategies for accelerating progress in the uptake of LSTs in the United States.
The Institute of Medicine\'s Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care held a workshop, titled Partnering with Patients to Drive Shared Decisions, Better Value, and Care Improvement, on February 25 and 26, 2013. The workshop, supported by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the Blue Shield of California Foundation, focused on identifying and exploring issues, attitudes, and approaches to increasing patient engagement in and demand for the following: shared decision making and better communication about the evidence in support of testing and treatment options; the best value from the health care they receive; and the use of data generated in the course of their care experience for care improvement. The workshop hoped to build awareness and demand from patients and families for better care at lower costs and to create a health care system that continuously learns and improves. Participants included members of the medical, clinical research, health care services research, regulatory, health care economics, behavioral economics, health care delivery, payer, and patient communities. Partnering with Patients to Drive Shared Decisions, Better Value, and Care Improvement Workshop Proceedings offers a summary of the 2-day workshop including the workshop agenda and biographies of speakers.
In 2004, the Institute of Medicine released Health Literacy: A Prescription to End Confusion, a report on the then-underappreciated challenge of enabling patients to comprehend their condition and treatment, to make the best decisions for their care, and to take the right medications at the right time in the intended dose. That report documented the problems, origins, and consequences of the fact that tens of millions of U.S. adults are unable to read complex texts, including many health-related materials, and it proposed possible solutions to those problems. To commemorate the anniversary of the release of the 2004 health literacy report, the Institute of Medicine's Roundtable on Health Literacy convened a 1-day public workshop to assess the progress made in the field of health literacy over the past decade, the current state of the field, and the future of health literacy at the local, national, and international levels. Health Literacy: Past, Present, and Future summarizes the presentation and discussion of the workshop.
Scientific advances such as the sequencing of the human genome have created great promise for improving human health by providing a greater understanding of disease biology and enabling the development of new drugs, diagnostics, and preventive services. However, the translation of research advances into clinical applications has so far been slower than anticipated. This is due in part to the complexity of the underlying biology as well as the cost and time it takes to develop a product. Pharmaceutical companies are adapting their business models to this new reality for product development by placing increasing emphasis on leveraging alliances, joint development efforts, early-phase research partnerships, and public-private partnerships. These collaborative efforts make it possible to identify new drug targets, enhance the understanding of the underlying basis of disease, discover novel indications for the use of already approved products, and develop biomarkers for disease outcomes or directed drug use. While the potential benefits of collaboration are significant, the fact that the relationships among development partners are often financial means that it is vital to ensure trust by identifying, disclosing, and managing any potential sources of conflict that could create bias in the research being performed together. Conflict of Interest and Medical Innovation is the summary of a workshop convened by the Institute of Medicine Roundtable on Translating Genomic-Based Research for Health in June 2013 to explore the appropriate balance between identifying and managing conflicts of interest and advancing medical innovation. A wide range of stakeholders, including government officials, pharmaceutical company representatives, academic administrators and researchers, health care providers, medical ethicists, patient advocates, and consumers, were invited to present their perspectives and participate in discussions during the workshop. This report focuses on current conflict of interest policies and their effect on medical innovation in an effort to identify best practices and potential solutions for facilitating innovation while still ensuring scientific integrity and public trust.
To receive the greatest value for health care, it is important to focus on issues of quality and disparity, and the ability of individuals to make appropriate decisions based on basic health knowledge and services. The Forum on the Science of Health Care Quality Improvement and Implementation, the Roundtable on Health Disparities, and the Roundtable on Health Literacy jointly convened the workshop "Toward Health Equity and Patient-Centeredness: Integrating Health Literacy, Disparities Reduction, and Quality Improvement" to address these concerns. During this workshop, speakers and participants explored how equity in care delivered and a focus on patients could be improved.
Millions of peopleâ€"infants, children, adults, and their familiesâ€"are currently coping with serious illness in the United States. Efforts are intensifying to improve overall care quality through the delivery of person-centered and family-oriented services, for patients of all ages and across disease stages, care settings, and specialties. While aging Baby Boomers are increasing the proportion of patients in the Medicare population over time, the sickest and most vulnerable patients needing health system support and other services to meet their complex needs can be found across the age spectrum and in a broad range of care settings, from perinatal care to geriatric care. Recognizing the need to thoughtfully consider and address the challenges and opportunities in efforts to improve care quality and value, the Roundtable on Quality Care for People with Serious Illness of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held the public workshop Integrating the Patient and Caregiver Voice into Serious Illness Care, on December 15, 2016, in Washington, DC. This workshop was the first in a series planned by the roundtable, and was designed specifically to bring together diverse personal perspectives and experiences about priorities and values that are important to patients and families coping with serious illness, and to consider solutions that support integration of these priorities and values in practice. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop.
The roots of health literacy can be traced back to the national literacy movement in India under Gandhi and to aid groups working in Africa to promote education and health. The term health literacy was first used in 1974 and described as "health education meeting minimal standards for all school grade levels". From that first use the definition of health literacy evolved during the next 30 years with official definitions promulgated by government agencies and large programs. Despite differences among these definitions, they all hold in common the idea that health literacy involves the need for people to understand information that helps them maintain good health. Although the United States produces a majority of the research on health literacy, Europe has strong multinational programs as well as research efforts, and health literacy experts in developing countries have created successful programs implemented on a community level. Given these distinct strengths of efforts worldwide, there are many opportunities for collaboration. International collaboration can harness the United States' research power, Europe's multilingual and multinational experience, and developing nations' community-based programs to create robust programs and research that reach people-not based on language or nationality but on need and value. A workshop on international health literacy efforts that feature presentations and discussion about health literacy interventions from various countries as well as other topics related to international health literacy was held as the basis for this report. Health Literacy: Improving Health, Health Systems, and Health Policy Around the World summarizes the findings and discussions at the workshop.
In September 2015, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine hosted a workshop to explore the basic and translational research needs for population health science, and to discuss specific research priorities and actions to foster population health improvement. The workshop was designed to provide frameworks for understanding population health research and its role in shaping and having an effect on population health, identify individual and institutional facilitators and challenges regarding the production, communication, and use of research for population health improvement, and identify key areas for future research critical to the advancement of population health improvement. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop.
The field of health literacy has evolved from one focused on individuals to one that recognizes that health literacy is multidimensional. While communicating in a health literate manner is important for everyone, it is particularly important when communicating with those with limited health literacy who also experience more serious medication errors, higher rates of hospitalization and use of the emergency room, poor health outcomes, and increased mortality. Over the past decade, research has shown that health literacy interventions can significantly impact various areas including health care costs, outcomes, and health disparities. To understand the extent to which health literacy has been shown to be effective at contributing to the Quadruple Aim of improving the health of communities, providing better care, providing affordable care, and improving the experience of the health care team, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a public workshop on building the case for health literacy. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop, and highlights important lessons about the role of health literacy in meeting the Quadruple Aim, case studies of organizations that have adopted health literacy, and discussions among the different stakeholders involved in making the case for health literacy.
To explore issues related to community-driven power-building efforts to improve population health, the Roundtable on Population Health Improvement of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine hosted a virtual public workshop, "Community Power in Population Health Improvement", on January 28 and 29, 2021. Participants discussed the different components and dimensions of community-led action around different population health improvement topics such as education, transportation, environmental health, healthy eating, and active living, among others. This Proceedings of a Workshop summarizes the presentations and discussion of the workshop.
The Institute of Medicine's Roundtable on Population Health Improvement brings together individuals and organizations that represent different sectors in a dialogue about what is needed to improve population health. On September 22, 2014, the roundtable held a workshop to discuss some of the science of health communication, audiences, and messaging, and to explore what it will take to generate widespread awareness, acceptance, and action to improve health, including through the entertainment media, the news media, and social media. This report summarizes the presentations and discussion of the workshop.
The United States faces a significantly aging population as well as a growing share of the population that is living longer with multiple chronic conditions. To provide high-quality care to people of all ages living with serious illness, it is critical that the nation develop an adequately trained and prepared workforce consisting of a range of professionals, including physicians, nurses, social workers, direct care workers, and chaplains. To explore some of the key workforce-related challenges to meeting the needs of people with serious illness, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine hosted a workshop on November 7, 2019. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop.
In its landmark report, Health Literacy: A Prescription to End Confusion, the Institute of Medicine noted that there are 90 million adults in the United States with limited health literacy who cannot fully benefit from what the health and health care systems have to offer. Since the release of that report, health literacy has become a vibrant research field that has developed and disseminated a wide range of tools and practices that have helped organizations, ranging in size from large health care systems to individual health care providers and pharmacists, to engage in health literate discussions with and provide health literate materials for patients and family members. Improving the health literacy of organizations can be an important component of addressing the social determinants of health and achieving the triple aim of improving the patient experience, improving the health of populations, and reducing the cost of care. However, the focus on organizations does not address the larger issue of how to improve health literacy across the U.S. population. To get a better understanding of the state of community-based health literacy interventions, the Roundtable on Health Literacy hosted a workshop on July 19, 2017 on community-based health literacy interventions. It featured examples of community-based health literacy programs, discussions on how to evaluate such programs, and the actions the field can take to embrace this larger view of health literacy. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop.
Health literacy has been shown to affect health outcomes. The use of preventive services improves health and prevents costly health care expenditures. Several studies have found that health literacy makes a difference in the extent to which populations use preventive services. On September 15, 2009, the Institute of Medicine Roundtable on Health Literacy held a workshop to explore approaches to integrate health literacy into primary and secondary prevention. Promoting Health Literacy to Encourage Prevention and Wellness serves as a factual account of the discussion that took place at the workshop. The report describes the inclusion of health literacy into public health prevention programs at the national, state, and local levels; reviews how insurance companies factor health literacy into their prevention programs; and discusses industry contributions to providing health literate primary and secondary prevention.
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.