Showing papers by "Lee Goldman published in 2014"
TL;DR: Optimal use of most standard hospital-based AMI treatment strategies, especially combined strategies, would be cost effective in China, and the overall impact on preventing CHD deaths was projected to be modest.
Abstract: Background—The cost-effectiveness of the optimal use of hospital-based acute myocardial infarction (AMI) treatments and their potential impact on coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality in China is not well known. Methods and Results—The effectiveness and costs of optimal use of hospital-based AMI treatments were estimated by the CHD Policy Model-China, a Markov-style computer simulation model. Changes in simulated AMI, CHD mortality, quality-adjusted life years, and total healthcare costs were the outcomes. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was used to assess projected cost-effectiveness. Optimal use of 4 oral drugs (aspirin, β-blockers, statins, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors) in all eligible patients with AMI or unfractionated heparin in non–ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction was a highly cost-effective strategy (incremental cost-effectiveness ratios approximately US $3100 or less). Optimal use of reperfusion therapies in eligible patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardia...
40 citations
TL;DR: This growing workforce, which now includes more than 1200 CSP alumni, has studied clinical, administrative, and population-based data to distill the evidence to inform clinical practice and to describe many of the system- and patient-level characteristics that are associated with variation in access and outcomes of health care.
Abstract: During the past 4 decades, the training of physician-scientists has been driven by the information needs of clinicians; policymakers; and, more recently, patients who have voiced a strong desire to move from case-based, opinion-driven clinical care to practice informed by evidence. Thought leaders, primarily from the fields of internal medicine, epidemiology, and public health, proposed that this task could best be accomplished by developing researchers grounded in clinical medicine but armed with the skills needed to ask and answer the most pressing clinical and health care delivery questions in medicine. One long-lasting result was the Clinical Scholars Program (CSP), initially funded by the Carnegie Corporation and the Commonwealth Foundation and later by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) (1).
2 citations