Newsletter Sign-Up

Keep up to date with NPC news and events by signing up for our e-newsletter E.V.I.dently, and our CER Daily Newsfeed.

Subscribe POLICY

For Immediate Release
Contacts: Andrea Hofelich, ahofelich@npcnow.org, 202-827-2078 (NPC)
Katie Delach, Katharine.Delach@uphs.upenn.edu, 215-349-5964 (Penn Medicine)

Data Can Offer Critical Insights, But Roadblocks to Data Access Persist

Authors of New Study Assess Data Access Policies to Federal and State Datasets; Provide Recommendations to Reduce Barriers to Use

(Washington, D.C., April 1, 2016)—Data is key to improving health outcomes and creating efficiencies in our health care system, but a new study captures the policy inconsistencies and hurdles that can hinder use of publicly funded federal and state datasets. These limitations can make it harder to conduct high-quality research that seeks to inform clinical decision-making, identify cost-effective, evidence-based care and evaluate innovative systems and payment designs.

“Publicly funded datasets have great potential to fuel quality research that will ultimately inform improvements in health care delivery and outcomes. There is a fundamental need to balance patient privacy with appropriate data access, but reducing barriers will help researchers maximize the potential utility of these resources,” said Jalpa A. Doshi, PhD, Associate Professor of Medicine at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, and an author of the paper.

Dr. Doshi and researchers Bruce Stuart, PhD, and Franklin Hendrick, MS, from the University of Maryland and Jennifer Graff, PharmD, from the National Pharmaceutical Council (NPC) co-authored the study, “Data, Data Everywhere, But Access Remains a Big Issue for Researchers,” which was published online today in eGEMs, a publication from the AcademyHealth’s EDM Forum. The researchers identified 116 federal and state datasets, and provided an in-depth analysis of nine federal datasets and 10 publicly funded, state all-payer claims databases (APCDs). The nine federal datasets examined represent five federal agencies and include individuals covered under Medicare, Medicaid, the Veterans Health Administration and commercial insurance plans. The 10 state APCDs represented all publicly funded APCDs, which had access policies finalized at the time the review was conducted (November 2014). The authors outlined how the databases differ in accessibility and compared access restrictions to the type or level of health information available in the data.

The study found that there is significant variation—sometimes within the same federal agency—in access restrictions based on the data request’s purpose and the requestor’s affiliation and funding source. In other cases, there were numerous indirect hurdles to using the data, including high user fees, prolonged wait times for data request approval and data delivery, and recency of data. One innovative approach to data access is the decision by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to allow access to its claims data to “innovators and entrepreneurs,” regardless of funding or affiliation.  However, cost and timeliness issues persist.

The authors similarly found variation in data access policies across the 10 APCDs analyzed. Four states—Kansas, Minnesota, Tennessee and Vermont— provided access to state government and contractors only. The other six states—Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Oregon—produce types of files that are available to external requestors; however, policies varied considerably.

“The lack of consistency and simplicity in data access policies places a burden on researchers and likely limits their ability to conduct studies that could positively impact our health care,” said Jennifer Graff, PharmD, NPC’s vice president for comparative effectiveness research. “Increasing data availability to a wide variety of stakeholders—while maintaining privacy—can move us closer to improving health outcomes, improving care delivery, and lowering costs.”

To reduce barriers and restrictions of data accessibility, the authors presented four key recommendations:

  • Emphasize research quality and intent—Rather than simply focusing on a requestor’s affiliation and/or funding source, data access policies placing emphasis on quality and intent of the research request create greater opportunities while maintaining protection of patient privacy.
  • Increase availability of granular data that can be linked—The ability to link across multiple datasets, including claims and electronic health records, is increasingly important to accelerate understanding and evaluation of the impact that initiatives, such as precision medicine, have on health care quality, effectiveness and value.
  • Utilize technology to enhance data security—Privacy concerns may be allayed by providing remote access to data and ensuring a secure environment by limiting researchers’ ability to download individual-level results.
  • Alleviate indirect access barriers—Use of approaches such as tiered pricing for data user fees, whereby commercial entities with greater resources are charged higher fees that help offset lower fees collected from academic and nonprofits, could enable more investigators to explore important research questions.

“Data-driven solutions and health care delivery should work to benefit all stakeholders—most important, the patients who are receiving care,” said Dr. Graff. “We hope this assessment of barriers and discussion of potential solutions to improving data access will set off thoughtful action to balance accessibility with health privacy, and ultimately allow publicly funded health care data to be put to even greater use.”

About the National Pharmaceutical Council
The National Pharmaceutical Council is a health policy research organization dedicated to the advancement of good evidence and science, and to fostering an environment in the United States that supports medical innovation. Founded in 1953 and supported by the nation’s major research-based pharmaceutical companies, NPC focuses on research development, information dissemination, and education on the critical issues of evidence, innovation and the value of medicines for patients. For more information, visit www.npcnow.org and follow NPC on Twitter @npcnow.

Blog Post

Are We Getting the Right Data to Make Individualized Health Decisions? Maybe.

Personalized medicine—an evolving field in which physicians use diagnostic tests to determine which medical treatments will work best for each...
Blog Post

NPC’s Dr. Graff on Developing Evidence That Is “Fit for Purpose”

What information do payers feel they need to guide their coverage decisions? Jennifer Graff, PharmD, vice president of comparative effectiveness...
Blog Post

Tackling Data Access at Health Datapalooza

By Jennifer Graff, PharmD, NPC VP for Comparative Effectiveness ResearchWe’re looking forward to participating in Health Datapalooza next week, which...
Newsletter Volume

E.V.I.dently: April 2016

MessageValue Assessment Through a Broader, Patient-Focused LensNPC has developed “Guiding Practices for Patient-Centered Value Assessment” to help...
Press Release

Fit for Purpose? New NPC, AcademyHealth Framework Closes Gaps Between Payer Needs and Research Answers

(Washington, DC, September 21, 2015)—Despite multi-million dollar public and private investments to tap into big data and improve the evidence...
Press Release

NPC Comments on CMS’ Announcement to Allow Broader Access to Publicly Funded Databases

(Washington, DC, June 2, 2015)—The National Pharmaceutical Council (NPC) today commented on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ (CMS)...
Press Release

NPC Highlights Stakeholder Views on Comparative Effectiveness Research and the Environment for Health Care Decision-Making

(Washington, DC, March 26, 2015)—A new survey of health care stakeholders reveals continued optimism that comparative effectiveness research (CER)...
Press Release

CER Collaborative Improving Health Outcomes Through New Comparative Evidence Tools

(Washington, DC, March 24, 2014)—Three peer-reviewed articles published in Value in Health offer important guidance to aid formulary decision-makers...
Commentary and Testimony Page

The Importance of Evidence, Value, Access and Innovation in 2016

Last year, in our 2015 Health Care Outlook published in Chain Drug Review, I highlighted the recent announcement by the U.S. Department of Health and...
Commentary and Testimony Page

Chain Drug Review – Commentary: “Health Care Outlook for 2015”

This commentary was originally published in the January 5, 2015 issue of Chain Drug Review.By: Dan Leonard, President, National Pharmaceutical...
Commentary and Testimony Page

Moving from “Comparative” to “Effectiveness” in Health Care Treatments

The early discussions about comparative effectiveness research (CER) focused on defining “comparative” and determining the implications for...
Commentary and Testimony Page

Health Care Reform and Pharmaceutical Innovation

Although the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (PPACA) is expected to have broad societal benefits, moving forward, it will be...
YouTube Videos

When Is Evidence Fit for Purpose? Closing Gaps Between Researchers, Payers

Despite multi-million dollar public and private investments to tap into big data and improve the evidence available for health care decision-making,...
YouTube Videos

Using Real-World Evidence to Increase Health Care Access, Improve Quality & Reduce Costs

Mitchell Sugarman, vice president of health economics, policy and payment at Medtronic Cardiac and Vascular Group, explains that health care decision...
YouTube Videos

FDA Moving Data to the Cloud, Data Mining Social Media

Taha A. Kass-Hout, MD, MS, chief health informatics officer at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), discusses the migration of clinical research...
YouTube Videos

Patient-Centered Clinical Research Networks: The Patients' Role

Sarah Daugherty, PhD, MPH, senior program officer, CER methods and infrastructure at the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI),...
Blog Post

Are We Getting the Right Data to Make Individualized Health Decisions? Maybe.

Personalized medicine—an evolving field in which physicians use diagnostic tests to determine which medical treatments will work best for each...
Blog Post

NPC’s Dr. Graff on Developing Evidence That Is “Fit for Purpose”

What information do payers feel they need to guide their coverage decisions? Jennifer Graff, PharmD, vice president of comparative effectiveness...
Blog Post

Tackling Data Access at Health Datapalooza

By Jennifer Graff, PharmD, NPC VP for Comparative Effectiveness ResearchWe’re looking forward to participating in Health Datapalooza next week, which...
Blog Post

Evidence Supply and Demand: A Framework for Closing Gaps between Researchers and Payers

With growing efforts and investments by stakeholders to tap into Big Data, the evidence available to inform payer decision-making, including real-...

Got CER? Educating Pharmacists for Practice in the Future: New Tools for New Challenges

This study provides an early evaluation of the CER Collaborative's training program's impact on...

Data, Data Everywhere, But Access Remains a Big Issue for Researchers

This study captures the policy inconsistencies and hurdles that can hinder use of publicly funded...

Standards and Guidelines for Observational Studies: Quality Is in the Eye of the Beholder

The lack of observational study standard/guideline agreement may contribute to variation in study...
  •  
  • 1 of 8
  • >