References From the International Severity Information Systems. (n.d.). . LWW. Retrieved February 14, 2022, from Hartung, D. M., Guise, J. M., Fagnan, L. J., Davis, M. M., & Stange, K. C. (2012). Role of practice-based research networks in comparative effectiveness research. , (1), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.2217/cer.11.7 Davis, M. M., Keller, S., DeVoe, J. E., & Cohen, D. J. (2012). Characteristics and lessons learned from practice-based research networks (PBRNs) in the United States. , , 107–116. https://doi.org/10.2147/JHL.S16441

References

Hartung, D. M., Guise, J. M., Fagnan, L. J., Davis, M. M., & Stange, K. C. (2012). Role of practice-based research networks in comparative effectiveness research. Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research, 1(1), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.2217/cer.11.7

Davis, M. M., Keller, S., DeVoe, J. E., & Cohen, D. J. (2012). Characteristics and lessons learned from practice-based research networks (PBRNs) in the United States. Journal of Health, 2, 107–116. https://doi.org/10.2147/JHL.S16441

Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) play a crucial role in advancing comparative effectiveness research (CER) and are an invaluable resource in generating evidence on clinical practice patterns, interventions, and outcomes. These networks are collaborative, practitioner-led organizations that conduct research within real-world primary care settings. PBRNs have the ability to link clinicians, investigators, and stakeholders to address research questions that are relevant and meaningful to the primary care community.

PBRNs offer several unique advantages for conducting CER. First, they provide a representative sample of real-world patients and practices, enhancing the generalizability of study findings and their applicability to real-world settings. PBRNs include diverse practice types (e.g., solo practices, group practices, community health centers) and serve a wide range of patient populations, including those traditionally underrepresented in clinical trials (e.g., racial and ethnic minorities, low-income individuals). This diversity allows for capturing variations in practice patterns, treatment outcomes, and patient perspectives, which are essential for informing evidence-based clinical guidelines and policy decisions.

Second, PBRNs facilitate rapid and efficient recruitment of patients and providers, reducing the time and cost associated with traditional clinical trials. PBRNs have established relationships with clinicians and their patients, fostering trust and engagement in research activities. By leveraging these existing relationships, PBRNs can quickly identify eligible patients and providers, implement interventions, and collect data in real-time. This streamlined process improves the feasibility of conducting large-scale studies and enables the evaluation of interventions in diverse populations and settings.

Third, PBRNs promote collaboration and knowledge sharing among clinicians, researchers, and other stakeholders. PBRNs encourage the active involvement of clinicians in all phases of the research process, from study design to dissemination of findings. This engagement enhances the relevance and practicality of research questions and ensures that study findings are applicable to everyday clinical practice. Additionally, PBRNs facilitate the exchange of best practices and lessons learned among network members, fostering a culture of continuous improvement in primary care delivery.

Despite these advantages, PBRNs face several challenges that need to be addressed to maximize their potential in CER. One challenge is the limited funding available for sustaining and expanding PBRN activities. PBRNs heavily rely on external funding sources, such as federal grants and contracts, which may be limited or subject to budgetary constraints. The sustainability of PBRNs is essential to maintain the infrastructure, support staff, and resources necessary for conducting high-quality research. Securing stable and long-term funding streams is crucial for the continued growth and impact of PBRNs in advancing CER.

Another challenge is the need for standardized data collection and management systems across PBRNs. PBRNs collect a vast amount of data from diverse sources, including electronic health records, patient surveys, and administrative databases. However, the variability in data collection methods and systems across PBRNs can hinder data integration and comparison of results. Establishing standardized data collection protocols, data sharing agreements, and interoperable data systems can enhance the efficiency and robustness of PBRN research.

Furthermore, PBRNs need to strengthen their capacity in data analysis and evidence synthesis. While PBRNs have expertise in conducting primary research, they may face challenges in analyzing and interpreting complex datasets, conducting advanced statistical analyses, and synthesizing evidence across studies. Building the capacity of PBRNs in data analysis and evidence synthesis can enhance their ability to generate rigorous and actionable evidence for informing clinical practice and policy decisions.

In conclusion, PBRNs are instrumental in advancing CER by providing real-world evidence on clinical practice patterns, interventions, and outcomes. These networks offer unique advantages for conducting research in primary care settings, including representative patient populations, efficient recruitment processes, and collaboration among researchers and clinicians. However, challenges such as limited funding, standardized data collection, and data analysis capacity need to be addressed to maximize the potential impact of PBRNs in CER. By addressing these challenges, PBRNs can continue to play a vital role in generating evidence to improve the quality and effectiveness of primary care delivery.