Public and private sector organizations are continuously developing new policies and interventions to improve health behaviors, health outcomes, and health care delivery. Examples include payment reforms (such as pay for performance or bundled payments), incentives for healthy behaviors, workplace wellness programs, and changing benefit packages and eligibility requirements in public and private insurance programs. However, promising ideas are usually implemented at full scale despite limited evidence. Rapid, universal rollout precludes the ability to randomly assign eligible individuals between treatment and control groups, which greatly limits the possibility of a rigorous evaluation of program consequences.
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Venkataramani AS, Underhill K, Volpp KG. Moving Toward Evidence-Based Policy: The Value of Randomization for Program and Policy Implementation. JAMA. 2020;323(1):21–22. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.18061
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: