The integration of behavioral health (BH) and primary care services has been the subject of considerable attention for almost a decade. Such work has been motivated by the prevalence of chronic health problems in persons with BH conditions and correspondingly high rates of early death. Service integration efforts typically included cross-referral or bidirectional efforts to add some features of primary care to specialty BH settings or the reverse. This article proposes a third approach based on full service and financial integration and shows how it differs substantially from the other 2 models. This new model has the potential to bring much-needed BH services to persons served in primary care settings who have these conditions, while fostering integrated services in specialty settings for those with the most severe mental or substance use conditions. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act could provide a valuable opportunity to implement this third model.

Incentives offered by the U.S. government have spurred marked increases in use of health information technology (IT).

Macular edema is the most common cause of vision loss among patients with diabetes.

Adult childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) are at high risk for illness and premature death. Little is known about the physicians who provide their routine medical care.

Interventions promoting weight loss can reduce the incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Whether dietary changes without calorie restriction also protect from diabetes has not been evaluated.

Ductal carcinoma in situ is a common finding in women having mammography screening, and there is considerable uncertainty about the balance of harms and benefits of different management options. This article outlines the process for developing a prioritized research agenda for the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute as informed by a diverse group of stakeholders on the management of ductal carcinoma in situ. Evidence gaps were identified by reviewing existing literature and engaging diverse stakeholders to refine these gaps. Stakeholders ranked evidence gaps by importance from their perspectives using a forced-ranking prioritization method. PubMed was searched for relevant recent studies, and ClinicalTrials.gov was searched for relevant ongoing trials for the 10 highest-ranked evidence gaps. Strengths and limitations of different study designs were assessed to address gaps. Stakeholders prioritized evidence gaps related to incorporation of patient-centered outcomes into future research, development of better methods to predict risk for invasive cancer, evaluation of a strategy of active surveillance, and testing of decision-making tools. The degree to which prioritized evidence gaps may have already been addressed is uncertain because a comprehensive systematic review has not been done.

Despite a paucity of high-quality evidence about benefits and harms, antipsychotic medication use among adolescents and young adults with bipolar disorder is increasing. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute tasked the Duke Evidence Synthesis Group with creating a prioritized agenda for research in this area that would incorporate the perspectives of relevant stakeholders. We identified a list of potential evidence gaps by reviewing existing literature and engaged a diverse group of 9 stakeholders to expand and refine this list. Using a forced-ranking prioritization method, stakeholders prioritized 10 of 23 potential evidence gaps as the most pressing for future research. These evidence gaps relate to 3 areas: the comparative effectiveness of intervention strategies, the effect of antipsychotics on patient-centered outcomes, and the influence of various patient characteristics on antipsychotic effectiveness. In addition to presenting these findings, we suggest appropriate study designs for addressing the stakeholder-prioritized research questions.