{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022044088176352707, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008016032064128256, 'mean_word_length': 5.172839506172839, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The promise and realities of comparative effectiveness research

Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) has been given a broad and ambitious mandate. Will it be able to deliver the multifaceted and granular comparative information that it has been tasked with developing? After a discussion of the general conditions for the feasibility of CER, we focus our attention on one of the most challenging areas: the evaluation of diagnostic tests and biomarkers. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.