Comparative effectiveness in head and neck malignancies.

ABSTRACT

To date, there is limited comparative effectiveness research (CER) in head and neck surgical oncology. Several barriers exist, the most common of which include low patient accrual, selection bias inherent to observational studies, and the difficulty of integrating both clinical and functional outcomes. Areas in need of meaningful CER range from initial evaluation to post-treatment surveillance, as well as the identification and evaluation of significant quality metrics and patient-reported outcomes. Despite existing hurdles, careful study design and statistical analyses can address current gaps in head and neck cancer care.