Family caregiving affects millions of Americans every day, in all walks of life. At least 17.7 million individuals in the United States are caregivers of an older adult with a health or functional limitation. The nation's family caregivers provide the lion's share of long-term care for our older adult population. They are also central to older adults' access to and receipt of health care and community-based social services. Yet the need to recognize and support caregivers is among the least appreciated challenges facing the aging U.S. population. Families Caring for an Aging America examines the prevalence and nature of family caregiving of older adults and the available evidence on the effectiveness of programs, supports, and other interventions designed to support family caregivers. This report also assesses and recommends policies to address the needs of family caregivers and to minimize the barriers that they encounter in trying to meet the needs of older adults. Table of Contents Front Matter Summary 1 Introduction 2 Older Adults Who Need Caregiving and the Family Caregivers Who Help Them 3 Family Caregiving Roles and Impacts 4 Economic Impact of Family Caregiving 5 Programs and Supports for Family Caregivers of Older Adults 6 Family Caregivers' Interactions with Health Care and Long-Term Services and Supports 7 Recommendations to Support Family Caregivers of Older Adults Appendix A: Acronyms and Glossary Appendix B: Committee and Staff Biographies Appendix C: Public Workshop Agendas Appendix D: Number of Years and Percentage of Adult Life Spent Caring for an Older Adult Appendix E: Methodology: NHATS and NSOC Surveys Appendix F: Caregiving: The Odyssey of Becoming More Human Appendix G: Caregiving Stories Appendix H: HIPAA and Caregivers' Access to Information

Healthcare decision makers in search of reliable information that compares health interventions increasingly turn to systematic reviews for the best summary of the evidence. Systematic reviews identify, select, assess, and synthesize the findings of similar but separate studies, and can help clarify what is known and not known about the potential benefits and harms of drugs, devices, and other healthcare services. Systematic reviews can be helpful for clinicians who want to integrate research findings into their daily practices, for patients to make well-informed choices about their own care, for professional medical societies and other organizations that develop clinical practice guidelines. Too often systematic reviews are of uncertain or poor quality. There are no universally accepted standards for developing systematic reviews leading to variability in how conflicts of interest and biases are handled, how evidence is appraised, and the overall scientific rigor of the process. In Finding What Works in Health Care the Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommends 21 standards for developing high-quality systematic reviews of comparative effectiveness research. The standards address the entire systematic review process from the initial steps of formulating the topic and building the review team to producing a detailed final report that synthesizes what the evidence shows and where knowledge gaps remain. Finding What Works in Health Care also proposes a framework for improving the quality of the science underpinning systematic reviews. This book will serve as a vital resource for both sponsors and producers of systematic reviews of comparative effectiveness research. Table of Contents Front Matter Summary 1 Introduction 2 Standards for Initiating a Systematic Review 3 Standards for Finding and Assessing Individual Studies 4 Standards for Synthesizing the Body of Evidence 5 Standards for Reporting Systematic Reviews 6 Improving the Quality of Systematic Reviews: Discussion, Conclusions, and Recommendations Appendix A: Abbreviations and Acronyms Appendix B: Glossary Appendix C: Workshop Agenda and Questions to Panelists Appendix D: Expert Guidance for Chapter 2: Standards for Initiating a Systematic Review Appendix E: Expert Guidance for Chapter 3: Standards for Finding and Assessing Individual Studies Appendix F: Expert Guidance for Chapter 4: Standards for Synthesizing the Body of Evidence Appendix G: Expert Guidance for Chapter 5: Standards for Reporting Systemic Reviews Appendix H: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Checklist Appendix I: Committee Biographies

Today's physician education system produces trained doctors with strong scientific underpinnings in biological and physical sciences as well as supervised practical experience in delivering care. Significant financial public support underlies the graduate-level training of the nation's physicians. Two federal programs-Medicare and Medicaid-distribute billions each year to support teaching hospitals and other training sites that provide graduate medical education. Graduate Medical Education That Meets the Nation's Health Needs is an independent review of the goals, governance, and financing of the graduate medical education system. This report focuses on the extent to which the current system supports or creates barriers to producing a physician workforce ready to provide high-quality, patient-centered, and affordable health care and identifies opportunities to maximize the leverage of federal funding toward these goals. Graduate Medical Education examines the residency pipeline, geographic distribution of generalist and specialist clinicians, types of training sites, and roles of teaching and academic health centers. The recommendations of Graduate Medical Education will contribute to the production of a better prepared physician workforce, innovative graduate medical education programs, transparency and accountability in programs, and stronger planning and oversight of the use of public funds to support training. Teaching hospitals, funders, policy makers, institutions, and health care organizations will use this report as a resource to assess and improve the graduate medical education system in the United States. Table of Contents Front Matter Summary 1 Introduction 2 Background on the Pipeline to the Physician Workforce 3 GME Financing 4 Governance 5 Recommendations for the Reform of GME Financing and Governance Appendix A: Abbreviations and Acronyms Appendix B: U.S. Senate Letters Appendix C: Public Workshop Agendas Appendix D: Committee Member Biographies Appendix E: Data and Methods to Analyze Medicare GME Payments Appendix F: Illustrations of the Phase-In of the Committee's Recommendations

Shortly after 1998, leading members of Georgia's government, medical community, and public-spirited citizenry began considering ways in which some of Georgia's almost $5 billion, 25-year settlement from the tobacco industry's Master Settlement Agreement with the 50 states could be used to benefit Georgia residents. Given tobacco's role in causing cancer, they decided to create an entity and program with the mission of making Georgia a national leader in cancer prevention, treatment, and research. This new entity--called the Georgia Cancer Coalition, Inc. (GCC)-- and the state of Georgia subsequently began implementing a far-reaching state cancer initiative that includes five strategic goals: (1) preventing cancer and detecting existing cancers earlier; (2) improving access to quality care for all state residents with cancer; (3) saving more lives in the future; (4) training future cancer researchers and caregivers; and (5) turning the eradication of cancer into economic growth for Georgia.
"Assessing the Quality of Cancer Care" identifies a set of measures that could be used to gauge Georgia's progress in improving the quality of its cancer services and in reducing cancer-related morbidity and mortality.