AAMC Testifies on VA Research
Oversight
July 18, 2003 - The AAMC July 15 testified
(PDF, 5 pages - 45KB) before the House Veterans' Affairs
Subcommittee on Health about recent proposed changes to the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) research program. Speaking
on behalf of the Association, John G. Clarkson, M.D., senior
vice president and dean, University of Miami School of Medicine,
explained that the AAMC "respects the fact that it is
the prerogative and appropriate function of the Office of
Research and Development (ORD) periodically to review and,
when deemed desirable, to re-balance funding across its research
portfolio in the way the office determines will best serve
the needs of the veteran population. However, the AAMC also
recognizes that such review and re-balancing can create great
anxiety by threatening settled expectations within the research
community, and, therefore, believes the process is best accomplished
with broad consultation involving all stakeholders, and with
clarity and transparency to avoid misunderstanding."
The main focus of the hearing was to address legislation
(H.R.
1585) to establish an Office of Research Compliance and
Assurance within the Veterans Health Administration with reporting
responsibility to the VA Under Secretary for Health. Expressing
the AAMC's deep commitment to clinical research and assuring
the protection of human research subjects, Dr. Clarkson acknowledged
the Association's support for the principle and intent of
the legislation, while not addressing whether such an office
would better be established through administrative rulemaking
or statute. Speaking on behalf of the VA, Under Secretary
for Health Robert Roswell, M.D., expressed the department's
belief that the VA has already administratively complied with
the intention of H.R. 1585 and that the legislation was therefore
unnecessary; however, Dr. Roswell offered several recommended
changes should the committee choose to proceed with the bill.
The remainder of the AAMC statement focused on the shifting
of priorities in the allocation of VA research dollars, and
alleged actions by ORD leadership that have been perceived
as threatening the integrity of the peer review system. The
Association is concerned that the loyalty and commitment of
jointly appointed sub-specialist clinician faculty members
may be "destabilized by the perceived loss of opportunity
to pursue their research interests…. [R]eplacing the
quality and spectrum of health care services provided by such
physicians either by full-time VA practitioners, or, reliably
and dependably, from the private sector would at best be difficult
and at worst, may not be possible." Dr. Clarkson's statement
also underscored the AAMC's strong belief in, and commitment
to, the peer review, stating "Evaluation of productivity
and relevance to agency mission is not only necessary but
intrinsic to a robust merit review process; that is, these
considerations should be incorporated into the peer review
process and not superimposed after the fact."
Information:
Jonathan Fishburn, Director, Research, Education and Veterans' Legislative Affairs
AAMC Office of Governmental Relations
jfishburn@aamc.org
(202) 828-0525
This page contains documents in Portable Document Format (PDF).
The Adobe Acrobat® Reader® is required to view PDF documents. Download
Acrobat® Reader®.
Get Washington Highlights
in your Inbox!
|
