Last September, CMS announced a public advisory meeting - MEDCAC - on its coverage with evidence development criteria (CED). In conjunction, AHRQ issued a 35 page report on the current criteria. Original blog here.
On November 17, CMS announces a new date of February 13/14, 2023. This will allow stakeholders more time to read and comment on the background document (now released in a 43-page version, but with the same two key questions). Also, CMS will release a "question list" for the MEDCAC by December 31, giving the public at least six weeks to consider them.
See the update page here. From Pearl Harbor Day to Valentine's Day.
See the new 43 (not 35) page AHRQ document here.
CED may be a key component of the administration's technology initiative, TCET, Transitional Coverage for Emerging Technologies. I was disappointed last fall that the meeting structure, and report, focused on "criteria" for CED rather than purposes, choices, and value creation of CED. The criteria are sort of apple pie ("the study is sponsored by an organization that can complete it successfully," or "the rationale of the study is well-supported by evidence.") Obviously, nobody, absent such guidance, would otherwise have enthusiastically endorsed CED by an organization manifestly unable to complete it, or eagerly approve a study design that made no sense. I noted at the time you could build a road that fulfills all design criteria (correct asphalt, correct width, correct signals and correct speed limit) that goes nowhere.