Displaying all 13 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Nature, 2005 Aug 11;436(7052):754.
    PMID: 16094324
    Matched MeSH terms: Research/economics*
  2. Nature, 2018 06;558(7711):499.
    PMID: 29950639 DOI: 10.1038/d41586-018-05504-3
    Matched MeSH terms: Research/economics
  3. Reidpath D, Allotey P, 166 signatories
    Science, 2020 May 15;368(6492):725.
    PMID: 32409468 DOI: 10.1126/science.abc2677
    Matched MeSH terms: Biomedical Research/economics*
  4. Balogun WG, Cobham AE, Amin A, Seeni A
    Neuroscience, 2018 03 15;374:323-325.
    PMID: 29427653 DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2018.01.062
    Neuroscience research and training in many African countries are difficult due to funding and infrastructure deficit. This has resulted in few neuroscientists within Africa. However, invertebrates such as Drosophila and Caenorhabditis elegans could provide the perfect answer to these difficulties. These organisms are cheap, easy to handle and offer a comparable advantage over vertebrates in neuroscience research modeling because they have a simple nervous system and exhibit well-defined behaviors. Studies using invertebrates have helped to understand neurosciences and the complexes associated with it. If Africa wants to catch up with the rest of the world in neuroscience research, it needs to employ this innovative cost-effective approach in its research. To improve invertebrate neuroscience within the Africa continent, the authors advocated the establishment of invertebrate research centers either at regional or national level across Africa. Finally, there is also a need to provide public funding to consolidate the gains that have been made by not-for-profit international organizations over the years.
    Matched MeSH terms: Biomedical Research/economics
  5. Cyranoski D
    Nature, 2005 Aug 4;436(7051):620-1.
    PMID: 16079812
    Matched MeSH terms: Research/economics
  6. Head MG, Fitchett JR, Clarke SC
    Lancet Infect Dis, 2015 Nov;15(11):1262.
    PMID: 26531036 DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(15)00351-5
    Matched MeSH terms: Biomedical Research/economics*
  7. Head MG, Fitchett JR, Newell ML, Scott JA, Harris JN, Clarke SC, et al.
    EBioMedicine, 2015 Sep;2(9):1193-9.
    PMID: 26501117 DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2015.06.024
    BACKGROUND: The burden of pneumonia continues to be substantial, particularly among the poorest in global society. We describe here the trends for UK pneumonia R&D investment and published outputs, and correlate with 2013 global mortality.

    METHODS: Data related to awards to UK institutions for pneumonia research from 1997 to 2013 were systematically sourced and categorised by disease area and type of science. Investment was compared to mortality figures in 2010 and 2013 for pneumonia, tuberculosis and influenza. Investment was also compared to publication data.

    RESULTS: Of all infectious disease research between 2011 and 2013 (£917.0 million), £28.8 million (3.1%) was for pneumonia. This was an absolute and proportionate increase from previous time periods. Translational pneumonia research (33.3%) received increased funding compared with 1997-2010 where funding was almost entirely preclinical (87.5%, here 30.9%), but high-burden areas such as paediatrics, elderly care and antimicrobial resistance received little investment. Annual investment remains volatile; publication temporal trends show a consistent increase. When comparing investment to global burden with a novel 'investment by mortality observed' metric, tuberculosis (£48.36) and influenza (£484.21) receive relatively more funding than pneumonia (£43.08), despite investment for pneumonia greatly increasing in 2013 compared to 2010 (£7.39). Limitations include a lack of private sector data and the need for careful interpretation of the comparisons with burden, plus categorisation is subjective.

    CONCLUSIONS: There has been a welcome increase for pneumonia funding awarded to UK institutions in 2011-2013 compared with 1997-2010, along with increases for more translational research. Published outputs relating to pneumonia rose steadily from 1997 to 2013. Investment relative to mortality for pneumonia has increased, but it remains low compared to other respiratory infections and clear inequities remain. Analyses that measure investments in pneumonia can provide an insight into funding trends and research gaps.

    RESEARCH IN CONTEXT: Pneumonia continues to be a high-burden illness around the globe. This paper shows that although research funding is increasing in the UK (between 1997 and 2013), it remains poorly funded compared to other important respiratory infectious diseases such as tuberculosis and influenza. Publications about pneumonia have been steadily increasing over time, indicating continuing academic and clinical interest in the topic. Though global mortality of pneumonia is declining, it should still be an area of high priority for funders, policymakers and researchers.

    Matched MeSH terms: Biomedical Research/economics
  8. Heller PS
    Soc Sci Med, 1982;16(3):267-84.
    PMID: 7100978 DOI: 10.1016/0277-9536(82)90337-9
    This paper provides an empirical analysis of the determinants of the demand for medical services in Peninsular Malaysia. After elaborating a theoretical model of household demand for medical care in Section II an econometric model is specified and estimated in Sections III, IV, and V. The results indicate that total medical demand, as measured by the absolute volume of outpatient and inpatient consumption, is highly inelastic to the cash price and to the cost in time of utilization. Total medical demand is also inelastic with respect to income. Yet consumers are clearly responsive to the relative prices of alternative sources of medical care. Consumers are also sensitive to the way in which the time of utilization is spent, with high travel and treatment time causing reduced demand for services.
    Matched MeSH terms: Health Services Research/economics*
  9. Fun WH, Sararaks S, Tan EH, Tang KF, Chong DWQ, Low LL, et al.
    BMC Health Serv Res, 2019 Apr 24;19(1):248.
    PMID: 31018843 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-019-4072-7
    BACKGROUND: Health Research Priority Setting (HRPS) in the Ministry of Health (MOH) Malaysia was initiated more than a decade ago to drive effort toward research for informed decision and policy-making. This study assessed the impact of funded prioritised research and identified research gaps to inform future priority setting initiatives for universal access and quality healthcare in Malaysia.

    METHODS: Research impact of universal access and quality healthcare projects funded by the National Institutes of Health Malaysia were assessed based on the modified Payback Framework, addressing categories of informing policy, knowledge production, and benefits to health and health sector. For the HRPS process, the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative methodology was adapted and adopted, with the incorporation of stakeholder values using weights and monetary allocation survey. Workshop discussions and interviews with stakeholders and research groups were conducted to identify research gaps, with the use of conceptual frameworks to guide the search.

    RESULTS: Seventeen ongoing and 50 completed projects were identified for research funding impact analysis. Overall, research fund allocation differed from stakeholders' expectation. For research impact, 48 out of 50 completed projects (96.0%) contributed to some form of policy-making efforts. Almost all completed projects resulted in outputs that contributed to knowledge production and were expected to lead to health and health sector benefits. The HRPS process led to the identification of research priority areas that stemmed from ongoing and new issues identified for universal access and quality healthcare.

    CONCLUSION: The concerted efforts of evaluation of research funding impact, prioritisation, dissemination and policy-maker involvement were valuable for optimal health research resource utilisation in a resource constrained developing country. Embedding impact evaluation into a priority setting process and funding research based on national needs could facilitate health research investment to reach its potential.

    Matched MeSH terms: Health Services Research/economics*
  10. Mitropoulos K, Al Jaibeji H, Forero DA, Laissue P, Wonkam A, Lopez-Correa C, et al.
    Hum Genomics, 2015 Jun 18;9:11.
    PMID: 26081768 DOI: 10.1186/s40246-015-0033-3
    In recent years, the translation of genomic discoveries into mainstream medical practice and public health has gained momentum, facilitated by the advent of new technologies. However, there are often major discrepancies in the pace of implementation of genomic medicine between developed and developing/resource-limited countries. The main reason does not only lie in the limitation of resources but also in the slow pace of adoption of the new findings and the poor understanding of the potential that this new discipline offers to rationalize medical diagnosis and treatment. Here, we present and critically discuss examples from the successful implementation of genomic medicine in resource-limited countries, focusing on pharmacogenomics, genome informatics, and public health genomics, emphasizing in the latter case genomic education, stakeholder analysis, and economics in pharmacogenomics. These examples can be considered as model cases and be readily replicated for the wide implementation of pharmacogenomics and genomic medicine in other resource-limited environments.
    Matched MeSH terms: Translational Medical Research/economics
  11. Head MG, Fitchett JR, Newell ML, Scott JAG, Clarke SC, Atun R
    Lancet Infect Dis, 2014 Nov;14(11):1037-1038.
    PMID: 25444398 DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(14)70949-1
    Matched MeSH terms: Biomedical Research/economics*
  12. Alkoshi S, Leshem E, Parashar UD, Dahlui M
    BMC Public Health, 2015;15:26.
    PMID: 25616973 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-015-1400-7
    Libya introduced rotavirus vaccine in October 2013. We examined pre-vaccine incidence of rotavirus hospitalizations and associated economic burden among children < 5 years in Libya to provide baseline data for future vaccine impact evaluations.
    Matched MeSH terms: Biomedical Research/economics
  13. Reid MJA, Arinaminpathy N, Bloom A, Bloom BR, Boehme C, Chaisson R, et al.
    Lancet, 2019 Mar 30;393(10178):1331-1384.
    PMID: 30904263 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30024-8
    Matched MeSH terms: Research/economics*
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links