Innovation and public accountability in clinical research.
(9/1000)
For more than 20 years, clinical researchers have expressed alarm about the decline of their field, but they have failed to achieve a consensus on policies to revitalize and sustain it. Although they have traced the plight of clinical research to profound changes in science, medicine, and public expectations, their conservative vision and preference for short-term measures inhibit effective policy formulation. These trends are the outcome of historical developments, and they seem to mandate a new approach to public policy. A potential source for more viable and socially accountable policies lies in practitioners' notion that clinical research bridges basic and applied science (by translating scientific innovations into practical measures). Exploiting that idea, however, would require a major reorientation of the field toward health services research and the institutions that are struggling to support it. (+info)
Bibliometric methods for the evaluation of arthritis research.
(10/1000)
This study uses bibliometric methods to evaluate the magnitude and quality of publications in arthritis research in the UK and compare this with that of other countries. Arthritis research was defined by publication in a specialist journal or by specific title key words or address. Outputs from 13 countries between 1988 and 1995 were analysed by number, research level (from clinical to basic) and potential impact on other researchers (from low to high). The UK has a strong presence in arthritis research and the highest relative commitment of all the countries studied. UK output was more clinical than that of other countries, except Spain, and was of relatively high impact. A second study examined UK arthritis papers supported by different funding sources, including government, private-non-profit and industry. Papers with funding acknowledgements were of significantly higher impact and less clinical than those without. The Arthritis Research Campaign was the leading funder in the UK with high-impact papers which, over the 8 yr period, have become more clinical than those supported by other funding sources, except hospital trusts. (+info)
Health economics and sexual dysfunction. Based on a presentation by Cyril F. Chang, PhD.
(11/1000)
Erectile dysfunction (ED) and the results of its treatment are two separate issues, centering on how outcomes of the disorder affect the economy and the impact its treatment has on quality of life. The treatment of ED has been an $800-million-a-year business in the United States alone. The recent introduction of the drug sildenafil raises the possibility that revenues from its sale could reap billions of dollars for the pharmaceutical industry, with much of that cost being borne by the managed care industry. The introduction of sildenatil raises new cost-effectiveness concerns about all available treatment options. Both the National Institutes of Health and the American Urological Association have identified the need for better studies whose outcomes could be used to analyze the problem of ED. (+info)
Occupational cancer in the European part of the Commonwealth of Independent States.
(12/1000)
Precise information on the number of workers currently exposed to carcinogens in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) is lacking. However, the large number of workers employed in high-risk industries such as the chemical and metal industries suggests that the number of workers potentially exposed to carcinogens may be large. In the CIS, women account for almost 50% of the industrial work force. Although no precise data are available on the number of cancers caused by occupational exposures, indirect evidence suggests that the magnitude of the problem is comparable to that observed in Western Europe, representing some 20,000 cases per year. The large number of women employed in the past and at present in industries that create potential exposure to carcinogens is a special characteristic of the CIS. In recent years an increasing amount of high-quality research has been conducted on occupational cancer in the CIS; there is, however, room for further improvement. International training programs should be established, and funds from international research and development programs should be devoted to this area. In recent years, following privatization of many large-scale industries, access to employment and exposure data is becoming increasingly difficult. (+info)
Funding clinical research: the need for information and longer term strategies.
(13/1000)
The Chief Medical Officer's Working Group on Specialist Medical Training recommended that training in research methodology should be a recognised component of all postgraduate training programmes and that further consideration be given by those responsible for postgraduate education, training and research to establishing how this might be achieved. Funding of the trainee in research is a crucial aspect of this directive, yet both trainers and trainees have described this as haphazard, invariably reliant on 'soft' money. The subject has raised wide discussion and debate. A questionnaire was sent to 205 consultant urologists in the UK, 154 (75%) replied and 130 (84%) had experience of research during their training. The first report examined their opinion about the contribution of research to their training; this report covers the questions directed towards funding, the source of their funding, whether sufficient funds, advice and information were available and where they might expect to obtain such details. The replies indicated a variety of sources of funding; knowledge about the financial support available for research was sparse and the majority considered there was insufficient advice and information available for trainees on the subject. Substantial funds are available for high quality scientific research programmes providing unprecedented opportunities for multidisciplinary collaboration that is essential for advancing clinical practice alongside technological developments. The process of obtaining support can be a time-consuming exercise, raising the need for an administrative infrastructure to select, prioritise and co-ordinate an appropriate research strategy for the future. (+info)
The relation between funding by the National Institutes of Health and the burden of disease.
(14/1000)
BACKGROUND: The Institute of Medicine has proposed that the amount of disease-specific research funding provided by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) be systematically and consistently compared with the burden of disease for society. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study comparing estimates of disease-specific funding in 1996 with data on six measures of the burden of disease. The measures were total mortality, years of life lost, and number of hospital days in 1994 and incidence, prevalence, and disability-adjusted life-years (one disability-adjusted life-year is defined as the loss of one year of healthy life to disease) in 1990. With the use of these measures as explanatory variables in a regression analysis, predicted funding was calculated and compared with actual funding. RESULTS: There was no relation between the amount of NIH funding and the incidence, prevalence, or number of hospital days attributed to each condition or disease (P=0.82, P=0.23, and P=0.21, respectively). The numbers of deaths (r=0.40, P=0.03) and years of life lost (r=0.42, P=0.02) were weakly associated with funding, whereas the number of disability-adjusted life-years was strongly predictive of funding (r=0.62, P<0.001). When the latter three measures were used to predict expected funding, the conclusions about the appropriateness of funding for some diseases varied according to the measure used. However, the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, breast cancer, diabetes mellitus, and dementia all received relatively generous funding, regardless of which measure was used as the basis for calculating support. Research on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, perinatal conditions, and peptic ulcer was relatively underfunded. CONCLUSIONS: The amount of NIH funding for research on a disease is associated with the burden of the disease; however, different measures of the burden of disease may yield different conclusions about the appropriateness of disease-specific funding levels. (+info)
Public advocacy and allocation of federal funds for biomedical research.
(15/1000)
Members of Congress and officials of the National Institutes of Health face heightened pressure from public advocacy groups seeking more funding for research on specific health conditions. In response, Congress and the Institute of Medicine have urged the NIH to create more opportunities for the public to participate in decision making on allocation of biomedical research resources. The ethical and policy implications of including advocates in the deliberations are explored, leading to the conclusion that public participation could contribute to more defensible decisions under three conditions: public participants are fairly selected and meaningful opinions are solicited; public participants look beyond their narrow constituencies to consider the health needs of the broader public; and NIH officials develop materials to assist participants with their deliberations. (+info)
Informatics at the National Institutes of Health: a call to action.
(16/1000)
Biomedical informatics, imaging, and engineering are major forces driving the knowledge revolutions that are shaping the agendas for biomedical research and clinical medicine in the 21st century. These disciplines produce the tools and techniques to advance biomedical research, and continually feed new technologies and procedures into clinical medicine. To sustain this force, an increased investment is needed in the physics, biomedical science, engineering, mathematics, information science, and computer science undergirding biomedical informatics, engineering, and imaging. This investment should be made primarily through the National Institutes of Health (NIH). However, the NIH is not structured to support such disciplines as biomedical informatics, engineering, and imaging that cross boundaries between disease- and organ-oriented institutes. The solution to this dilemma is the creation of a new institute or center at the NIH devoted to biomedical imaging, engineering, and informatics. Bills are being introduced into the 106th Congress to authorize such an entity. The pathway is long and arduous, from the introduction of bills in the House and Senate to the realization of new opportunities for biomedical informatics, engineering, and imaging at the NIH. There are many opportunities for medical informaticians to contribute to this realization. (+info)