1,721,303 research outputs found
Systematic analysis of funding awarded to institutions in the United Kingdom for infectious disease research, 1997-2010.
Full text linkOBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the research investments made to UK institutions for all infectious disease research and identify the direction of spend by institution. DESIGN: Systematic analysis. Databases and websites were systematically searched for information on relevant studies funded for the period 1997-2010. SETTING: UK institutions carrying out infectious disease research. PARTICIPANTS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Twenty academic institutions receiving greatest sum investments across infection are included here, also NHS sites, Sanger Institute, Health Protection Agency and the Medical Research Council. We measured total funding, median award size, disease areas and position of research along the R&D value chain. RESULTS: Included institutions accounted for £2.1 billion across 5003 studies. Imperial College and University of Oxford received the most investment. Imperial College led the most studies. The Liverpool and London Schools of Tropical Medicine had highest median award size, whereas the NHS sites combined had many smaller studies. Sum NHS funding appears to be declining over time, whilst university income is relatively stable. Several institutions concentrate almost exclusively on pre-clinical research. In some areas, there is clearly a leading institution, e.g. Aberdeen and mycology research or UCL and antimicrobial resistance. CONCLUSION: UK institutions carry out research across a wide range of infectious disease areas. This analysis can identify centres of excellence and help inform future resource allocation for research priorities. Institutions can use this analysis for establishing expertise within their groups, identifying external collaborators and informing local research strategy
Infectious disease research investments follow colonial ties: questionable ethics
Full text linkInternational funding for global health research is not systematically documented. We have assessed the level of research funding awarded by UK funders of international research to low-and middle-income countries or research institutions in these countries
Funding healthcare-associated infection research: a systematic analysis of UK research investments, 1997-2010.
Full text linkHealthcare-associated infections (HCAIs) are a cause of high health and economic burden in the UK. The number of HCAI research studies funded in the UK, and the associated amount of investment, has not previously been analysed
Investing in sepsis research: systematic analysis of UK public and philanthropic funding 1997-2010
Full text linkVersion of Recor
Health systems and communicable diseases: predicting and responding to future challenges.
No full textDifferences in research funding for women scientists: a systematic comparison of UK investments in global infectious disease research during 1997-2010
Full text linkThere has not previously been a systematic comparison of awards for research funding in infectious diseases by sex. We investigated funding awards to UK institutions for all infectious disease research from 1997 to 2010, across disease categories and along the research and development continuum
Systematic analysis of funding awarded for viral hepatitis-related research to institutions in the United Kingdom, 1997-2010.
Full text linkViral hepatitis is responsible for great health, social and economic burden both globally and in the UK. This study aimed to assess the research funding awarded to UK institutions for viral hepatitis research and the relationship of funded research to clinical and public health burden of viral hepatitis. Databases and websites were systematically searched for information on infectious disease research studies funded for the period 1997-2010. Studies specifically related to viral hepatitis research were identified and categorized in terms of funding by pathogen, disease and by a research and development value chain describing the type of science. The overall data set included 6165 studies (total investment £2.6 billion) of which £76.9 million (3.0%) was directed towards viral hepatitis across 323 studies (5.2%). By pathogen, there were four studies specifically investigating hepatitis A (£3.8 million), 69 studies for hepatitis B (21.4%) with total investment of £14.7 million (19.1%) and 236 (73.1%) hepatitis C studies (£62.7 million, 81.5%). There were 4 studies investigating hepatitis G, and none specifying hepatitis D or E. By associated area, viral hepatitis and therapeutics research received £17.0 million, vaccinology £3.1 million and diagnostics £2.9 million. Preclinical research received £50.3 million (65.4%) across 173 studies, whilst implementation and operational research received £19.4 million (25.3%) across 128 studies. The UK is engaged in much hepatology research, but there are areas where the burden is great and may require greater focus, such as hepatitis E, development of a vaccine for hepatitis C, and further research into hepatitis-associated cancers. Private sector data, and funding information from other countries, would also be useful in priority setting
Investing in emerging infectious diseases: a systematic analysis of UK research
No full textBackground: Emerging and infectious diseases threaten health, security, and the global economy. However, little is known about investments in research to tackle outbreaks and innovate new tools for infectious disease control.Methods & Materials: We systematically searched databases and websites for information on research investments for the period 1997-2010. We identified 325,922 studies for screening, included 6,165 studies in the initial analysis, and identified 654 studies on emerging infectious diseases in the final analysis.Results: We identified a total research investment in emerging infectious diseases of £199 million, accounting for 7.7% of a total research investment in infectious diseases of £2.6 billion. In comparison, investment in HIV research amounted to £478 million (18.4% of total investment).Diagnostic tools for control accounted for £9.8 million (4.9%) across 66 studies. Studies assessing therapeutics accounted for £20.0 million (9.9%) across 35 studies. Vaccine research attracted the least funding for tools to tackle emerging infectious diseases, with £11.5 million (5.8%) across 24 studies.Hepatitis C received the most investment with £59.7 million (30.0%), followed by prion research with £33.5 million (16.8%), Campylobacter jejuni with £24.1 million (12.1%), and Helicobacter pylori with £15.1 million (7.6%). Although total influenza investment was £80.1 million, funding specifically for H5N1 influenza virus was £13.7 million (6.9%) and for H1N1 influenza virus was £10.8 million (5.4%).Public funding accounted for £144.0 million (72.3%) across 361 studies with philanthropic funding awarding £40.6 million (20.4%) across 173. Preclinical research attracted the most investment with £142.4 million (71.5%) followed by epidemiological and operational research with £42.1 million (21.2%) and product development research with £12.2 million (6.1%). Phase 1, 2, 3 clinical trials was the least well-funded type of research with £2.5 million (1.2%).Conclusion: Emerging infectious diseases receives small amounts of funding compared to other scientific disciplines, with the exception of HIV. It is essential that we map, monitor and evaluate emerging infectious disease research funding given their importance to global health security
- …
