Kryl David, Allen Liz, Dolby Kevin, Sherbon Beverley, Viney Ian
Research Information and Intelligence Branch, National Institute for Health Research, London, UK.
BMJ Open. 2012 Mar 30;2(2):e000897. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-000897. Print 2012.
To investigate the feasibility of using research papers cited in clinical guidelines as a way to track the impact of particular funding streams or sources.
In recent years, medical research funders have made efforts to enhance the understanding of the impact of their funded research and to provide evidence of the 'value' of investments in particular areas of research. One of the most challenging areas of research evaluation is around impact on policy and practice. In the UK, the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) provide clinical guidelines, which bring together current high-quality evidence on the diagnosis and treatment of clinical problems. Research referenced in these guidelines is an indication of its potential to have real impact on health policy and practice.
This study is based on analysis of the authorship and funding attribution of research cited in two NICE clinical guidelines: dementia and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Analysis identified that around a third of papers cited in the two NICE guidelines had at least one author based in the UK. In both cases, about half of these UK attributed papers contained acknowledgements which allowed the source of funding for the research to be identified. The research cited in these guidelines was found to have been supported by a diverse set of funders from different sectors. The study also investigated the contribution of research groups based in universities, industry and the public sector.
The study found that there is great potential for guidelines to be used as sources of information on the quality of the research used in their development and that it is possible to track the source of the funding of the research. The challenge is in harnessing the relevant information to track this in an efficient way.
探讨将临床指南中引用的研究论文作为追踪特定资金流或资金来源影响的一种方式的可行性。
近年来,医学研究资助者努力增进对其资助研究影响的理解,并提供在特定研究领域投资“价值”的证据。研究评估中最具挑战性的领域之一是对政策和实践的影响。在英国,国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)提供临床指南,这些指南汇集了关于临床问题诊断和治疗的当前高质量证据。这些指南中引用的研究表明其对卫生政策和实践产生实际影响的潜力。
本研究基于对NICE两项临床指南(痴呆症和慢性阻塞性肺疾病)中引用研究论文的作者身份和资金归属的分析。
分析发现,NICE这两项指南中引用的论文约有三分之一至少有一位作者来自英国。在这两种情况下,这些英国作者的论文中约有一半包含致谢内容,从而能够确定该研究的资金来源。发现这些指南中引用的研究得到了来自不同部门的多种资助者的支持。该研究还调查了大学、产业界和公共部门研究团队的贡献。
该研究发现,指南极有可能被用作关于其制定过程中所使用研究质量的信息来源,并且有可能追踪研究的资金来源。挑战在于如何有效利用相关信息来进行追踪。