Khan Mishal S, Fletcher Helen, Coker Richard
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Tahir Foundation Building, 12 Science Drive 2 #10-01, Singapore, 117549, Singapore.
BMC Med. 2016 Aug 25;14(1):123. doi: 10.1186/s12916-016-0644-0.
Through decades of research, numerous studies have generated robust evidence about effective interventions for tuberculosis control. Yet, the global annual decline in incidence of approximately 1 % is evidence that current approaches and investment strategies are not sufficient. In this article, we assess recent tuberculosis research funding and discuss two critical gaps in funding and in scientific evidence from topics that have been left off the research priority agenda.We first examine research and development funding goals in the 2011-2015 Global Plan to Stop Tuberculosis and analyze disbursements to different research areas by funders worldwide in 2014. We then summarize, through a compilation of published literature and consultation with 35 researchers across multiple disciplines in the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine TB Centre, priorities identified by the tuberculosis research community. Finally, we compare researchers' priority areas to the global funding agendas and activities.Our analysis shows that, among the five key research areas defined in the 2011-2015 Global Plan - namely drugs, basic science, vaccines, diagnostics and operational research - drug discovery and basic science on Mycobacterium tuberculosis accounted for 60 % of the $2 billion annual funding target. None of the research areas received the recommended level of funding. Operational research, which had the lowest target, received 66 % of its target funding, whereas new diagnostics received only 19 %. Although many of the priority research questions identified by researchers fell within the Global Plan categories, our analysis highlights important areas that are not explicitly mentioned in the current plan. These priority research areas included improved understanding of tuberculosis transmission dynamics, the role of social protection and social determinants, and health systems and policy research.While research priorities are increasingly important in light of the limited funding for tuberculosis, there is a risk that we neglect important research areas and encourage the formation of research silos. To ensure that funding priorities, researchers' agendas and national tuberculosis control policies are better coordinated, there should be more, and wider, dialogue between stakeholders in high tuberculosis burden countries, researchers, international policymakers and funders.
经过数十年研究,众多研究已产生了关于结核病控制有效干预措施的有力证据。然而,全球发病率每年约1%的下降表明,当前方法和投资策略并不充分。在本文中,我们评估了近期结核病研究资金情况,并讨论了资金以及研究优先议程中未涉及主题的科学证据方面的两个关键差距。我们首先审视了《2011 - 2015年全球终止结核病计划》中的研发资金目标,并分析了2014年全球各地资助者对不同研究领域的支出情况。然后,我们通过汇编已发表文献并与伦敦卫生与热带医学院结核病中心35位多学科研究人员进行磋商,总结了结核病研究界确定的优先事项。最后,我们将研究人员的优先领域与全球资金议程及活动进行了比较。我们的分析表明,在《2011 - 2015年全球计划》确定的五个关键研究领域——即药物、基础科学、疫苗、诊断方法和运筹学研究——中,结核分枝杆菌的药物研发和基础科学占每年20亿美元资金目标的60%。没有一个研究领域获得了建议的资金水平。目标最低的运筹学研究获得了其目标资金的66%,而新型诊断方法仅获得了19%。尽管研究人员确定的许多优先研究问题属于《全球计划》类别,但我们的分析突出了当前计划中未明确提及的重要领域。这些优先研究领域包括对结核病传播动态的更好理解、社会保护和社会决定因素的作用以及卫生系统和政策研究。鉴于结核病资金有限,研究优先事项愈发重要,但存在忽视重要研究领域并助长形成研究孤岛的风险。为确保资金优先事项、研究人员议程和国家结核病控制政策得到更好协调,结核病高负担国家的利益相关者、研究人员、国际政策制定者和资助者之间应进行更多、更广泛的对话。