• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

制定健康研究提案资助优先级的框架:整合资金的价值。

A Framework to Prioritise Health Research Proposals for Funding: Integrating Value for Money.

机构信息

Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.

School of Medicine, Centre for Applied Health Economics, Griffith University, Nathan, 4111, QLD, Australia.

出版信息

Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2019 Dec;17(6):761-770. doi: 10.1007/s40258-019-00495-2.

DOI:10.1007/s40258-019-00495-2
PMID:31257553
Abstract

When making funding decisions, research organisations largely consider the merits (e.g. scientific rigour and feasibility) of submitted research proposals; yet, there is often little or no reference to their value for money. This may be attributed to the challenges of assessing and integrating value of research into existing research prioritisation processes. We propose a framework that considers both the merits of research and its value for money to guide health research funding decisions. A practical framework is developed based on current processes followed by funding organizations for assessing investigator-initiated research proposals, and analytical methods for evaluating the expected value of research. We apply the analytical methods to estimate the expected return on investment of two real-world grant applications. The framework comprises four sequential steps: (1) initial screening of applications for eligibility and completeness; (2) merit assessment of eligible proposals; (3) estimating the expected value of research for the shortlisted proposals that pass the first two steps and ranking of proposals based on return on investment; and (4) selecting research proposals for funding. We demonstrate how the expected value for money can be efficiently estimated using certain information provided in funding applications. The proposed framework integrates value-for-money assessment into the existing research prioritisation processes. Considering value for money to inform research funding decisions is vital to achieve efficient utilisation of research budgets and maximise returns on research investments.

摘要

在做出资金决策时,研究机构主要考虑提交的研究提案的优点(例如科学严谨性和可行性);然而,通常很少或根本没有提及它们的物有所值。这可能归因于评估和将研究价值纳入现有研究优先级制定过程中的挑战。我们提出了一个框架,该框架同时考虑了研究的优点及其性价比,以指导卫生研究资金决策。基于资助机构评估研究员发起的研究提案的现行流程和评估研究预期价值的分析方法,制定了一个实用框架。我们应用分析方法估算了两个真实世界的拨款申请的预期投资回报。该框架包括四个连续步骤:(1)对申请进行初步筛选,以确定其是否符合资格和完整性;(2)对符合条件的提案进行优点评估;(3)估算通过前两个步骤的入围提案的研究预期价值,并根据投资回报率对提案进行排名;(4)选择研究提案进行资助。我们展示了如何使用资助申请中提供的某些信息来有效地估算预期性价比。拟议框架将性价比评估纳入现有研究优先级制定过程。考虑性价比以告知研究资金决策对于实现研究预算的有效利用和最大化研究投资回报至关重要。

相似文献

1
A Framework to Prioritise Health Research Proposals for Funding: Integrating Value for Money.制定健康研究提案资助优先级的框架:整合资金的价值。
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2019 Dec;17(6):761-770. doi: 10.1007/s40258-019-00495-2.
2
Directing research funds to the right research projects: a review of criteria used by research organisations in Australia in prioritising health research projects for funding.将研究资金导向正确的研究项目:对澳大利亚研究组织在为健康研究项目提供资金方面使用的优先排序标准进行的回顾。
BMJ Open. 2018 Dec 22;8(12):e026207. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026207.
3
A Practical Application of Value of Information and Prospective Payback of Research to Prioritize Evaluative Research.信息价值和研究预期回报在评估性研究优先级排序中的实际应用
Med Decis Making. 2016 Apr;36(3):321-34. doi: 10.1177/0272989X15594369. Epub 2015 Jul 24.
4
Choosing Wisely: Applying Value-Based Economic Principles to Population Science Research Investment.明智选择:将基于价值的经济原则应用于人口科学研究投资。
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2024 Feb 6;33(2):179-182. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-23-0883.
5
Developing a framework to incorporate real-world evidence in cancer drug funding decisions: the Canadian Real-world Evidence for Value of Cancer Drugs (CanREValue) collaboration.开发将真实世界证据纳入癌症药物资助决策框架:加拿大癌症药物价值的真实世界证据(CanREValue)合作。
BMJ Open. 2020 Jan 7;10(1):e032884. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032884.
6
Governments Need Better Guidance to Maximise Value for Money: The Case of Australia's Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee.政府需要更好的指导以实现资金价值最大化:以澳大利亚药品福利咨询委员会为例。
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2016 Aug;14(4):401-407. doi: 10.1007/s40258-015-0220-3.
7
A new approach to grant review assessments: score, then rank.一种新的资助评审评估方法:先打分,再排名。
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2023 Jul 24;8(1):10. doi: 10.1186/s41073-023-00131-7.
8
Research Costs Investigated: A Study Into the Budgets of Dutch Publicly Funded Drug-Related Research.研究成本调查:对荷兰公共资助药物相关研究预算的研究。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Jan;36(1):105-113. doi: 10.1007/s40273-017-0572-7.
9
Contest models highlight inherent inefficiencies of scientific funding competitions.竞赛模式突出了科学资助竞赛固有的低效率。
PLoS Biol. 2019 Jan 2;17(1):e3000065. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000065. eCollection 2019 Jan.
10
Streamlined research funding using short proposals and accelerated peer review: an observational study.使用简短提案和加速同行评审简化研究资金投入:一项观察性研究
BMC Health Serv Res. 2015 Feb 7;15:55. doi: 10.1186/s12913-015-0721-7.

引用本文的文献

1
Priorities for paediatric critical care research: a modified Delphi study by the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Paediatric Study Group.儿科重症监护研究的优先事项:澳大利亚和新西兰重症监护学会儿科研究小组的一项改良德尔菲研究。
Crit Care Resusc. 2023 Oct 18;23(2):194-201. doi: 10.51893/2021.2.oa6. eCollection 2021 Jun.
2
Reporting reimbursement price decisions for onco-hematology drugs in Spain.报告西班牙肿瘤血液学药物的报销价格决策。
Front Public Health. 2023 Oct 24;11:1265323. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1265323. eCollection 2023.
3
A decision-support tool for funding health innovations at a tertiary academic medical center.
为三级学术医学中心的健康创新提供资金的决策支持工具。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2023 Feb 13;39(1):e11. doi: 10.1017/S0266462323000028.
4
Mapping Chilean clinical research: a protocol for a scoping review and multiple evidence gap maps.绘制智利临床研究图谱:一项范围综述和多个证据缺口图谱制定方案。
BMJ Open. 2022 Jun 20;12(6):e057555. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057555.
5
Description of the use of multicriteria to support pricing and reimbursement decisions by European health technology assessment bodies.描述了使用多标准来支持欧洲卫生技术评估机构的定价和报销决策。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Aug 14;21(1):814. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06784-8.
6
A Review of Web-Based Tools for Value-of-Information Analysis.基于网络的信息价值分析工具述评。
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2021 Sep;19(5):645-651. doi: 10.1007/s40258-021-00662-4. Epub 2021 May 28.
7
Value of Information Analysis: Are We There Yet?信息价值分析:我们到那儿了吗?
Pharmacoecon Open. 2021 Jun;5(2):139-141. doi: 10.1007/s41669-020-00227-6.
8
Economic Theory and Medical Assistance in Dying.经济理论与医疗协助死亡
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2021 Jan;19(1):5-8. doi: 10.1007/s40258-020-00587-4.