Health Economics Research Group www.brunel.ac.uk/about/acad/herg Developing and Applying a Framework for Assessing the Payback from Medical Research Dr.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Common Assessment Framework for Adults Demonstrator Site Programme Event to Support Expressions of Interest.
Advertisements

Monitoring and Evaluation in the CSO Sector in Ghana
The Payback Framework: & developments in assessing policy and economic impacts of health research & application to development research Stephen Hanney.
PUTTING A VALUE ON BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH PROGRAMS: ADAPTING THE RESEARCH PAYBACK FRAMEWORK FOR APPLICATION IN THE UNITED STATES JACK E. SCOTT, MARGARET BLASINSKY.
Bath and North East Somerset – The place to live, work and visit “Think Local” The Council’s New Procurement Strategy Cllr David Bellotti Cabinet Member.
Engaging with the Public on Research and the Future of Open Access Stephen Pinfield and Emily Nunn Information School, University of Sheffield, UK Open.
Authors and affiliation Research, University of Sheffield, 3 East Midlands Ambulance Service Study flow Conclusion In addition to measures relating to.
Program Evaluation and Measurement Janet Myers. Objectives for today… To define and explain concepts and terms used in program evaluation. To understand.
Smarter Regulation and Competitiveness The Scottish Perspective Prof Russel Griggs, OBE Regulatory Review Group, Chair July 2013.
Successor to the Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation HRB and Department of Health Consultation Workshop 11 March 2015 Dermot Curran Assistant.
The Pupil Deprivation Grant
Moving to a Unified Grants Process and a Single Monitoring Framework Jim Gray Acting Head of Community Planning, Corporate Services Dept, Glasgow City.
Health Economics Research Group KPKnowledge production RTCB Research targeting & capacity building IPPDInforming policy.
The spatial dimensions of Skills for Life workplace provision Dr. Natasha Kersh Institute of Education,, University of London Paper prepared for the Seminar.
Introduction Background Method Findings Discussion Conclusion Renewable energy technologies are a relatively new market entrant in Australia. In the overarching.
‘ Social injustice is killing people on a grand scale ’ ‘ A new approach to development ’ economic growth is without question important, particularly for.
Sponsored/Hosted by:. Your Guide to Intelligent Giving Where the Heart Meets the Mind Critical Friend to Charities.
Resource allocation for disability - NDA feasibility study Eithne Fitzgerald Head of Policy and Research National Disability Authority.
Facilities Management Category Management Plan Synopsis Version 1.1 (March 2015)
Evaluating Services & Expenditure in Social Sectors Approaches supported by The Atlantic Philanthropies Gail Birkbeck Feb 1, 2013.
Richard J.T. Klein Stockholm Environment Institute and Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, Linköping University.
DIVISION Landstingsdirektörens stab Coral Interreg Europe proposal Project proposal addresses objective 1.2 of the Interreg Europe Programme: Improve the.
INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 1 Click to edit Master title style 1 Integrated Assessment and Planning for Sustainable.
Integrated Assessment and Planning
Adaptation & Technology Gaps Anne Olhoff Head of Programme Climate Resilient Development UNEP Risø Centre UNEP Adaptation Knowledge Day V, Bonn, 9 June.
Health Promoting Health Service: Development day.
Publishing your work is necessary but not sufficient for wider research impact Libby Kalucy Editor in Chief, Australian Journal of Primary Health 9 August.
Public Bodies (Joint Working) (Scotland) Bill. Health and Social Care Integration Not a new concept - policy goal for UK governments over the last few.
WP5 Outpatient and Home care WP Leader Prof. John Hutton Dept. Health Sciences and York Health Economics Consortium.
Writing Impact into Research Funding Applications Paula Gurteen Centre for Advanced Studies.
Presenter-Dr. L.Karthiyayini Moderator- Dr. Abhishek Raut
Participatory research to enhance climate change policy and institutions in the Caribbean: ARIA toolkit pilot 27 th meeting of the CANARI Partnership January.
Semester 2: Lecture 9 Analyzing Qualitative Data: Evaluation Research Prepared by: Dr. Lloyd Waller ©
Welcome to SURF 09 Involving Patients and the Public in HCAI Research.
By Bankole Ebisemiju At an Intensive & Interactive workshop on Techniques for Effective & Result Oriented Annual Operation Plan November 24th 2010 Annual.
Providing the know-how for Closing the Gap: The new research agenda.
Implementation and process evaluation: developing our approach Ann Lendrum University of Manchester Neil Humphrey University of Manchester Gemma Moss Institute.
Development of Public Health Standards and Protocols in Nova Scotia PHPC CPD Day June 9th, 2013 Dr. Robert Strang Dr. Brent Moloughney.
The Evaluation of Publicly Funded Research Berlin, 26/27 September 2005 Evaluation for a changing research base Paul Hubbard Head of Research Policy, HEFCE,
Evaluating the impact of health research: Revisiting the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Impact Assessment Framework Nicola Lauzon, Marc Turcotte.
Identifying the Impacts of Technology Transfer Beyond Commercialization FPTT National Meeting, June 12, 2007.
The Research Excellence Framework Expert Advisory Groups round 1 meetings February 2009 Paul Hubbard Head of Research Policy.
DETERMINE Working document # 4 'Economic arguments for addressing social determinants of health inequalities' December 2009 Owen Metcalfe & Teresa Lavin.
National Vulnerability and Risk Assessments Questions for Consideration (1) Tuesday, 24 th June th EIONET Workshop on Climate Change Impacts, Vulnerability.
OPTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR ENGAGEMENT OF CIVIL SOCIETY IN GEF PROJECTS presented by Ermath Harrington GEF Regional Focal Point.
Policies and Procedures for Civil Society Participation in GEF Programme and Projects presented by GEF NGO Network ECW.
NATIONAL INDABA 2015 Breakaway 3: Socio-economic impact of the lottery businesses on the South African economy.
Developing a Framework In Support of a Community of Practice in ABI Jason Newberry, Research Director Tanya Darisi, Senior Researcher
Social Impact – What Works NEFF 7 September 2011 Carol Candler NRF.
A Conceptual Framework: Public and Private Benefits of Higher Education Jamie P. Merisotis, President The Institute for Higher Education Policy
Investing in a healthy community: making the most of NICE’s ROI tools Judith Richardson Health & Social Care Directorate.
Royal Irish Academy Briefing Bert Rima 109/01/2016.
DEVELOPING THE WORK PLAN
John N. Lavis, MD, PhD Professor and Canada Research Chair in Knowledge Transfer and Exchange McMaster University Program in Policy Decision-Making McMaster.
BUDGETING PROCESS Dr. BALAMURUGAN MUTHURAMAN Chapter
EVALUATION OF THE SEE SARMa Project. Content Project management structure Internal evaluation External evaluation Evaluation report.
Jane Holdsworth 20 January The terminology of outcomes and impact How to evidence outcomes and impact Methods for collecting evidence Sources of.
Supporting People Review Presentation for NIFHA Care and Support Conference – 3 June 2015 Stephen Martin, Deputy Director, Housing Policy Delivery.
Scottish Improvement Science Collaborating Centre Strengthening the evidence base for improvement science: lessons learned Dr Nicola Gray, Senior Lecturer,
Szilárd Árvay Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Hungary.
Monitoring and Evaluation Systems for NARS organizations in Papua New Guinea Day 4. Session 10. Evaluation.
Strategies to Improve Health Equity
Name Job title Research Councils UK
Dr Kieran Fenby-Hulse & Dr Rebekah Smith McGloin
XS2I4MS – Final Event of the Mentoring and Coaching Programme
Poster 1. Leadership Development Programme : Leading Cultures of Research and Innovation in Clinical Teams Background The NHS Constitution is explicit.
Building Knowledge about ESD Indicators
The MSK-HQ Developing a generic Musculoskeletal Patient Reported Outcome Measure Policy & Public Affairs Team, Arthritis Research UK e.
Health Impact Assessment in NSW
Fundraising and Operational Research
Presentation transcript:

Health Economics Research Group Developing and Applying a Framework for Assessing the Payback from Medical Research Dr Steve Hanney and Prof Martin Buxton Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 3PH (UK) Is it worth spending money on medical research? Increasingly governments and other funders of research are asking what they are getting for the money spent on health research. In response a stream of work to assess the payback from health research started at HERG in It is now informing the debate on assessing the benefits of medical research in a range of countries, including Canada and The Netherlands and in international bodies such as the World Health Organization. Reasons for assessing payback from medical research Three main sets of reasons exist for assessing payback: The payback framework developed at HERG HERG’s payback framework has two elements: a multi- dimensional categorisation of benefits from health research, and a model of how best to assess them (Buxton and Hanney, 1996). The two elements fit together: the model helps to indicate where the various categories of benefit will be most likely to occur. This logic model helps facilitate assessment and taking a detailed approach enables the issue of the counter-factual to be addressed: what would the world have looked like without the specific research being examined? The multi-dimensional categorisation of payback The multi-dimensional categorisation of payback consists of 5 main categories and key sub-categories: Payback model for assessing the outputs and outcomes The logic model has seven stages and two interfaces with considerable feedback (Hanney et al., 2003). See Figure 1. The framework highlights the interfaces between the research system and both its environment and the stock of knowledge. Here the level of permeability is important; this emphasises the need for activities and mechanisms at the interfaces to enhance the likelihood of research being conducted that meets the needs of potential users and engages the interest of leading researchers, and is then fed back into the wider environment. Whilst the model simplifies reality, it provides a structured way of organising and presenting case studies. Analysis at the early stages of the model is particularly valuable where the intention is to address the second main aim of conducting payback assessments, i.e. to identify factors associated with different levels of payback in the hope of informing the conduct and management of future research. While in the later stages it is not possible totally to tie the multi-dimensional categories of benefits to certain stages of the model, it is feasible to identify broad correlations: categories a) and b) are together considered to be the primary outputs from research; category c) relates to the secondary outputs; and categories d) and e) are the final outcomes. Applications of the payback framework The payback framework was originally tested in case studies. Subsequently it was used to assess the impact of various NHS R&D Programmes, and to analyse the long term impact of two bodies of basic and clinical research. It is currently informing the development of an evaluation framework by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Internationally there is interest from medical research charities in applying the framework, following its successful application to show the impact of the research funded by the UK’s Arthritis Research Campaign (see separate poster). References Buxton M and Hanney S (1996) How can payback from health services research be assessed? Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 1: Hanney S, Gonzalez-Block M, Buxton M and Kogan M (2003) The utilisation of health research in policy-making: Concepts, examples and methods of assessment. Health Research Policy and Systems, 1 (2) systems.com/content/1/1/2. systems.com/content/1/1/2 to provide accountability for funds spent and justification for future funding; to inform research policy and management so as to enhance payback; to assist with prioritising future research a) Knowledge production b) Research targeting, capacity building, absorption c) Informing policy and product development d) Health and health sector benefits -health gain -cost-savings -improvements in processes of health care -equity e) Broader economic benefits -benefits from commercial developments -healthy workforce. Figure 1: HERG’s Payback Model: Recent Version (Source: Hanney et al, 2003)