Literature DB >> 11685787

Routine monitoring of performance: what makes health research and development different?

B Croxson1, S Hanney, M Buxton.   

Abstract

Increasing attention is being directed to measuring and monitoring the use of health-related R&D funding, partly to justify this expenditure and partly to ensure that R&D effort is directed to achieving the paybacks desired by funders. These paybacks include contributing to knowledge, contributing to R&D capacity, political benefits, benefits to the health service and to patients, and more general economic benefits. This paper addresses the issues that must be considered when designing a routine performance management system for health R&D. Conventional methods of routine performance management are often rendered inappropriate in this context by the intangible and unpredictable outcomes of research, which are heterogeneous across projects and programmes and which can be hard to attribute to particular R&D support. Instead, to be effective in this context, a routine system must combine quantitative and qualitative indicators, utilising information from a number of different sources. The system must achieve acceptable levels (defined by the funder) on each of the following criteria: it must measure those dimensions of payback that are valued by the funder; it must be decision-relevant; it must be consistent with truthful compliance; it must minimise perverse incentives; and it must have acceptable net costs. It is vitally important that the system itself generates a positive payback. We illustrate these issues by outlining a system that might be used to monitor the payback from government-funded R&D.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11685787     DOI: 10.1258/1355819011927530

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy        ISSN: 1355-8196


  7 in total

1.  Systematic review of methods for evaluating healthcare research economic impact.

Authors:  Bahareh Yazdizadeh; Reza Majdzadeh; Hojat Salmasian
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2010-03-02

2.  A novel performance monitoring framework for health research systems: experiences of the National Institute for Health Research in England.

Authors:  Anas El Turabi; Michael Hallsworth; Tom Ling; Jonathan Grant
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2011-03-24

3.  The journals of importance to UK clinicians: a questionnaire survey of surgeons.

Authors:  Teresa H Jones; Steve Hanney; Martin J Buxton
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2006-06-08       Impact factor: 2.796

4.  A simple, generalizable method for measuring individual research productivity and its use in the long-term analysis of departmental performance, including between-country comparisons.

Authors:  Richard Wootton
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2013-01-14

5.  The utilisation of health research in policy-making: concepts, examples and methods of assessment.

Authors:  Stephen R Hanney; Miguel A Gonzalez-Block; Martin J Buxton; Maurice Kogan
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2003-01-13

6.  Proposed methods for reviewing the outcomes of health research: the impact of funding by the UK's 'Arthritis Research Campaign'

Authors:  Stephen R Hanney; Jonathan Grant; Steven Wooding; Martin J Buxton
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2004-07-23

7.  Assessing policy-makers', academics' and experts' satisfaction with the performance of the Palestinian health research system: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Mohammed AlKhaldi; Yehia Abed; Constanze Pfeiffer; Saleem Haj-Yahia; Abdulsalam Alkaiyat; Marcel Tanner
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2018-07-25
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.