Literature DB >> 17192926

Financial anatomy of neuroscience research.

E Ray Dorsey1, Philip Vitticore, Jason De Roulet, Joel P Thompson, Melisa Carrasco, S Claiborne Johnston, Robert G Holloway, Hamilton Moses.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the level of funding for neuroscience research from federal and industry sources and to examine the therapeutic advances in the neurosciences over the past decade.
METHODS: We examined financing for neuroscience research over the past decade from the following principal sponsors of biomedical research: the National Institutes of Health, the pharmaceutical industry, large biotechnology firms, and large medical device firms. We also examined US Food and Drug Administration approvals for new molecular entities and medical devices for indications within the neurosciences. Neuroscience was defined to include funding and approvals for neurological and psychiatric conditions.
RESULTS: Total (nominal) industry and government funding for neuroscience research increased from $4.8 billion in 1995 to $14.1 billion in 2005 and doubled after adjusting for inflation. In 2005, the pharmaceutical industry and the largest biotechnology and medical device firms accounted for 58% of total funding. The US Food and Drug Administration approved 40 new molecular entities for indications within the neurosciences from 1995 to 2005, with the annual number of approvals remaining relatively stagnant during this period. From 1995 to 2005, the US Food and Drug Administration also approved 1,679 medical devices in the neurosciences for use.
INTERPRETATION: Financing for neuroscience research has increased significantly over the past decade, but new approvals for drugs in the neurosciences have not kept pace with the rapid increase in funding. This lag may represent a natural delay in realizing the return in the investment in scientific research or a decline in the productivity of neuroscience research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17192926     DOI: 10.1002/ana.21047

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Neurol        ISSN: 0364-5134            Impact factor:   10.422


  10 in total

1.  Using ontology-based annotation to profile disease research.

Authors:  Yi Liu; Adrien Coulet; Paea LePendu; Nigam H Shah
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2012-04-11       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Barriers to investigator-initiated deep brain stimulation and device research.

Authors:  Michael L Kelly; Donald Malone; Michael S Okun; Joan Booth; Andre G Machado
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2014-03-26       Impact factor: 9.910

Review 3.  New Therapeutics to Modulate Mitochondrial Function in Neurodegenerative Disorders.

Authors:  Heather M Wilkins; Jill K Morris
Journal:  Curr Pharm Des       Date:  2017       Impact factor: 3.116

4.  Financing of U.S. biomedical research and new drug approvals across therapeutic areas.

Authors:  E Ray Dorsey; Joel P Thompson; Melisa Carrasco; Jason de Roulet; Philip Vitticore; Sean Nicholson; S Claiborne Johnston; Robert G Holloway; Hamilton Moses
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-09-11       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Collaborative models for translational neuroscience and rehabilitation research.

Authors:  Bruce H Dobkin
Journal:  Neurorehabil Neural Repair       Date:  2009-06-18       Impact factor: 3.919

6.  NIH disease funding levels and burden of disease.

Authors:  Leslie A Gillum; Christopher Gouveia; E Ray Dorsey; Mark Pletcher; Colin D Mathers; Charles E McCulloch; S Claiborne Johnston
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-02-24       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Where will the (New) Drugs for Traumatic Brain Injury Treatment be Coming From?

Authors:  Denes V Agoston; Mårten Risling
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2012-03-02       Impact factor: 4.003

Review 8.  Psychiatrization of Society: A Conceptual Framework and Call for Transdisciplinary Research.

Authors:  Timo Beeker; China Mills; Dinesh Bhugra; Sanne Te Meerman; Samuel Thoma; Martin Heinze; Sebastian von Peter
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2021-06-04       Impact factor: 4.157

9.  Results availability for analgesic device, complex regional pain syndrome, and post-stroke pain trials: comparing the RReADS, RReACT, and RReMiT databases.

Authors:  Faustine L Dufka; Troels Munch; Robert H Dworkin; Michael C Rowbotham
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 7.926

Review 10.  Can literature analysis identify innovation drivers in drug discovery?

Authors:  Pankaj Agarwal; David B Searls
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 84.694

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.