Evaluating "payback" on biomedical research

Chalmers, Iain; Grant, Jonathan; Cottrell, Robert C.; Fawcett, Gail; Cluzeau, Françoise

doi:10.1136/bmj.321.7260.566

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is one source of evidence of the "payback" for the investment of funding organisations in supporting the systematic review process. 17 Finally, we recognise that not all guideline recommendations can be underpinned by systematic reviews. Guideline developers can and should make recommendations that are specific to local contexts.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of systematic reviews in clinical practice guidelines: a case study of smoking cessation

Silagy¹,

Stead²,

Lancaster³

2001

BMC News and views

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To examine the extent to which recommendations in the national guidelines for the cessation of smoking are based on evidence from systematic reviews of controlled trials. Design Retrospective analysis of recommendations for the national guidelines for the cessation of smoking. Materials National guidelines in clinical practice on smoking cessation published in English. Main outcome measures The type of evidence (systematic review of controlled trials, individual trials, other studies, expert opinion) used to support each recommendation. We also assessed whether a Cochrane systematic review was available and could have been used in formulating the recommendation. Results Four national smoking cessation guidelines (from Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States) covering 105 recommendations were identified. An explicit evidence base for 100%, 89%, 68%, and 98% of recommendations, respectively, was detected, of which 60%, 56%, 59%, and 47% were based on systematic reviews of controlled studies. Cochrane systematic reviews could have been used to develop between 39% and 73% of recommendations but were actually used in 0% to 36% of recommendations. The UK guidelines had the highest proportion of recommendations based on Cochrane systematic reviews. Conclusions Use of systematic reviews in guidelines is a measure of the "payback" on investment in research synthesis. Systematic reviews commonly underpinned recommendations in guidelines on smoking cessation. The extent to which they were used varied by country and there was evidence of duplication of effort in some areas. Greater international collaboration in developing and maintaining an evidence base of systematic reviews can improve the efficiency of use of research resources.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of systematic reviews in clinical practice guidelines: a case study of smoking cessation

Silagy¹,

Stead²,

Lancaster³

2001

BMC News and views

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, formal evaluations of funding research programmes were carried out. [35,44,45] Two papers were recently published reviewing the different methods for payback analysis. [35,46] They provided a rigorous framework to justify prospective investments.…”

Section: Stage 1: Deciding On Public and Private Investment In Produc...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Early Assessment of Medical Technologies to Inform Product Development and Market Access

IJzerman

Steuten

2011

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy

144

193

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Worldwide, billions of dollars are invested in medical product development and there is an increasing pressure to maximize the revenues of these investments. That is, governments need to be informed about the benefits of spending public resources, companies need more information to manage their product development portfolios and even universities may need to direct their research programmes in order to maximize societal benefits. Assuming that all medical products need to be adopted by the heavily regulated healthcare market at one point in time, it is worthwhile to look at the logic behind healthcare decision making, specifically, decisions on the coverage of medical products and decisions on the use of these products under competing and uncertain conditions. With the growing tension between leveraging economic growth through R&D spending on the one hand and stricter control of healthcare budgets on the other, several attempts have been made to apply the health technology assessment (HTA) methodology to earlier stages of technology development and implementation. For instance, horizon scanning was introduced to systematically assess emerging technologies in order to inform health policy. Others have introduced iterative economic evaluation, e.g. economic evaluations in earlier stages of clinical research. However, most of these methods are primarily intended to support governments in making decisions regarding potentially expensive new medical products. They do not really inform biomedical product developers on the probability of return on investment, nor do they inform about the market needs and specific requirements of technologies in development. It is precisely this aspect that increasingly receives attention, i.e. is it possible to use HTA tools and methods to inform biomedical product development and to anticipate further development and market access. Several methods have been used in previous decades, but have never been compiled in a comprehensive review. The main objective of this article was to provide an overview of previous work and methods in the field of early HTA, and to put these approaches in perspective through a conceptual framework introduced in this paper. A particular goal of the review was to familiarize decision makers with available techniques that can be employed in early-stage decision making, and to identify opportunities for further methodological growth in this emerging field of HTA.

show abstract

“…Guidelines should be based on valid summaries of all the available research evidence relevant to particular clinical questions (5). The scientific content of guidelines should be derived primarily from systematic review of controlled trials, and from individual randomised trials (6).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing Evidence-Based Clinical Guidelines For Military Use: Case Study Of Smoking Cessation Guidelines

Croft

Geary²,

Irvine³

et al. 2002

J R Army Med Corps

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

These are the first ever clinical guidelines for military use which meet accepted modern quality criteria. Informal monitoring of the uptake of these guidelines between July 2001 to December 2001 suggests that they have been well received by military health professionals. An audit of their impact on smoking patterns within the UK Armed Forces will commence in 2002. The guidelines will be updated 5-yearly, or sooner.

show abstract

Evaluating "payback" on biomedical research

Cited by 10 publications

References 3 publications

Use of systematic reviews in clinical practice guidelines: a case study of smoking cessation

Use of systematic reviews in clinical practice guidelines: a case study of smoking cessation

Early Assessment of Medical Technologies to Inform Product Development and Market Access

Developing Evidence-Based Clinical Guidelines For Military Use: Case Study Of Smoking Cessation Guidelines

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About