The National Institute for Health Research at 10 Years: An impact synthesis: 100 Impact Case Studies

Jones, Molly Morgan; Kamenetzky, Adam; Manville, Catriona; Ghiga, Ioana; MacLure, Calum; Harte, Emma; Spisak, Anton; Kirtley, Anne; Grant, Jonathan

doi:10.7249/rr1574

2016

DOI: 10.7249/rr1574

|View full text |Cite

The National Institute for Health Research at 10 Years: An impact synthesis: 100 Impact Case Studies

Molly Morgan Jones

Adam Kamenetzky

Catriona Manville

et al.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2017

2021

Publication Types

Select...

Article5

Relationship

Self Cite1

Independent4

Authors

Journals

Cited by 14 publications

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Learning from the UK’s research impact assessment exercise: a case study of a retrospective impact assessment exercise and questions for the future

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

National governments spend significant amounts of money supporting public research. However, in an era where the international economic climate has led to budget cuts, policymakers increasingly are looking to justify the returns from public investments, including in science and innovation. The so-called 'impact agenda' which has emerged in many countries around the world is part of this response; an attempt to understand and articulate for the public what benefits arise from the research that is funded. The United Kingdom is the most progressed in implementing this agenda and in 2014 the national research assessment exercise, the Research Excellence Framework, for the first time included the assessment of research impact as a component. For the first time within a dual funding system, funding would be awarded not only on the basis of the academic quality of research, but also on the wider impacts of that research. In this paper we outline the context and approach taken by the UK government, along with some of the core challenges that exist in implementing such an exercise. We then synthesise, together for the first time, the results of the only two national evaluations of the exercise and offer reflections for future exercises both in the UK and internationally.

show abstract

Learning from the UK’s research impact assessment exercise: a case study of a retrospective impact assessment exercise and questions for the future

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Methods and impact of engagement in research, from theory to practice and back again: early findings from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeSince 2012, PCORI has been funding patient-centered comparative effectiveness research with a requirement for engaging patients and other stakeholders in the research, a requirement that is unique among the US funders of clinical research. This paper presents PCORI’s evaluation framework for assessing the short- and long-term impacts of engagement; describes engagement in PCORI projects (types of stakeholders engaged, when in the research process they are engaged and how they are engaged, contributions of their engagement); and identifies the effects of engagement on study design, processes, and outcomes selection, as reported by both PCORI-funded investigators and patient and other stakeholder research partners.MethodsDetailed quantitative and qualitative information collected annually from investigators and their partners was analyzed via descriptive statistics and cross-sectional qualitative content and thematic analysis, and compared against the outcomes expected from the evaluation framework and its underlying conceptual model.ResultsThe data support the role of engaged research partners in refinements to the research questions, selection of interventions to compare, choice of study outcomes and how they are measured, contributions to strategies for recruitment, and ensuring studies are patient-centered.ConclusionsThe evaluation framework and the underlying conceptual model are supported by results to date. PCORI will continue to assess the effects of engagement as the funded projects progress toward completion, dissemination, and uptake into clinical decision making.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11136-017-1581-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Innovation Pathways in the NHS: An Introductory Review

Arora

Wright

Cheng

et al. 2021

Ther Innov Regul Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Healthcare as an industry is recognised as one of the most innovative. Despite heavy regulation, there is substantial scope for new technologies and care models to not only boost patient outcomes but to do so at reduced cost to healthcare systems and consumers. Promoting innovation within national health systems such as the National Health Service (NHS) in the United Kingdom (UK) has been set as a key target for health care professionals and policy makers. However, while the UK has a world-class biomedical research industry, several reports in the last twenty years have highlighted the difficulties faced by the NHS in encouraging and adopting innovations, with the journey from idea to implementation of health technology often taking years and being very expensive, with a high failure rate. This has led to the establishment of several innovation pathways within and around the NHS, to encourage the invention, development and implementation of cost-effective technologies that improve health care delivery. These pathways span local, regional and national health infrastructure. They operate at different stages of the innovation pipeline, with their scope and work defined by location, technology area or industry sector, based on the specific problem identified when they were set up. In this introductory review, we outline each of the major innovation pathways operating at local, regional and national levels across the NHS, including their history, governance, operating procedures and areas of expertise. The extent to which innovation pathways address current challenges faced by innovators is discussed, as well as areas for improvement and future study.

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

The National Institute for Health Research at 10 Years: An impact synthesis: 100 Impact Case Studies

Cited by 14 publications

References 1 publication

Learning from the UK’s research impact assessment exercise: a case study of a retrospective impact assessment exercise and questions for the future

Learning from the UK’s research impact assessment exercise: a case study of a retrospective impact assessment exercise and questions for the future

Methods and impact of engagement in research, from theory to practice and back again: early findings from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute

Innovation Pathways in the NHS: An Introductory Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About