Steven Wooding

A 'DECISIVE' approach to research funding: Lessons from three Retrosight studies

The Retrosight approach consists of looking at research that was conducted in the past and, using Payback case studies, tracing that research through to the present day to understand both the extent to which the research has had impacts, within academia and more widely, and how these impacts came about. RAND Europe has conducted three studies based on this approach in different research fields: arthritis research, cardiovascular research and mental health research. Each drew out a set of observations and recommendations for policymakers and research funders in those research fields. By reviewing and comparing the findings of the three studies, we have identified eight lessons which combine to provide a DECISIVE approach to biomedical and health research funding: Different skills: Fund researchers with more than just research skills-individuals are key when it comes to translation of research into wider impact. Engaged: Support your researchers to engage with non-academic stakeholders to help their work have a wider impact. Clinical: For greater impact on patient care within 10-20 years, fund clinical rather than basic research. Impact on society: If you want to have a wider impact, dont just fund for academic excellence. Size: Bigger isnt necessarily better when it comes to the size of a research grant. International: For high academic impact, fund researchers who collaborate internationally and support them to do so. Variety: Simple metrics will only capture some of the impact of your research. Expectations: Most broader social and economic impact will come from just a few projects.

Mapping the global mental health research funding system

This study maps the global funding of mental health research between 2009 and 2014. It builds from the bottom up a picture of who the major funders are, what kinds of research they support and how their strategies relate to one another. It uses the funding acknowledgements on journal papers as a starting point for this. The study also looks to the future, considering some of the areas of focus, challenges and opportunities which may shape the field in the coming few years.

100 Metrics to Assess and Communicate the Value of Biomedical Research: An Ideas Book

Biomedical research affects society in many ways. It has been shown to improve health, create jobs, add to our knowledge, and foster new collaborations. Despite the complexity of modern research, many of the metrics used to evaluate the impacts of research still focus on the traditional, often academic, part of the research pathway, covering areas such as the amount of grant funding received and the number of peer-reviewed publications. In response to increasing expectations of accountability and transparency, the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC), in collaboration with RAND Europe, undertook a project to help communicate the wider value of biomedical research. The initiative developed resources to support academic medical centers in evaluating the outcomes and impacts of their research using approaches relevant to various stakeholders, including patients, providers, administrators, and legislators. This study presents 100 ideas for metrics that can be used to assess and communicate the value of biomedical research. The list is not comprehensive, and the metrics are not fully developed, but they should serve to stimulate and broaden thinking about how academic medical centers can communicate the value of their research to a broad range of stakeholders.

Most mobility to and from the UK is within a small set of western countries

Amongst those receiving their highest degree overseas, most did so in EU countries or the US; the most common countries were the US, Germany, Spain and France Regardless of duration, the USA, Germany and France are the most common destinations for researchers from the UK. Australia, Canada and Japan are also important destinations of non-UK nationals in the UK have EU or North American nationalities 80%

Experiences of mobility differ between groups

A key driver of mobility for postdocs is career progression, and personal circumstances are generally considered to be less of a barrier for this group than for more senior researchers Graduates from elsewhere in the EU are even more likely than UK nationals to move overseas after graduation, and there is also the indication that international postdoctoral mobility is becoming more common The postdoctoral period is important for mobility yet receives less focus in literature than PhDs

A global map of mental health research funding

Introduction Mental illness has a major impact on individuals, healthcare systems and society. Research is needed to improve our understanding of the underlying mechanisms of many mental health conditions and to develop effective treatments. However, the field of mental health research is broad and fragmented. It covers a diversity of health conditions and contains a large and varied population of researchers and funding organisations. These characteristics are a significant challenge to coordinating and conducting research. There has never been, to the best of our knowledge, a comprehensive view of the entire mental health research funding ‘ecosystem’ at a global scale. This study provides a snapshot of the mental health research funding ecosystem, showing who the major funders are, what kinds of research they support and how their strategies relate to one another.

Mapping UK mental health research funding and its contribution to global funding: A refined analysis for the UK context

A refined analysis for the UK context