Many of the protocolos for prioritization in public health research are developed for interventions, or to estimate burden-disease in a short time in a population, but for long-term research (two-three years) in basic and biomedical sciences, what is the best way to prioritize the funding? Thanks.
Dear Magdalena,
A good day to you. Prior to answering your question, I would like to point out that There are many protocols formatted or modeled base on process of evaluation or assessment without any intervention. Insofar, there are studies done that account for long term basis in terms of the impact and health risk to the population that consume unhealthy food and sedentary lifestyle (Obesity), poor healthy behavior practice, poor housing environment....and etc. There are study look at the impact of lack of availability / accessibility in certain healthcare services in an area. in addition, long term research in epidemiological study using cohort or longitudinal design are plentiful.
With regards to your last question 'what is the best way to prioritize the funding especially for the long term research). Let say there are a list of long term research study applications made waiting to get approval from you. Each study stated with a budget more than $50,000. Some studies proposed to be run for a number of years ranging from 2 to 5 years. So how to prioritize the funding accordingly.
Honestly, there is no so called the BEST way to do it. It is usually depending on, the irection or field area interests, But idea that mostly used will be based on the level of importance.
It could be by depending on the focus or interest area. For example, a company's 5-year plan that focuses a new set of organic skin care product due to increasing consumer demand for skin protection from the ultraviolet radiation and also able to prevent skin from darkening or poses whitening effect. In this case, the company will provide funding with higher priority to be directed towards biotechnology and pharmaceutical research in dermatology..
if in a region, let say the government found out that aging population is so drastically change and getting more dominant compared to youngster population, such as Japan. Their funding would be prioritized to biomedical engineering science research that study how biorobotic system can help old people to do some housing work, biotechnology study in food plantation and harvesting or machinery unit. In health, the government would probably fund those research that studies about geriatric health and rehabilitation.
In other words, we may look at the beneficial health impact one could bring to the society. If the Study can benefit more greater number of people, then the fund will be given to the research. Among all the evaluation studies related to health intervention, there is an increasing pattern of studies that looking at the 'Cost-effectiveness' by comparing different interventions strategies.
Hoping my input could be helpful to you.
Warmest regards,
Raymond Seow
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Medicine
- Public Health