Systematic review of methods for evaluating healthcare research economic impact

Abstract

BackgroundThe economic benefits of healthcare research require study so that appropriate resources can be allocated to this research, particularly in developing countries. As a first step, we performed a systematic review to identify the methods used to assess the economic impact of healthcare research, and the outcomes.MethodAn electronic search was conducted in relevant databases using a combination of specific keywords. In addition, 21 relevant Web sites were identified.ResultsThe initial search yielded 8,416 articles. After studying titles, abstracts, and full texts, 18 articles were included in the analysis. Eleven other reports were found on Web sites. We found that the outcomes assessed as healthcare research payback included direct cost-savings, cost reductions in healthcare delivery systems, benefits from commercial advancement, and outcomes associated with improved health status. Two methods were used to study healthcare research payback: macro-economic studies, which examine the relationship between research studies and economic outcome at the aggregated level, and case studies, which examine specific research projects to assess economic impact.ConclusionsOur study shows that different methods and outcomes can be used to assess the economic impacts of healthcare research. There is no unique methodological approach for the economic evaluation of such research. In our systematic search we found no research that had evaluated the economic return of research in low and middle income countries. We therefore recommend a consensus on practical guidelines at international level on the basis of more comprehensive methodologies (such as Canadian Academic of Health Science and payback frameworks) in order to build capacity, arrange for necessary informative infrastructures and promote necessary skills for economic evaluation studies.

Public Health Ethics: Cases Spanning the Globe

“…WHO's call reinforces the 2008 Global Ministerial Forum on Research for Health held in Mali, which recommended that each country allocate 2 % of health ministry funds to health care research (Yazdizadeh et al 2010 ). All research involving human subjects will require review by institutional review boards (IRBs) or, as they are generally known in Africa, research ethics committees (RECs) .…”

Four centuries on from Bacon: progress in building health research systems to improve health systems?

“…While the first account of the Payback Framework was in 1996 [ 29 ], a major update was described in HARPS in 2004 [ 30 ]. Two reviews of studies assessing the wider impacts from health research have been published in HARPS , one from the Italian Cochrane Centre [ 31 ] and another from an Iranian team [ 32 ], both identifying the Payback Framework as the most widely used approach, including its influence on other frameworks. Papers published in HARPS that describe applications and developments of the Payback Framework include two on primary care research in Australia [ 33 , 34 ].…”

Organising health research systems as a key to improving health: the World Health Report 2013 and how to make further progress

“…The report describes various studies showing how the value of research had been demonstrated, but also quotes a review conducted in Iran [16] showing that such studies have been concentrated in high-income countries, a finding confirmed in a later review of research impact studies [17]. …”