The NIHR Public Health Research Programme: responding to local authority research needs in the United Kingdom

Abstract

The remit of the National Institute for Health Research Public Health Research (PHR) Programme is to evaluate public health interventions, providing new knowledge on the benefits, costs, acceptability and wider impacts of interventions, set outside of the National Health Service, intended to improve the health of the public and reduce inequalities. This paper illustrates how the PHR Programme is providing new knowledge for public health decision makers, based on the nine key areas for local authority public health action, described by the King’s Fund. Many funded PHR projects are evaluating interventions, applied in a range of settings, across the identified key areas for local authority influence. For example, research has been funded on children and young people, and for some of the wider determinants of health, such as housing and travel. Other factors, such as spatial planning, or open and green spaces and leisure, are less represented in the PHR Programme. Further opportunities in research include interventions to improve the health of adolescents, adults in workplaces, and communities. Building evidence for public health interventions at local authority level is important to prioritise and implement effective changes to improve population health.

Supporting and enabling health research in a local authority (SERLA): an exploratory study

“…In 2019/20 the total public health grant for local authorities was £3.13 billion [ 3 ] but this grant has been significantly cut by £200 million in recent years [ 4 ]. Continuous cuts to public services pose significant challenges for local authorities, increasing the need for reliable and timely evidence to optimise the use of resources to improve population health [ 5 ].…”

Priority-setting in public health research funding organisations: an exploratory qualitative study among five high-profile funders

“…We found that across the board, the public health research community was involved in generating ideas, but other groups of potential stakeholders had lesser involvement. The NIHR PHRP’s inclusion of public health decision-makers in both its stakeholder events and its decision-making committee is noteworthy in this regard, and a recent article found that the priority-driven research funded by the NIHR PHRP matched the areas that national guidelines recommended local authorities act on to improve population health [ 4 ].…”

“…The Public Health Innovation and Research in Europe project represents perhaps the most in-depth research on European public health research funders [ 2 ]. Additional studies have focused on the research funding priorities of individual funding organisations, like the National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR) [ 3 , 4 ], the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) [ 5 ] and the United States National Institutes for Health [ 6 ]. Given that priority funding areas are identified and refreshed more or less frequently, the published literature, while historically interesting, does not offer insight into the current priority-driven funding trends.…”

Building health research systems: WHO is generating global perspectives, and who’s celebrating national successes?

“…Among them, an examination of ethics approval systems in various countries, which was generally positive about reforms in the system in England [10]; an account of how the NIHR has responded to the research needs of local government in the United Kingdom after responsibility for public health was transferred to it [11]; and an analysis of how an NIHR initiative to integrate research into the local healthcare system was successfully implemented in North West London [12]. …”