1 / 14

Date

Adding Value in Research. Ruairidh Milne, NETSCC Sir Iain Chalmers, James Lind Initiative 26 November 2013 7 th NIHR Trainee Meeting, Leeds. Date. Objectives. To understand why Adding Value in Research matters To know why it is important to NIHR

gitano
Download Presentation

Date

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Adding Value in Research Ruairidh Milne, NETSCC Sir Iain Chalmers, James Lind Initiative 26 November 2013 7th NIHR Trainee Meeting, Leeds Date

  2. Objectives • To understand why Adding Value in Research matters • To know why it is important to NIHR • To explore the implications for your own research

  3. Excellence Accountability Impact

  4. NIHR Vision To improve the health and wealth of the nation through research Aim • To create a health research system in which the NHS supports • outstanding individuals • working in world-class facilities • conducting leading-edge research • focused on the needs of patients and the public.

  5. Faculty Investigators &Senior Investigators Associates Trainees Universities Infrastructure Research NHS Trusts Clinical Research Networks Research Projects & Programmes Patients&Public Research Units & Schools Clinical Research Facilities & Centres Research Management Systems Research InformationSystems Systems

  6. 5 steps to maximise potential impact of research Right questions Accessible, full reports Unbiased and usable Speedy delivery Appropriate methods Iain Chalmers and Paul Glasziou. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet2009.

  7. 5 steps to maximise potential impact of research Right questions Accessible, full reports Unbiased and usable Speedy delivery Appropriate methods Iain Chalmers and Paul Glasziou. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet2009.

  8. 5 steps to maximise potential impact of research Right questions Accessible, full reports Unbiased and usable Speedy delivery Appropriate methods Low priority questions addressed Important outcomes not assessed Over 50% studies designed without reference to systematic reviews of existing evidence Over 50% of studies never published in full Biased under-reporting of studies with disappointing results Over 50% of studies fail to take adequate steps to reduce biases, e.g. unconcealed treatment allocation Hyper-regulation of research Inefficient delivery of research Poor re-use of data

  9. Doctoral theses • Caan and Cole looked at doctoral research (PhD, Dphil, MD) on clinical topics • 82 theses associated with 39 British universities • 39 (47.6%) were apparently not associated with any journal articles Caan W, Cole M. How much doctoral research on clinical topics is published? Evid Based Med 2012;17:71–4.

  10. 5 steps to maximise potential impact of research Right questions Accessible, full reports Unbiased and usable Speedy delivery Appropriate methods Low priority questions addressed Important outcomes not assessed Over 50% studies designed without reference to systematic reviews of existing evidence Over 50% of studies never published in full Biased under-reporting of studies with disappointing results Over 30% of trial interventions not described enough Over 50% planned study outcomes not reported Most new research not interpreted in context of systematic assessment of relevant evidence Over 50% of studies fail to take adequate steps to reduce biases, e.g. unconcealed treatment allocation Hyper-regulation of research Inefficient delivery of research Poor re-use of data Research waste

  11. 5 steps to maximise potential impact of research Right questions Accessible, full reports Unbiased and usable Speedy delivery Appropriate methods Low priority questions addressed Important outcomes not assessed Over 50% studies designed without reference to systematic reviews of existing evidence Over 50% of studies never published in full Biased under-reporting of studies with disappointing results Over 30% of trial interventions not described enough Over 50% planned study outcomes not reported Most new research not interpreted in context of systematic assessment of relevant evidence Over 50% of studies fail to take adequate steps to reduce biases, e.g. unconcealed treatment allocation Hyper-regulation of research Inefficient delivery of research Poor re-use of data NIHR: adding value in research

  12. Electronic Voting Scores • 1 = Not at all • 2 = Poor • 3 = Satisfactory • 4 = Good • 5 = Very good • 6 = Exemplary

  13. NIHR collaborative actions • develop and agree guidance that ensures all primary research it funds is informed by a review of the existing literature. • ensure that all NIHR funded research is published. • develop and agree guidance on the expected timeliness of NIHR funded research being made available publically. • ensure all NIHR funded research is delivered to time and target • ensure information on Adding Value in Research is made available to patients, the public and health professionals, whilst also working to inform the evidence base in this area.

More Related