European non-communicable respiratory disease research, 2002-13: Bibliometric study of outputs and funding

©2016 Begum et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. This study was conducted in order to map European research in chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs). It was intended to assist the European Commission and other research funders to identify gaps and overlaps in their portfolios, and to suggest ways in which they could improve the effectiveness of their support and increase the impact of the research on patient care and on the reduction of the incidence of the CRDs. Articles and reviews were identified in the Web of Science on research in six non-communicable respiratory diseases that were published in 2002-13 from 31 European countries. They represented only 0.8% of biomedical research output but these diseases accounted for 4.7% of the European disease burden, as measured by Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs), so the sub-field is seriously under-researched. Europe is prominent in the sub-field and published 56% of the world total, with the UK the most productive and publishing more than France and Italy, the next two countries, combined. Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) were the diseases with the most publications and the highest citation rates. They also received the most funding, with around two acknowledgments per paper (in 2009-13), whereas cystic fibrosis and emphysema averaged only one. Just over 37% of papers had no specific funding and depended on institutional support from universities and hospitals

Mapping research activity on mental health disorders in Europe: Study protocol for the Mapping_NCD project

© 2016 The Author(s). Background: Mental health disorders (MHDs) constitute a large and growing disease burden in Europe, although they typically receive less attention and research funding than other non-communicable diseases (NCDs). This study protocol describes a methodology for the mapping of MHD research in Europe as part of Mapping_NCD, a 2-year project funded by the European Commission which seeks to map European research funding and impact for five NCDs in order to identify potential gaps, overlaps, synergies and opportunities, and to develop evidence-based policies for future research. Methods: The project aims to develop a multi-focal view of the MHD research landscape across the 28 European Union Member States, plus Iceland, Norway and Switzerland, through a survey of European funding entities, analysis of research initiatives undertaken in the public, voluntary/not-for-profit and commercial sectors, and expert interviews to contextualize the gathered data. The impact of MHD research will be explored using bibliometric analyses of scientific publications, clinical guidelines and newspaper stories reporting on research initiatives. Finally, these research inputs and outputs will be considered in light of various metrics that have been proposed to inform priorities for the allocation of research funds, including burden of disease, treatment gaps and cost of illness. Discussion: Given the growing burden of MHDs, a clear and broad view of the current state of MHD research is needed to ensure that limited resources are directed to evidence-based priority areas. MHDs pose a particular challenge in mapping the research landscape due to their complex nature, high co-morbidity and varying diagnostic criteria. Undertaking such an effort across 31 countries is further challenged by differences in data collection, healthcare systems, reimbursement rates and clinical practices, as well as cultural and socioeconomic diversity. Using multiple methods to explore the spectrum of MHD research funding activity across Europe, this project aims to develop a broad, high-level perspective to inform priority setting for future research

Behaviourally Mediated Phenotypic Selection in a Disturbed Coral Reef Environment

Natural and anthropogenic disturbances are leading to changes in the nature of many habitats globally, and the magnitude and frequency of these perturbations are predicted to increase under climate change. Globally coral reefs are one of the most vulnerable ecosystems to climate change. Fishes often show relatively rapid declines in abundance when corals become stressed and die, but the processes responsible are largely unknown. This study explored the mechanism by which coral bleaching may influence the levels and selective nature of mortality on a juvenile damselfish, Pomacentrus amboinensis, which associates with hard coral. Recently settled fish had a low propensity to migrate small distances (40 cm) between habitat patches, even when densities were elevated to their natural maximum. Intraspecific interactions and space use differ among three habitats: live hard coral, bleached coral and dead algal-covered coral. Large fish pushed smaller fish further from the shelter of bleached and dead coral thereby exposing smaller fish to higher mortality than experienced on healthy coral. Small recruits suffered higher mortality than large recruits on bleached and dead coral. Mortality was not size selective on live coral. Survival was 3 times as high on live coral as on either bleached or dead coral. Subtle behavioural interactions between fish and their habitats influence the fundamental link between life history stages, the distribution of phenotypic traits in the local population and potentially the evolution of life history strategies

Studying Evidence Use for Health Policymaking from a Policy Perspective

Individuals working within the health sector widely embrace the idea of using evidence to achieve their goals of improving individual and population health. Yet while these actors embrace an ideal form of rational-instrumental evidence use under the banner of ‘evidence based policymaking’, they often struggle to understand when, why, or how evidence is used in policy processes. This chapter sets out the conceptual framework employed in this volume to study the use of evidence within policymaking from a public policy perspective. It explores the importance of both political contestation and institutional context to understand when and how evidence will be used within policy processes. The chapter then outlines the structure of this book and the focus of subsequent chapters, highlighting how each of these talks to these themes

Rethinking Policy ‘Impact’:Four Models of Research-Policy Relations

Abstract Political scientists are increasingly exhorted to ensure their research has policy ‘impact’, most notably via Research Excellence Framework (REF) impact case studies, and ‘pathways to impact’ statements in UK Research Council funding applications. Yet the assumptions underpinning these frameworks often fail to reflect available evidence and theories. Notions of ‘impact’, ‘engagement’ and ‘knowledge exchange’ are typically premised on simplistic, linear models of the policy process, according to which policy-makers are keen to ‘utilise’ expertise to produce more ‘effective’ policies. Such accounts overlook the rich body of literature in political science, policy studies, and sociology of knowledge, which offer more complex and nuanced accounts. Drawing on this wider literature, this paper sets out four different approaches to theorising the relationship: (1) knowledge shapes policy; (2) politics shapes knowledge; (3) co-production; and (4) autonomous spheres. We consider what each of these four approaches suggests about approaches to incentivising and measuring research impact

Alternatives to cost-benefit analysis for economic evaluation

Science and scientific devices, such as cost-benefit analysis (CBA), involve an implicit effort to rationalize policy-making. In political science, these efforts are not new. Social scientists cannot assume that the notion of policymakers improving their decision-making via means of scientific knowledge necessarily speaks for itself. Beyond the outputs that devices such as CBA offer, health economists and policy makers need to build their relationship by additional means. As environmental policy interventions make their way through policy processes-stages such as agenda setting, policy formulation, adoption, implementation, and evaluation-environmental health economists need to engage and participate in nuanced and entrepreneurial ways, demonstrating an ability to work with both CBA and the many alternatives to it

The pathway out of neoliberalism and the analysis of political ideology in the post-crisis world

©2015 Taylor & Francis Neoliberalism has not simply ‘survived’; it has failed to die, seemingly outlived the socio-economic conditions that gave rise to its existence. In this way, the non-death of neoliberalism raises some important questions about the nature of ideology, principally: its relationship to socio-economic determinants, how it exercises its grip over subjects and how this grip, or hold, can itself be exorcised. Seeking insights into these questions, this paper tells the story of the scholarly response to the non-death of neoliberalism over a ten-year period of crisis: a pre-crisis era beginning with the Asian financial crisis (1997– 2007) and a post-crisis era beginning with the global financial crisis to the present day (2008–2015). The paper considers key scholarly responses to the persistence of neoliberalism at three fundamental levels: (a) the trajectory of their analytical technique, or the key concepts that underpin their wider project; (b) their critique of neoliberalism, or how these concepts render the construction of core neoliberal ideals; and (c) their ideological response to neoliberalism, or their recommendations regarding the pathway out of neoliberalism. On this basis, the paper engages in a discussion of the most plausible explanation for the non-death of neoliberalism and the most likely avenue along which the post-crisis world might build an escape

Integrated care and the ‘agentification’ of the English National Health Service

Integrated care is a global reform principle for improving patient access and outcomes by ensuring that healthcare organisations deliver services in a joined-up, person-centred way. Following reforms designed to infuse agency within English National Health Service (NHS) organisations, the agenda for integration must come to grips with the different approaches to joint working that these organisations mobilise, and the compatibility of their different agentic orientations. We build a matrix for identifying the extent to which different forms of agency orient nine NHS organisational types. Interrogating the Strategic and Operational Plans of these organisations for the period 2015–2018 based on questions derived from the matrix, we associate each organisation with one of eight generalised models. Assuming that there is greater potential for integration where organisations mobilise similar forms of agency, we discuss the incentives and potential governance changes that policy makers might consider to enhance integrative potential