Long-term yogurt consumption and risk of incident hypertension in adults

The Nurses' Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-up Study cohorts are supported by grants UM1 CA186107, UM1 CA176726, and UM1 CA167552 from the National Institutes of Health. The current analyses were supported by small grants from the National Dairy Council, the General Mills Bell Institute for Health and Nutrition, and the Boston Nutrition and Obesity Research Center. The Boston Nutrition Obesity Research Center is administratively based at Boston Medical Center and is funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH/NIDDK) grant P30DK046200. (UM1 CA186107 - National Institutes of Health; UM1 CA176726 - National Institutes of Health; UM1 CA167552 - National Institutes of Health; small grants from the National Dairy Council; General Mills Bell Institute for Health and Nutrition; Boston Nutrition and Obesity Research Center; P30DK046200 - National Institutes of Health (NIH/NIDDK))Accepted manuscrip

Outliving Grant Funding: A Review of State CKF Projects and Coalitions and the Roles of Funding and In-Kind Support in Their Survival

Examines how the requirements built into RWJF's grants for projects to increase enrollment in Medicaid and State Children's Health Insurance Programs affected the sustainability, evolution, and activities of grantees and coalitions after the grants ended

The Flypaper Effect: Evidence from the Italian National Health System

Public expenditure reduction in Italy is achieved through a revision of social security and health care programmes. In particular, public health expenditure control has been implemented through a reform that imposes more stringent budget rules at local level and a considerable reduction in the grants-in-aid from central government. The response to a decrease in categorical lump-sum grants from the central to local governments might result in an asymmetrical response to intergovernmental grants: local spending is highly responsive to increases in grants, but it is relatively insensitive to grants reduction [Stine, 1994; Gramkhar and Oates, 1996]. In our paper we have estimated this hypothesis using a sample of cross-sectional and time- observations covering the 20 Italian regions over the period 1989-1993. Two different models have been estimated based on different budget balance rules. The empirical results of our model show the existence of a standard and a super flypaper effect in both models. The introduction of the soft-budget constraint hypothesis results in a stronger effect of grants and a lower response of own resources which shows that before reducing expenditure regional governments prefer to incur some deficit.flypaper effect, health care, Italy, soft-budget constraint

Spotlight on Health Grantmaking in Ohio

Provides a snapshot of foundation grantmaking to Ohio's health sector in 2003. Analyzes grants received by area of health care and demographic group, lists top recipient organizations, and summarizes profiles of Ohio foundations focused on health issues

2014 Annual Report

In FY 2014 Chicago Foundation for Women granted out $2,113,731 to 99 organisations for 150 grants to support 3 issue areas: 24$24 million in grants

Project Retrosight. Understanding the returns from cardiovascular and stroke research: Policy Report

Copyright @ 2011 RAND Europe. All rights reserved. The full text article and the summary of the article are both available via the links below.This project explores the impacts arising from cardiovascular and stroke research funded 15-20 years ago and attempts to draw out aspects of the research, researcher or environment that are associated with high or low impact. The project is a case study-based review of 29 cardiovascular and stroke research grants, funded in Australia, Canada and UK between 1989 and 1993. The case studies focused on the individual grants but considered the development of the investigators and ideas involved in the research projects from initiation to the present day. Grants were selected through a stratified random selection approach that aimed to include both high- and low-impact grants. The key messages are as follows: 1) The cases reveal that a large and diverse range of impacts arose from the 29 grants studied. 2) There are variations between the impacts derived from basic biomedical and clinical research. 3) There is no correlation between knowledge production and wider impacts 4) The majority of economic impacts identified come from a minority of projects. 5) We identified factors that appear to be associated with high and low impact. This report presents the key observations of the study and an overview of the methods involved. It has been written for funders of biomedical and health research and health services, health researchers, and policy makers in those fields. It will also be of interest to those involved in research and impact evaluation.This study was initiated with internal funding from RAND Europe and HERG, with continuing funding from the UK National Institute for Health Research, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada and the National Heart Foundation of Australia. The UK Stroke Association and the British Heart Foundation provided support in kind through access to their archives

Project Retrosight. Understanding the returns from cardiovascular and stroke research: Case Studies

Copyright @ 2011 RAND Europe. All rights reserved. The full text article is available via the link below.This project explores the impacts arising from cardiovascular and stroke research funded 15-20 years ago and attempts to draw out aspects of the research, researcher or environment that are associated with high or low impact. The project is a case study-based review of 29 cardiovascular and stroke research grants, funded in Australia, Canada and UK between 1989 and 1993. The case studies focused on the individual grants but considered the development of the investigators and ideas involved in the research projects from initiation to the present day. Grants were selected through a stratified random selection approach that aimed to include both high- and low-impact grants. The key messages are as follows: 1) The cases reveal that a large and diverse range of impacts arose from the 29 grants studied. 2) There are variations between the impacts derived from basic biomedical and clinical research. 3) There is no correlation between knowledge production and wider impacts 4) The majority of economic impacts identified come from a minority of projects. 5) We identified factors that appear to be associated with high and low impact. This report presents the key observations of the study and an overview of the methods involved. It has been written for funders of biomedical and health research and health services, health researchers, and policy makers in those fields. It will also be of interest to those involved in research and impact evaluation.This study was initiated with internal funding from RAND Europe and HERG, with continuing funding from the UK National Institute for Health Research, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada and the National Heart Foundation of Australia. The UK Stroke Association and the British Heart Foundation provided support in kind through access to their archives

The Candida albicans transcription factor Cas5 couples stress responses, drug resistance and cell cycle regulation

We thank Cowen lab members for helpful discussions. We also thank David Rogers (University of Tennessee) for sharing microarray analysis of the CAS5 homozygous mutant, and Li Ang (University of Macau) for assistance in optimizing the ChIP-Seq experiments. J.L.X. is supported by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Doctoral award and M.D.L. is supported by a Sir Henry Wellcome Postdoctoral Fellowship (Wellcome Trust 096072). B.T.G. holds an Ontario Graduate Scholarship. C.B. and B.J.A. are supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Foundation Grants (FDN-143264 and -143265). D.J.K. is supported by a National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases grant (1R01AI098450) and J.D.L.C.D. is supported by the University of Rochester School of Dentistry and Medicine PREP program (R25 GM064133). A.S. is supported by the Creighton University and the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services (LB506-2017-55). K.H.W. is supported by the Science and Technology Development Fund of Macau S.A.R. (FDCT; 085/2014/A2). L.E.C. is supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Operating Grants (MOP-86452 and MOP-119520), the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council (NSERC) of Canada Discovery Grants (06261 and 462167), and an NSERC E.W.R. Steacie Memorial Fellowship (477598).Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Project Retrosight. Understanding the returns from cardiovascular and stroke research: Methodology Report

Copyright @ 2011 RAND Europe. All rights reserved. The full text article is available via the link below.This project explores the impacts arising from cardiovascular and stroke research funded 15-20 years ago and attempts to draw out aspects of the research, researcher or environment that are associated with high or low impact. The project is a case study-based review of 29 cardiovascular and stroke research grants, funded in Australia, Canada and UK between 1989 and 1993. The case studies focused on the individual grants but considered the development of the investigators and ideas involved in the research projects from initiation to the present day. Grants were selected through a stratified random selection approach that aimed to include both high- and low-impact grants. The key messages are as follows: 1) The cases reveal that a large and diverse range of impacts arose from the 29 grants studied. 2) There are variations between the impacts derived from basic biomedical and clinical research. 3) There is no correlation between knowledge production and wider impacts 4) The majority of economic impacts identified come from a minority of projects. 5) We identified factors that appear to be associated with high and low impact. This report presents the key observations of the study and an overview of the methods involved. It has been written for funders of biomedical and health research and health services, health researchers, and policy makers in those fields. It will also be of interest to those involved in research and impact evaluation.This study was initiated with internal funding from RAND Europe and HERG, with continuing funding from the UK National Institute for Health Research, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada and the National Heart Foundation of Australia. The UK Stroke Association and the British Heart Foundation provided support in kind through access to their archives