» Articles » PMID: 35945538

What Funders Are Doing to Assess the Impact of Their Investments in Health and Biomedical Research

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2022 Aug 9
PMID 35945538
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

As pressures to maximize research funding grow, biomedical research funders are increasingly tasked with demonstrating the long-term and real-world impacts of their funded research investments. Over the past three decades, research impact assessments (RIA) have emerged as an important tool for analysing the impacts of research by incorporating logic models, frameworks and indicators to track measures of knowledge production, capacity-building, development of research products, adoption of research into clinical guidelines and policies, and the realization of health, economic and social benefits. While there are currently several models for RIA within the literature, less attention has been paid to how funders can practically select and implement a RIA model to demonstrate the impacts of their own research portfolios. In this paper, a literature review was performed to understand (1) which research funders have performed RIAs of their research portfolios to date; (2) how funders have designed their assessments, including the models and tools they have used; (3) what challenges to and facilitators of success have funders found when adopting the RIA model to their own portfolio; and (4) who participates in the assessments. Forty-four papers from both published and grey literature were found to meet the review criteria and were examined in detail. There is a growing culture of RIA among funders, and included papers spanned a diverse set of funders from 10 countries or regions. Over half of funders (59.1%) used a framework to conduct their assessment, and a variety of methods for collecting impact data were reported. Issues of methodological rigour were observed across studies in the review, and this was related to numerous challenges funders faced in designing timely RIAs with quality impact data. Over a third of articles (36.4%) included input from stakeholders, yet only one article reported surveying patients and members of the public as part of the assessment. To advance RIA among funders, we offer several recommendations for increasing the methodological rigour of RIAs and suggestions for future research, and call for a careful reflection of the voices needed in an impact assessment to ensure that RIAs are having a meaningful impact on patients and the public.

Citing Articles

Assessing the quality of studies funded by the Israel National Institute for Health Policy Research, 2010-2020.

Even D, Leshno M, Porath A Isr J Health Policy Res. 2025; 14(1):10.

PMID: 40038781 PMC: 11881469. DOI: 10.1186/s13584-025-00672-w.


Perspectives of old-age and dementia researchers on communication with policymakers and public research funding decision-makers: an international cross-sectional survey.

Fusdahl P, Borda M, Baldera J, Aarsland D, Khachaturian A, Braut G Front Med (Lausanne). 2025; 11:1472479.

PMID: 39760038 PMC: 11695358. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1472479.


Outcomes of an integrated knowledge translation approach in five African countries: a mixed-methods comparative case study.

Sell K, Rehfuess E, Osuret J, Bayiga-Zziwa E, Geremew B, Pfadenhauer L Health Res Policy Syst. 2024; 22(1):162.

PMID: 39658798 PMC: 11629502. DOI: 10.1186/s12961-024-01256-x.


Rethinking our future: Describing and enhancing the impacts of dissemination and implementation science for cancer prevention and control.

Cuevas Soulette V, Emmons K, Luke D, Allen P, Carothers B, Brownson R J Clin Transl Sci. 2024; 8(1):e159.

PMID: 39540109 PMC: 11557277. DOI: 10.1017/cts.2024.587.


What public health challenges and unmet medical needs would benefit from interdisciplinary collaboration in the EU? A survey and multi-stakeholder debate.

Pistollato F, Burkhart G, Deceuninck P, Bernasconi C, Di Virgilio S, Emili L Front Public Health. 2024; 12:1417684.

PMID: 39104886 PMC: 11298480. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1417684.


References
1.
Vishwanatha J, Jones H . Implementation of The Steps Toward Academic Research (STAR) Fellowship Program to Promote Underrepresented Minority Faculty into Health Disparity Research. Ethn Dis. 2018; 28(1):3-10. PMC: 5794445. DOI: 10.18865/ed.28.1.3. View

2.
Huang G, Fang C, Lopez S, Bhagat N, Langer P, Eloy J . Impact of fellowship training on research productivity in academic ophthalmology. J Surg Educ. 2014; 72(3):410-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2014.10.010. View

3.
Donovan C, Butler L, Butt A, Jones T, Hanney S . Evaluation of the impact of National Breast Cancer Foundation-funded research. Med J Aust. 2014; 200(4):214-8. DOI: 10.5694/mja13.10798. View

4.
Hanney S, Wooding S, Sussex J, Grant J . From COVID-19 research to vaccine application: why might it take 17 months not 17 years and what are the wider lessons?. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020; 18(1):61. PMC: 7276964. DOI: 10.1186/s12961-020-00571-3. View

5.
Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A . Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016; 5(1):210. PMC: 5139140. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4. View