Adding
Download
1 / 14

Date - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 223 Views
  • Uploaded on

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

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Date' - gitano


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Adding Value in Research

Ruairidh Milne, NETSCC

Sir Iain Chalmers, James Lind Initiative

26 November 2013

7th NIHR Trainee Meeting, Leeds

Date


Objectives
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


Excellence

Accountability

Impact


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.


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


5 steps to maximise potential impact of research
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.


5 steps to maximise potential impact of research1
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.


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


Doctoral theses
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.


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


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


Electronic voting scores
Electronic Voting Scores

  • 1 = Not at all

  • 2 = Poor

  • 3 = Satisfactory

  • 4 = Good

  • 5 = Very good

  • 6 = Exemplary


Nihr collaborative actions
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.


ad