Europe combating cancer: the European Union's commitment to cancer research in the 6th Framework Programme.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Jungbluth S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5543862 | biostudies-other | 2007 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundMeasuring research impact is of critical interest to philanthropic and government funding agencies interested in ensuring that the research they fund is both scientifically excellent and has meaningful impact into health and other outcomes. The Beat Cancer Project (BCP) is a AUD $34 m cancer research funding scheme that commenced in 2011. It was initiated by an Australian charity (Cancer Council SA), and supported by the South Australian Government and the state's major universities.MethodsThis study applied Buxton and Hanney's Payback Framework to assess research impact generated from the BCP after 3 years of funding. Data sources were an audit of peer-reviewed publications from January 2011 to September 2014 from Web of Knowledge and a self-report survey of investigators awarded BCP research funding during its first 3 years of implementation (2011-2013). Of the 104 surveys, 92 (88%) were completed.ResultsThe BCP performed well across all five categories of the Payback Framework. In terms of knowledge production, 1257 peer-reviewed publications were generated and the mean impact factor of publishing journals increased annually. There were many benefits to future research with 21 respondents (23%) reporting career advancement, and 110 higher degrees obtained or expected (including 84 PhDs). Overall, 52% of funded projects generated tools for future research. The funded research attracted substantial further income yielding a very high rate of leverage. For every AUD $1 that the cancer charity invested, the BCP gained an additional AUD $6.06. Five projects (5%) had informed policy and 5 (5%) informed product development, with an additional 31 (34%) and 35 (38%) projects, respectively, anticipating doing so. In terms of health and sector and broader economic benefits, 8 (9%) projects had influenced practice or behaviour of health staff and 32 (34%) would reportedly to do so in the future.ConclusionsResearch impact was a priority of charity and government funders and led to a deliberate funding strategy. Emphasising research impact while maintaining rigorous, competitive processes can achieve the joint objectives of excellence in research, yielding good research impact and a high rate of leverage for philanthropic and public investment, as indicated by these early results.
| S-EPMC5944042 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Redesigning the agri-food system through agroecology represents a common ambition among practitioners, activists and scholars to achieve environmental and socio-economic sustainability. Research can have a main role to support this path. Although it seems that there is a gradual increasing body of agroecology research, it clearly lacks good knowledge about this. The main objective of this study was therefore to map research projects related to agroecology in Europe with the aim to characterize European research in terms of implementation of agroecology elements, identify needs for future cross collaboration between countries and networks, and support the setting up of appropriate research agendas fostering agroecology research in Europe. Methods: A desktop research with different databases related to European and transnational funding programmes was carried out to identify funded research projects involved in agroecology. The obtained projects were used to perform a social network analysis. Furthermore, two surveys were conducted, one with coordinators of identified projects and a second one for researchers engaged in agroecology. Results: Our study highlighted a predominant trajectory of agroecology research prone to the transformation of the agri-food system. France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and United Kingdom were the most active countries engaged in agroecology research. In all surveys, issues related to efficiency improvement, synergies strengthening, local economy development, and co-creation and sharing of knowledge were the most implemented to support agri-food transformation. Transdisciplinary approaches were mainly addressed by European projects. Surveys reported a limited participation of value chain actors, while researchers, farmers, and their associations were the most involved. Survey respondents suggested to increase project duration and introduce flexibility methods to modulate research actions according to dynamic of the contexts. Conclusion: On the basis of the results, some policy recommendations were provided to fostering agroecology research in Europe and its contribution for transformation of agri-foods systems.
| S-EPMC10445821 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundResearch requires high-quality ethical and governance scrutiny and approval. However, when research is conducted across different countries, this can cause challenges due to the differing ethico-legal framework requirements of ethical boards. There is no specific guidance for research which does not involve non-medicinal products.AimTo describe and address differences in ethical and research governance procedures applied by research ethics committees for non-pharmaceutical palliative care studies including adult participants in collaborative European studies.DesignAn online survey analysed using descriptive statistics.Setting/participantsEighteen principal investigators in 11 countries conducting one of three European-funded studies.ResultsThere was variation in practice including whether ethical approval was required. The time to gain full approvals differed with the United Kingdom having governance procedures that took the longest time. Written consent was not required in all countries nor were data safety monitoring committees for trials. There were additional differences in relation to other data management issues.ConclusionResearchers need to take the differences in research approval procedures into account when planning studies. Future research is needed to establish European-wide recommendations for policy and practice that dovetail ethical procedures and enhance transnational research collaborations.
| S-EPMC7521003 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We analysed the peer review of grant proposals under Marie Curie Actions, a major EU research funding instrument, which involves two steps: an independent assessment (Individual Evaluation Report, IER) performed remotely by 3 raters, and a consensus opinion reached during a meeting by the same raters (Consensus Report, CR). For 24,897 proposals evaluated from 2007 to 2013, the association between average IER and CR scores was very high across different panels, grant calls and years. Median average deviation (AD) index, used as a measure of inter-rater agreement, was 5.4 points on a 0-100 scale (interquartile range 3.4-8.3), overall, demonstrating a good general agreement among raters. For proposals where one rater disagreed with the other two raters (n=1424; 5.7%), or where all 3 raters disagreed (n=2075; 8.3%), the average IER and CR scores were still highly associated. Disagreement was more frequent for proposals from Economics/Social Sciences and Humanities panels. Greater disagreement was observed for proposals with lower average IER scores. CR scores for proposals with initial disagreement were also significantly lower. Proposals with a large absolute difference between the average IER and CR scores (?10 points; n=368, 1.5%) generally had lower CR scores. An inter-correlation matrix of individual raters' scores of evaluation criteria of proposals indicated that these scores were, in general, a reflection of raters' overall scores. Our analysis demonstrated a good internal consistency and general high agreement among raters. Consensus meetings appear to be relevant for particular panels and subsets of proposals with large differences among raters' scores.
| S-EPMC4488366 | biostudies-literature
Project description:?A bibliographic database of scientific papers published by authors affiliated worldwide, especially focused in Europe and in the European Atlantic Area, and containing the keywords "microalga(e)" or "phytoplankton" was built. A corpus of 79,020 publications was obtained and analyzed using the Orbit Intellixir software to highlight the evolution of the research domain. Publication rates from 1960 to 2019, organization of the research, collaboration networks between countries and organizations, emerging and fading research concepts, major studied species, and associated concepts, as well as journals publishing microalgae research were considered. As a result, of the 79,020 papers published worldwide, 26,137 included authors from Europe (33% of world production) and 6989 from the European Atlantic Area (AA) (27% of European production, 9% of world production). The main worldwide scientific research topics found in this study were phytoplankton, community, bloom, diatoms, distribution, ecosystem, coastal, chlorophyll, zooplankton, photosynthesis, and primary production. At the European scale, the most studied topics were related to the environment, food, chemicals, pigments, protein, feed, and drugs. The highest scientific trends and market opportunities analysis identified bioplastics and biostimulants as top emerging concepts at the European level and agricultural, animal feed, and blue biotechnology at the European AA level.
| S-EPMC7074000 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This paper examines the ethical and legal challenges encountered during the GATEKEEPER Project and how these challenges informed the development of a comprehensive framework for future Large-Scale Pilot (LSP) projects. GATEKEEPER is a LSP Project with 48 partners conducting 30 implementation studies across Europe with 50,000 target participants grouped into 9 Reference Use Cases. The project underscored the complexity of obtaining ethical approval across various jurisdictions with divergent regulations and procedures. Through a detailed analysis of the issues faced and the strategies employed to navigate these challenges, this study proposes an ethical and legal framework. This framework, derived from a comparative analysis of ethical application forms and regulations, aims to streamline the ethical approval process for future LSP research projects. By addressing the hurdles encountered in GATEKEEPER, the proposed framework offers a roadmap for more efficient and effective project management, ensuring smoother implementation of similar projects in the future.
| S-EPMC11016076 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Although colorectal cancer outcomes in England are improving, they remain poorer than many comparable countries. Yorkshire Cancer Research has, therefore, established a Bowel Cancer Improvement Programme (YCR BCIP) to improve colorectal cancer outcomes within Yorkshire and Humber, a region representative of the nation. It aims to do this by quantifying variation in practice, engaging with the colorectal multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) to understand this and developing educational interventions to minimise it and improve outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:Initially, routine health datasets will be used to quantify variation in the demographics, management and outcomes of patients across the Yorkshire and Humber region and results presented to MDTs. The YCR BCIP is seeking to supplement these existing data with patient-reported health-related quality of life information (patient-reported outcome measures, PROMs) and tissue sample analysis. Specialty groups (surgery, radiology, pathology, clinical oncology, medical oncology, clinical nurse specialists and anaesthetics) have been established to provide oversight and direction for their clinical area within the programme, to review data and analysis and to develop appropriate educational initiatives. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The YCR BCIP is aiming to address the variation in practice to significantly improve colorectal cancer outcomes across the Yorkshire and Humber region. PROMs and tissue sample collection and analysis will help to capture the information required to fully assess care in the region. Engagement of the region's MDTs with their data will lead to a range of educational initiatives, studies and clinical audits that aim to optimise practice across the region.
| S-EPMC6886907 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC1120421 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Health systems in Australia and worldwide are increasingly expected to conduct research and quality improvement activities in addition to delivering clinical care and training health professionals. This study aims to inform a research impact evaluation at a regional Australian Hospital and Health Service by developing a programme theory showing how research investment is expected to have impact. METHODS:This qualitative study, representing the first phase of a larger mixed methods research impact evaluation at the Townsville Hospital and Health Service (THHS), adopts a realist-informed design involving the development of a programme theory. Data were obtained between February and May 2019 from strategic documentation and interviews with six current and former health service executives and senior employees. Inductive themes were integrated into a conceptual framework to visually represent the programme theory. RESULTS:Research at THHS has developed organically as the service has matured into a regional tertiary referral service serving a diverse rural and remote population across northern Queensland. Throughout this journey, individual THHS leaders often adopted a research development mantle despite disincentives arising from a performance-driven reporting and activity-based funding service context. Impact expectations from research investment at THHS were identified in the categories of enhanced research activity and capacity among clinicians, and improved clinical practice, health workforce capability and stability, and patient and population health. Seven contextual factors were identified as potential enablers or obstacles to these impact expectations and ambitions. CONCLUSIONS:By identifying both relevant impact types and key contextual factors, this study offers programme theory to inform a planned research impact evaluation at THHS. The conceptual framework may be useful in other regionally based health service settings. More broadly, there are opportunities for future research to test and refine hybrid versions of linear and realist research impact evaluation models that combine resource-intensive, theory-driven approaches with policy practicality.
| S-EPMC7059332 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aging western societies are facing an increasing prevalence of chronic inflammatory and degenerative diseases for which often no effective treatments exist, resulting in increasing health-care expenditure. Despite high investments in drug development, the number of promising new drug candidates decreases. We propose that preclinical research in non-human primates can help to bridge the gap between drug discovery and drug prescription. Translational research covers various stages of drug development of which preclinical efficacy tests in valid animal models is usually the last stage. Preclinical research in non-human primates may be essential in the evaluation of new drugs or therapies when a relevant rodent model is not available. Non-human primate models for life-threatening or severely debilitating diseases in humans are available at the Biomedical Primate Research Centre (BPRC). These have been instrumental in translational research for several decades. In order to stimulate European health research and innovation from bench to bedside, the European Commission has invested heavily in access to non-human primate research for more than 20 years. BPRC has hosted European users in a series of transnational access programs covering a wide range of research areas with the common theme being immune-mediated inflammatory disorders. We present an overview of the results and give an account of the studies performed as part of European Union Framework Programme (EU FP)-funded translational non-human primate research performed at the BPRC. These data illustrate the value of translational non-human primate research for the development of new therapies and emphasize the importance of EU FP funding in drug development.
| S-EPMC5098224 | biostudies-literature