ArticleThe Journal of infectious diseases2016
Mapping Investments and Published Outputs in Norovirus Research: A Systematic Analysis of Research Funded in the United States and United Kingdom During 1997-2013.
Article in The Journal of infectious diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Norovirus surveillance comes of age: the impact of NoroNet.The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2018Article
- Norovirus in 2016-Emesis Aplenty but Clear Signs of Progress.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNorovirus accounts for a considerable portion of the global disease burden. Mapping national or international investments relating to norovirus research is limited.
methodsWe analyzed the focus and type of norovirus research funding awarded to institutions in the United States and United Kingdom during 1997-2013. Data were obtained from key public and philanthropic funders across both countries, and norovirus-related research was identified from study titles and abstracts. Included studies were further categorized by the type of scientific investigation, and awards related to vaccine, diagnostic, and therapeutic research were identified. Norovirus publication trends are also described using data from Scopus.
resultsIn total, US and United Kingdom funding investment for norovirus research was £97.6 million across 349 awards; 326 awards (amount, £84.9 million) were received by US institutions, and 23 awards (£12.6 million) were received by United Kingdom institutions. Combined, £81.2 million of the funding (83.2%) was for preclinical research, and £16.4 million (16.8%) was for translational science. Investments increased from £1.7 million in 1997 to £11.8 million in 2013. Publication trends showed a consistent temporal increase from 48 in 1997 to 182 in 2013.
conclusionsDespite increases over time, trends in US and United Kingdom funding for norovirus research clearly demonstrate insufficient translational research and limited investment in diagnostics, therapeutics, or vaccine research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.