Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27297230›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2016

Applying for, reviewing and funding public health research in Germany and beyond.

Ansgar Gerhardus, Heiko Becher, Peter Groenewegen, Ulrich Mansmann, Thorsten Meyer, Holger Pfaff, Milo Puhan, Oliver Razum, Eva Rehfuess, Rainer Sauerborn and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Ansgar GerhardusDepartment for Health Services Research, Institute for Public Health and Nursing Research, Health Sciences Bremen, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany.
Heiko BecherInstitute of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Peter GroenewegenNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Ulrich MansmannDepartment of Medical Information Sciences, Biometrics, and Epidemiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.
Thorsten MeyerIntegrative Rehabilitation Research Unit, Institute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Holger PfaffInstitute for Medical Sociology, Health Services Research and Rehabilitation Science, Center for Health Services Research Cologne, Faculty of Human Science and Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Milo PuhanEpidemiology, Biostatistics & Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Oliver RazumDepartment of Epidemiology and International Public Health, School of Public Health, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.
Eva RehfuessDepartment of Medical Information Sciences, Biometrics, and Epidemiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.
Rainer SauerbornInstitute for Public Health, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Daniel StrechCELLS - Centre for Ethics and Law in the Life Sciences, Institute for History, Ethics and Philosophy in Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Frank WissingGerman Medical Faculties' Association (MFT), Berlin, Germany.
Hajo ZeebLeibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology, Department of Prevention and Evaluation, Health Sciences Bremen, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany.
Eva Hummers-PradierDepartment of General Practice, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany. eva.hummers-pradier@med.uni-goettingen.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Public health research is complex, involves various disciplines, epistemological perspectives and methods, and is rarely conducted in a controlled setting. Often, the added value of a research project lies in its inter- or trans-disciplinary interaction, reflecting the complexity of the research questions at hand. This creates specific challenges when writing and reviewing public health research grant applications. Therefore, the German Research Foundation (DFG), the largest independent research funding organization in Germany, organized a round table to discuss the process of writing, reviewing and funding public health research. The aim was to analyse the challenges of writing, reviewing and granting scientific public health projects and to improve the situation by offering guidance to applicants, reviewers and funding organizations. The DFG round table discussion brought together national and international public health researchers and representatives of funding organizations. Based on their presentations and discussions, a core group of the participants (the authors) wrote a first draft on the challenges of writing and reviewing public health research proposals and on possible solutions. Comments were discussed in the group of authors until consensus was reached. Public health research demands an epistemological openness and the integration of a broad range of specific skills and expertise. Applicants need to explicitly refer to theories as well as to methodological and ethical standards and elaborate on why certain combinations of theories and methods are required. Simultaneously, they must acknowledge and meet the practical and ethical challenges of conducting research in complex real life settings. Reviewers need to make the rationale for their judgments transparent, refer to the corresponding standards and be explicit about any limitations in their expertise towards the review boards. Grant review boards, funding organizations and research ethics committees need to be aware of the specific conditions of public health research, provide adequate guidance to applicants and reviewers, and ensure that processes and the expertise involved adequately reflect the topic under review.

Indexed as

Ethical ReviewFinancial SupportFinancing, OrganizedHealth Services ResearchPeer Review, ResearchPublic HealthResearch DesignConsensusEthics Committees, ResearchGermanyGuidelines as TopicHumansResearch PersonnelFundingGrants peer reviewHealth services researchHealth systems researchPublic healthResearch

Identifiers

PMID27297230
PMCPMC4907007

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.