Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29626404›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of health policy and management2018

Making Research Matter Comment on "Public Spending on Health Service and Policy Research in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States: A Modest Proposal".

David J Hunter, John Frank

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of health policy and management, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Eating or Feeding Our Young: A Response to Recent Commentaries.International journal of health policy and management · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

David J HunterInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK.
John FrankUsher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K007017/1Medical Research Council MR/K023209/1Medical Research Council MR/K02325X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We offer a UK-based commentary on the recent "Perspective" published in IJHPM by Thakkar and Sullivan. We are sympathetic to the authors' call for increased funding for health service and policy research (HSPR). However, we point out that increasing that investment - in any of the three countries they compare: Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom- will ipso facto not necessarily lead to any better use of research by health system decision-makers in these settings. We cite previous authors' descriptions of the many factors that tend to make the worlds of researchers and decision-makers into "two solitudes." And we call for changes in the structure and funding of HSPR, particularly the incentives now in place for purely academic publishing, to tackle a widespread reality: most published research in HSPR, as in other applied fields of science, is never read or used by the vast majority of decision-makers, working out in the "real world.

Indexed as

Health ServicesHealth Services ResearchCanadaHealth PolicyHumansPolicy MakingResearch PersonnelUnited KingdomUnited StatesEvidenceHealth ReformHealth Service and Policy Research (HSPR)

Identifiers

PMID29626404
PMCPMC5949227

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.