Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32414373›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2020

Exploring why global health needs are unmet by research efforts: the potential influences of geography, industry and publication incentives.

Alfredo Yegros-Yegros, Wouter van de Klippe, Maria Francisca Abad-Garcia, Ismael Rafols

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–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

69 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. From researchBMJ global health · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. The imperative to embed ethics in health research priority-setting.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Alfredo Yegros-YegrosCentre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands. a.yegros@cwts.leidenuniv.nl.
Wouter van de KlippeCentre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Maria Francisca Abad-GarciaDepartment of History of Science and Documentation, Universitat de València, València, Spain.
Ismael RafolsCentre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands. i.rafols@cwts.leidenuniv.nl.

Funding

Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades (ES) CSO2017-85379
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt has been well established that research is not addressing health needs in a balanced way - much more research is conducted on diseases with more burden in high-income countries than on those with more burden in lower-income countries. In this study, we explore whether these imbalances persist and inquire about the possible influence of three factors, namely geography, industry and publication incentives.

methodsWe use WHO data on the Global Burden of Disease as a proxy measure of health needs and bibliometric information as a proxy for research efforts. Scientific publications on diseases were collected from MEDLINE using MeSH terms to identify relevant publications. We used Web of Science to collect author affiliations and citation data. We developed a correspondence table between WHO ICD-10 and MeSH descriptors to compare global health needs and research efforts. This correspondence table is available as supplementary material.

resultsResearch output is heavily concentrated in high-income countries and is mainly focused on their health needs, resulting in a relative lack of attention to diseases in lower income countries. A new finding is that diseases with a similar burden in high- and middle-income countries are also under-researched, both globally and in relation to disease burden in high- and middle-income countries. Global industrial R&D is found to be very similar to the focus of public research. Diseases more prevalent in high-income countries generate ten-fold more research attention than those in low-income countries. We find no discernible preference towards diseases of high-income countries versus those of low-income countries in the top 25% most prestigious journals. However, in middle-income countries, citation rates are substantially lower for diseases most prevalent in low- and middle-income countries.

conclusionsFrom a global perspective, the imbalance between research needs and research efforts persists as most of the research effort concentrates on diseases affecting high-income countries. Both pharmaceutical companies and the public sector also tend to focus on diseases with more burden in high-income countries. Our findings indicate that researchers in middle-income countries receive more citations when researching diseases more prevalent in high-income countries, and this may divert the attention of researchers in these countries from diseases more prevalent in their contexts.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchDeveloped CountriesDeveloping CountriesGlobal HealthHealth PrioritiesMotivationPublishingAttentionBibliometricsClassificationCost of IllnessDrug IndustryGeographyHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansInternational Cooperationburden of diseasepharmaceutical industrypublication incentivesresearch evaluationresearch prioritiesunmet health needs

Identifiers

PMID32414373
PMCPMC7227286

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.