Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38885387›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2024

The economic case for scaling up health research and development: Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Daniel Tortorice, Rino Rappuoli, David E Bloom

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2024. 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. Review
  4. 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

3 authors.

Daniel TortoriceDepartment of Economics and Accounting, College of the Holy Cross, Worcester, MA 01610.
Rino RappuoliFondazione Biotecnopolo di Siena, Siena 53100, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8827-254X
David E BloomDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115.

Funding

International Vaccine Institute NAThe Davos Alzheimer's Collaborative NAWellcome TrustWellcome Trust (WT) 215490/Z/19/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, governments directly funded vaccine research and development (R&D), quickly leading to multiple effective vaccines and resulting in enormous health and economic benefits to society. We develop a simple economic model showing this feat could potentially be repeated for other health challenges. Based on inputs from the economic and medical literatures, the model yields estimates of optimal R&D spending on treatments and vaccines for known diseases. Taking a global and societal perspective, we estimate the social benefits of such spending and a corresponding rate of return. Applications to Streptococcus A vaccines and Alzheimer's disease treatments demonstrate the potential of enhanced research and development funding to unlock massive global health and health-related benefits. We estimate that these benefits range from 2 to 60 trillion (2020 US$) and that the corresponding rates of return on R&D spending range from 12% to 23% per year for 30 y. We discuss the current shortfall in R&D spending and public policies that can move current funding closer to the optimal level.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsBiomedical ResearchCost-Benefit AnalysisCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansModels, EconomicSARS-CoV-2COVID-19 VaccinesCOVID-19Group A Strephealth economicsresearch & developmentvaccines

Identifiers

PMID38885387
PMCPMC11214072

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.