How long does biomedical research take? Studying the time taken between biomedical and health research and its translation into products, policy, and practice
نویسندگان
چکیده
BACKGROUND The time taken, or 'time lags', between biomedical/health research and its translation into health improvements is receiving growing attention. Reducing time lags should increase rates of return to such research. However, ways to measure time lags are under-developed, with little attention on where time lags arise within overall timelines. The process marker model has been proposed as a better way forward than the current focus on an increasingly complex series of translation 'gaps'. Starting from that model, we aimed to develop better methods to measure and understand time lags and develop ways to identify policy options and produce recommendations for future studies. METHODS Following reviews of the literature on time lags and of relevant policy documents, we developed a new approach to conduct case studies of time lags. We built on the process marker model, including developing a matrix with a series of overlapping tracks to allow us to present and measure elements within any overall time lag. We identified a reduced number of key markers or calibration points and tested our new approach in seven case studies of research leading to interventions in cardiovascular disease and mental health. Finally, we analysed the data to address our study's key aims. RESULTS The literature review illustrated the lack of agreement on starting points for measuring time lags. We mapped points from policy documents onto our matrix and thus highlighted key areas of concern, for example around delays before new therapies become widely available. Our seven completed case studies demonstrate we have made considerable progress in developing methods to measure and understand time lags. The matrix of overlapping tracks of activity in the research and implementation processes facilitated analysis of time lags along each track, and at the cross-over points where the next track started. We identified some factors that speed up translation through the actions of companies, researchers, funders, policymakers, and regulators. Recommendations for further work are built on progress made, limitations identified and revised terminology. CONCLUSIONS Our advances identify complexities, provide a firm basis for further methodological work along and between tracks, and begin to indicate potential ways of reducing lags.
منابع مشابه
Translating Evidence into Healthcare Policy and Practice: Single Versus Multi-Faceted Implementation Strategies – Is There a Simple Answer to a Complex Question?
How best to achieve the translation of research evidence into routine policy and practice remains an enduring challenge in health systems across the world. The complexities associated with changing behaviour at an individual, team, organizational and system level have led many academics to conclude that tailored, multifaceted strategies provide the most effective approach to knowledge translati...
متن کاملBridging the Gap Between Research and Policy and Practice; Comment on “CIHR Health System Impact Fellows: Reflections on ‘Driving Change’ Within the Health System”
Far too often, there is a gap between research and policy and practice. Too much research is undertaken with little relevance to real life problems or its reported in ways that are obscure and impenetrable. At the same time, many policies are developed and implemented but are untouched by, or even contrary to evidence. An accompanying paper describes an innovative progr...
متن کاملHealth Services Research Spending and Healthcare System Impact; Comment on “Public Spending on Health Service and Policy Research in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States: A Modest Proposal”
The challenges associated with translating health services and policy research (HSPR) evidence into practice are many and long-standing. Indeed, those challenges have themselves spawned new areas of research, including knowledge translation and implementation science. These sub-disciplines have increased our understanding of the critical success factors associated with the uptake of research ev...
متن کاملFair Processes for Priority Setting: Putting Theory into Practice; Comment on “Expanded HTA: Enhancing Fairness and Legitimacy”
Embedding health technology assessment (HTA) in a fair process has great potential to capture societal values relevant to public reimbursement decisions on health technologies. However, the development of such processes for priority setting has largely been theoretical. In this paper, we provide further practical lead ways on how these processes can be implemented. We first present the misconce...
متن کاملMeeting the Challenge of the “Know-Do” Gap; Comment on “CIHR Health System Impact Fellows: Reflections on ‘Driving Change’ Within the Health System”
Bridging the ‘know-do’ gap is not new but considerably greater attention is being focused on the issue as governments and research funders seek to demonstrate value for money and impact on policy and practice. Initiatives like the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Health System Impact (HSI) Fellowship are therefore both timely and welcome. However, they conf...
متن کامل