Global colorectal cancer research, 2007-2021: Outputs and funding.

The purpose of this study was to provide an evidence base for colorectal cancer research activity that might influence policy, mainly at the national level. Improvements in healthcare delivery have lengthened life expectancy, but within a situation of increased cancer incidence. The disease burden of CRC has risen significantly, particularly in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Research is key to its control and reduction, but few studies have delineated the volume and funding of global research on CRC. We identified research papers in the Web of Science (WoS) from 2007 to 2021, and determined the contributions of the leading countries, the research domains studied, and their sources of funding. We identified 62 716 papers, representing 5.7% of all cancer papers. This percentage was somewhat disproportionate to the disease burden (7.7% in 2015), especially in Eastern Europe. International collaboration increased over the time period in almost all countries except in China. Genetics, surgery and prognosis were the leading research domains. However, research on palliative care and quality-of-life in CRC was lacking. In Western Europe, the main funding source was the charity sector, particularly in the UK, but in most other countries government played the leading role, especially in China and the USA. There was little support from industry. Several Asian countries provided minimal contestable funding, which may have reduced the impact of their CRC research. Certain countries must perform more CRC research overall, especially in domains such as screening, palliative care and quality-of-life. The private-non-profit sector should be an alternative source of support.

Research on lung cancer and its funding, 2004-2018.

Although smoking is declining in high-income countries, the relative burden from its most well-known consequence, lung cancer, continues to increase, especially in low-income countries. We examined the amount, types, geographical origins and funding of research on lung cancer as revealed by papers in the Web of Science over the 15 years, 2004-2018. The annual number of lung cancer research papers increased over the study period from 2,157 to 8,202, but as a percentage of all biomedical research in Western Europe and North America they only accounted for one-eighth of the percentage of the disease burden. Lung cancer increased its share of cancer research from 4.4% to 6.5%, mainly because of the greatly expanded output from China in 2014-2018 which published almost one-third of the world's total on a fractional count basis. For almost all other countries, their lung cancer presence in cancer research has declined over the 15 years. However, only 15% of the Chinese papers were co-authored internationally and its research was focussed on treatment rather than prevention. Support for lung cancer research is primarily from the government rather than charity. There is therefore an urgent need to increase support for lung cancer research, and for more international collaboration, especially in low-income countries where the disease burden is growing rapidly, and in neglected domains, such as screening and palliative care.

Mental health disorders research in Europe, 2001-2018.

BACKGROUND: The burden of mental health disorders in Europe is well above the world average and has increased from 11.5% to 13.9% of the total disease burden in 2000 and 2015. That from dementia has increased rapidly, and overtaken that from depression as the leading component. There have been no analyses of the research activity in Europe to combat this burden. METHODOLOGY: We identified research papers in the Web of Science (WoS) with a complex mental health disorders filter based on title words and journal names in the years 2001-18, and downloaded their details for analysis. RESULTS: European mental health disorders research represented less than 6% of the total biomedical research. We estimate that research expenditure in Europe on mental health disorders amounted to about €5.4 billion in 2018. The Scandinavian countries, with Croatia and Estonia, published the most relative to their wealth, but the outputs of France and Romania were less than half the amounts expected. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The burden from mental health disorders is increasing rapidly in Europe, but research was only half what would have been proportional. Suicide & self-harm, and alcohol misuse, were also neglected by researchers, particularly since the latter also causes many physical burdens, such as foetal alcohol syndrome, interpersonal violence, and road traffic accidents. Other relatively neglected subjects are sexual disorders, obsessive compulsive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, attention-deficit hyperactivity and sleep disorders. There is an increasing volume of research on alternative (non-drug) therapies, particularly for post-traumatic stress and eating disorders, notably in Germany.

Student learning about UK health services in a cross-border curriculum partnership; the London-Cyprus experience.

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Purpose of the article Cross border partnerships require curricula, faculty and students to negotiate challenges associated with national regulatory frameworks, contexts and cultures. This study investigated student attitude and behaviours when encountering learning about health services in host and home students in the context of problem based learning. Materials and Methods First year graduate entry students' health systems interest and exposure and their perceptions of the dynamics of learning in PBL were investigated via a questionnaire comprising open and closed questions. Results and Conclusions Results showed a difference between home and host students in the ways they learned about home health systems and their attitudes to the value of learning about home and international health systems. There was no difference in the quantity of health service related learning objectives generated. Both groups reported noticing differences between the PBL cases and clinical practice, however, perceptions of the reasons for the differences varied between home and host students. We are interested in the way in which this perception of difference was reported as either a stimulus or a barrier to learning.

The value of European immigration for high-level UK research and clinical care: cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: The UK's impending departure ('Brexit') from the European Union may lead to restrictions on the immigration of scientists and medical personnel to the UK. We examined how many senior scientists and clinicians were from other countries, particularly from Europe, in two time periods. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals who had been elected as Fellows of the Royal Society or of the Academy of Medical Sciences, and UK medical doctors currently practising and listed in the Medical Register for 2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Percentages of Fellows of the Royal Society, Fellows of the Academy of Medical Sciences and UK medical doctors by nationality (UK and Irish: UKI, European: EUR and rest of world: RoW) over time. Fellows of the Royal Society and the Academy of Medical Sciences proportions were assessed for two time periods, and doctors over decades of qualification (<1960s to 2010s). RESULTS: Percentages of European Fellows of the Royal Society increased from 0.8% (1952-1992) (the year the UK signed the Maastricht treaty) to 4.3% (1993-2015). For Fellows of the Academy of Medical Sciences, percentages increased from 2.6% (pre-1992) to 8.9% (post-1992) (for both, p < 0.001). In the 1970s, only 6% of doctors were trained in the EU; the proportion increased to 11% in the last two decades (also p < 0.001). Europeans replaced South Asians as the main immigrant group. Among these, doctors from the Czech Republic, Greece, Poland and Romania made the largest contribution. CONCLUSIONS: Any post-Brexit restriction on the ability of the UK to attract European researchers and medical doctors may have serious implications for the UK's science leadership globally and healthcare provision locally.

Mapping cancer research across Central and Eastern Europe, the Russian Federation and Central Asia: Implications for future national cancer control planning.

Cancer research is an essential part of national cancer control programmes, and the emerging economies of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and the Russian Federation and Central Asia (R-CA) (Commonwealth of Independent States) remain relatively understudied. Here, we map the cancer research activity from the 29 countries across these regions over a 10-year period (2007-2016), using a standard scientometric approach. Research activity was compared with the countries' wealth and with the disease burden from different cancers, and analyses were also performed by the research domain (e.g. fundamental cancer biology, surgery). We found that although there was a correlation between outputs and national wealth, there were many outliers; the CEE countries publishing relatively more, and the R-CA, less. Outputs reflected cancer burdens, but there was a relative paucity of research on lung, colorectal, gastric and pancreatic cancer, as well as research domains such as screening and palliative care. Clinical trials accounted for only 3% of all research outputs from all countries, and were very international, with on average 1.5 CEE countries and 8.0 others involved in each article, and they were heavily cited (on average, 84 times in 5 years). Poland was by far the most research-active country, but significant needs and opportunities have been identified to expand the cancer research activity in all CEE and R-CA countries to enhance national cancer control planning.

The contribution of Cyprus to non-communicable diseases and biomedical research from 2002 to 2013: implications for evidence-based health policy.

BACKGROUND: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the leading causes of disease burden and mortality at the European level and in Cyprus. This research was conducted to map the research activities of Cypriot institutions in five NCDs, namely oncology, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, mental health and respiratory conditions. METHODS: For the period 2002-2013, research in Cyprus was assessed on its biomedical outputs and compared to the rest of Europe relative to their GDP. The research output in the five NCDs was obtained and contrasted to their respective disease burdens. The results from each of the five NCDs showed the amount of cross-country collaboration with other researchers from other European countries and from the rest of the world, and the research level of the papers on a clinical to basic scale. For each NCD field the research application was assessed, whereas for oncology the research type was also assessed. Information was collected on the development of clinical guidelines, on Cypriot newspapers reporting on medical and policy documents and advisory committees' output as well as research and funding organisations available in Cyprus, for potential evaluation of impact in health policy on the five NCDs. RESULTS: Cypriot biomedical research output appeared appropriate in volume compared with its wealth and the expected value from a regression line for other European countries. However, it was focused particularly on the molecular mechanisms of transmittable or hereditary diseases, rather than on the five NCDs. Cyprus performs well in palliative care, which receives funding from several local charities and other non-profit organisations. Cyprus has the highest relative burden from diabetes in Europe, but the subject is largely neglected by researchers. Similarly, it suffers more from mental disorders than most of the rest of Europe, but the amount of research is relatively small. Respiratory conditions research is under-funded and under-researched too. CONCLUSIONS: The biomedical research portfolio in Cyprus is adequate in volume, but not well fitted to its pattern of disease. The means whereby research can be used to improve healthcare in the country are also unsatisfactory, although the Ministry of Health is now developing a comprehensive plan which will include the development of clinical guidelines and proposals for the evaluation of how healthcare is delivered on the island.

Mapping the European cancer research landscape: An evidence base for national and Pan-European research and funding.

BACKGROUND: Cancer research is among the most active biomedical research domains for the European Union (EU). However, little quantitative empirical evidence is available to guide the decisions on the choice of disease site to study, specific research domain focus or allocation of research resources. To inform national/supranational cancer research policy, high-resolution intelligence is needed. METHODS: We performed a bibliometric analysis of European cancer research papers in the Web of Science from 2002 to 2013 to quantify research activity in each of the 28 EU Member States, along with Iceland, Norway and Switzerland (EUR31), which cancer sites/research domains they addressed, and their sources of financial support (2009-2013). FINDINGS: Cancer research papers from EUR31 correlated well with national Gross Domestic Products (r2 = 0.94). However, certain cancer sites (lung, oesophagus and pancreas) were under-researched relative to their disease burden, whereas central nervous system and blood cancers were more generously supported than their burden would warrant. An analysis of research domains indicated a paucity of research on radiotherapy (5%), palliative care (1.2%) and quality of life (0.5%). European cancer research funding in 2012-2013 amounted to ∼€7.6 billion and came from diverse sources, especially in western Europe/Scandinavia, where in nine countries the charitable sector outspent the government but not in Eastern Europe where charitable research funding barely exists. INTERPRETATION: Several countries need to increase their cancer research outputs substantially, and/or alter their research portfolios to better match their growing (and changing) cancer burden. More co-ordination among funding agencies is required, so that resources can be attuned to align activities to research gaps and perceived clinical needs. In Eastern Europe, the charitable funding sector needs to be developed, so that both public and patient advocacy can have an active role in research.

European cancer research: from bench to bedside and to breakfast table.

We examined the outputs, sources of funding, and impact of European cancer research from 2002-13. Outputs were compared with the disease burden and individual countries' wealth. Funding came from a huge number of sources, particularly private-non-profit ones in northern and western Europe. Impacts were determined from citations on cancer clinical guidelines and in European newspaper stories about cancer research.

European Non-Communicable Respiratory Disease Research, 2002-13: Bibliometric Study of Outputs and Funding.

This study was conducted in order to map European research in chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs). It was intended to assist the European Commission and other research funders to identify gaps and overlaps in their portfolios, and to suggest ways in which they could improve the effectiveness of their support and increase the impact of the research on patient care and on the reduction of the incidence of the CRDs. Articles and reviews were identified in the Web of Science on research in six non-communicable respiratory diseases that were published in 2002-13 from 31 European countries. They represented only 0.8% of biomedical research output but these diseases accounted for 4.7% of the European disease burden, as measured by Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs), so the sub-field is seriously under-researched. Europe is prominent in the sub-field and published 56% of the world total, with the UK the most productive and publishing more than France and Italy, the next two countries, combined. Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) were the diseases with the most publications and the highest citation rates. They also received the most funding, with around two acknowledgments per paper (in 2009-13), whereas cystic fibrosis and emphysema averaged only one. Just over 37% of papers had no specific funding and depended on institutional support from universities and hospitals.