ABSTRACT
This study examines the impacts arising from neuroscience and mental health research going back 20-25 years, and identifies attributes of the research, researchers or research setting that are associated with translation into patient benefit, in the particular case of schizophrenia. The study combined two methods: forward-tracing case studies to examine where scientific advances of 20 years ago have led to impact today; and backward-tracing perspectives to identify the research antecedents of today's interventions in schizophrenia. These research and impact trails are followed principally in Canada, the UK and the USA. The headline findings are as follows: The case studies and perspectives support the view that mental health research has led to a diverse and beneficial range of academic, health, social and economic impacts over the 20 years since the research was undertaken.Clinical research has had a larger impact on patient care than basic research has over the 20 years since the research was undertaken.Those involved in mental health research who work across boundaries are associated with wider health and social benefits.Committed individuals, motivated by patient need, who effectively champion research agendas and/or translation into practice are key in driving the development and implementation of interventions.This study provides an overview of the methods and presents the full set of findings, with the policy provocations they raise, and an emerging research agenda. It has been written for funders of biomedical and health research and health services, health researchers, and policymakers in those fields. It will also be of interest to those involved in research and impact evaluation.
ABSTRACT
The Department of Health (England) commissioned this evaluation of the pilot Health Technology Cooperatives (HTCs), which are part of its research infrastructure. Its purpose is to explore how this initiative has affected relationships between clinical, industrial and academic partners; how the HTCs fit into the current health innovation landscape; and the alignment of HTC activities to the goals set out in the NIHR strategy. Since the HTC scheme was intended to focus on medical devices, this review investigated how medical device development is being pursued by other similar entities in England, Australia and the USA. The key question was whether the institutional relationships initiated by the HTCs are contributing to the health research system in England and if this scheme is the most effective way of pursuing these relationships. This review had no specific theory or hypothesis to test, so information was gathered so as to allow key conclusions to be drawn and linked to existing theories. This review used documented evidence from the institutions involved as well as interviews. The pilot HTCs have shown that there are different, but equally legitimate, management approaches to the clinician-industry-patient relationship. These different approaches are reflections both of the disease field and the host institution culture. Neither HTC has concluded how best to sustain activities in the long term, particularly core management facilities such as supporting initial meetings with potential partners and early development of technologies from non-commercial sources. Recommendations focused on how best to support core HTC activities in the future.
