The clinical relevance and newsworthiness of NIHR HTA-funded research: a cohort study
The clinical relevance and newsworthiness of NIHR HTA-funded research: a cohort study
Objective
To assess the clinical relevance and newsworthiness of the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme funded reports.
Study design
Retrospective cohort study.
Setting
The cohort included 311 NIHR HTA Programme funded reports publishing in HTA in the period 1 January 2007–31 December 2012. The McMaster Online Rating of Evidence (MORE) system independently identified the clinical relevance and newsworthiness of NIHR HTA publications and non-NIHR HTA publications. The MORE system involves over 4000 physicians rating publications on a scale of relevance (the extent to which articles are relevant to practice) and a scale of newsworthiness (the extent to which articles contain news or something clinicians are unlikely to know).
Main outcome measures
The proportion of reports published in HTA meeting MORE inclusion criteria and mean average relevance and newsworthiness ratings were calculated and compared with publications from the same studies publishing outside HTA and non-NIHR HTA funded publications.
Results
286/311 (92.0%) of NIHR HTA reports were assessed by MORE, of which 192 (67.1%) passed MORE criteria. The average clinical relevance rating for NIHR HTA reports was 5.48, statistically higher than the 5.32 rating for non-NIHR HTA publications (mean difference=0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.29, p=0.01). Average newsworthiness ratings were similar between NIHR HTA reports and non-NIHR HTA publications (4.75 and 4.70, respectively; mean difference=0.05, 95% CI ?0.18 to 0.07, p=0.402). NIHR HTA-funded original research reports were statistically higher for newsworthiness than reviews (5.05 compared with 4.64) (mean difference=0.41, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.64, p=0.001).
Conclusions
Funding research of clinical relevance is important in maximising the value of research investment. The NIHR HTA Programme is successful in funding projects that generate outputs of clinical relevance.
1-8
Wright, David
a55be721-4b15-4555-bf61-73fcb75c1a39
Young, A.
20a873cc-c298-4207-961d-40d7fe04f556
Iserman, E.
6b72ed0f-f768-4e49-a5a9-4f10e99242f6
Maeso, R.
6244cf8d-a36f-46ea-96ea-c4476165b52d
Turner, S.
6ef3affe-56f8-4375-bfe5-5bff76bb06e9
Haynes, R.B.
21cd3b12-3086-4565-beda-e68e6be860cc
Milne, R.
bd90470b-bba2-49a1-aa12-f1319d78afc2
7 May 2014
Wright, David
a55be721-4b15-4555-bf61-73fcb75c1a39
Young, A.
20a873cc-c298-4207-961d-40d7fe04f556
Iserman, E.
6b72ed0f-f768-4e49-a5a9-4f10e99242f6
Maeso, R.
6244cf8d-a36f-46ea-96ea-c4476165b52d
Turner, S.
6ef3affe-56f8-4375-bfe5-5bff76bb06e9
Haynes, R.B.
21cd3b12-3086-4565-beda-e68e6be860cc
Milne, R.
bd90470b-bba2-49a1-aa12-f1319d78afc2
Wright, David, Young, A., Iserman, E., Maeso, R., Turner, S., Haynes, R.B. and Milne, R.
(2014)
The clinical relevance and newsworthiness of NIHR HTA-funded research: a cohort study.
BMJ Open, 4 (5), .
(doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004556).
(PMID:24812191)
Abstract
Objective
To assess the clinical relevance and newsworthiness of the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme funded reports.
Study design
Retrospective cohort study.
Setting
The cohort included 311 NIHR HTA Programme funded reports publishing in HTA in the period 1 January 2007–31 December 2012. The McMaster Online Rating of Evidence (MORE) system independently identified the clinical relevance and newsworthiness of NIHR HTA publications and non-NIHR HTA publications. The MORE system involves over 4000 physicians rating publications on a scale of relevance (the extent to which articles are relevant to practice) and a scale of newsworthiness (the extent to which articles contain news or something clinicians are unlikely to know).
Main outcome measures
The proportion of reports published in HTA meeting MORE inclusion criteria and mean average relevance and newsworthiness ratings were calculated and compared with publications from the same studies publishing outside HTA and non-NIHR HTA funded publications.
Results
286/311 (92.0%) of NIHR HTA reports were assessed by MORE, of which 192 (67.1%) passed MORE criteria. The average clinical relevance rating for NIHR HTA reports was 5.48, statistically higher than the 5.32 rating for non-NIHR HTA publications (mean difference=0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.29, p=0.01). Average newsworthiness ratings were similar between NIHR HTA reports and non-NIHR HTA publications (4.75 and 4.70, respectively; mean difference=0.05, 95% CI ?0.18 to 0.07, p=0.402). NIHR HTA-funded original research reports were statistically higher for newsworthiness than reviews (5.05 compared with 4.64) (mean difference=0.41, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.64, p=0.001).
Conclusions
Funding research of clinical relevance is important in maximising the value of research investment. The NIHR HTA Programme is successful in funding projects that generate outputs of clinical relevance.
Text
e004556.full.pdf
- Version of Record
Available under License Other.
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 1 April 2014
Published date: 7 May 2014
Organisations:
Faculty of Medicine
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 368195
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/368195
PURE UUID: 26e3fd55-36c3-4130-819d-9fa9bccebce8
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 20 Aug 2014 12:01
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 02:58
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
A. Young
Author:
E. Iserman
Author:
R. Maeso
Author:
S. Turner
Author:
R.B. Haynes
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics