The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Comparing research investment to United Kingdom institutions and published outputs for tuberculosis, HIV and malaria: a systematic analysis across 1997–2013

Comparing research investment to United Kingdom institutions and published outputs for tuberculosis, HIV and malaria: a systematic analysis across 1997–2013
Comparing research investment to United Kingdom institutions and published outputs for tuberculosis, HIV and malaria: a systematic analysis across 1997–2013
Background: The “Unfinished Agenda” of infectious diseases is of great importance to policymakers and research funding agencies that require ongoing research evidence on their effective management. Journal publications help effectively share and disseminate research results to inform policy and practice. We assess research investments to United Kingdom institutions in HIV, tuberculosis and malaria, and analyse these by numbers of publications and citations and by disease and type of science.

Methods: Information on infection-related research investments awarded to United Kingdom institutions across 1997–2010 were sourced from funding agencies and individually categorised by disease and type of science. Publications were sourced from the Scopus database via keyword searches and filtered to include only publications relating to human disease and containing a United Kingdom-based first and/or last author. Data were matched by disease and type of science categories. Investment (United Kingdom pounds) and publications were compared to generate an ‘investment per publication’ metric; similarly, an ‘investment per citation’ metric was also developed as a measure of the usefulness of research.

Results: Total research investment for all three diseases was £1.4 billion, and was greatest for HIV (£651.4 million), followed by malaria (£518.7 million) and tuberculosis (£239.1 million). There were 17,271 included publications, with 9,322 for HIV, 4,451 for malaria, and 3,498 for tuberculosis. HIV publications received the most citations (254,949), followed by malaria (148,559) and tuberculosis (100,244). According to UK pound per publication, tuberculosis (£50,691) appeared the most productive for investment, compared to HIV (£61,971) and malaria (£94,483). By type of science, public health research was most productive for HIV (£27,296) and tuberculosis (£22,273), while phase I–III trials were most productive for malaria (£60,491). According to UK pound per citation, tuberculosis (£1,797) was the most productive area for investment, compared to HIV (£2,265) and malaria (£2,834). Public health research was the most productive type of science for HIV (£2,265) and tuberculosis (£1,797), whereas phase I–III trials were most productive for malaria (£1,713).

Conclusions: When comparing total publications and citations with research investment to United Kingdom institutions, tuberculosis research appears to perform best in terms of efficiency. There were more public health-related publications and citations for HIV and tuberculosis than other types of science. These findings demonstrate the diversity of research funding and outputs, and provide new evidence to inform research investment strategies for policymakers, funders, academic institutions, and healthcare organizations.
aids, bibliometrics, funding, health policy, hiv, infectious disease, malaria, publications, research impact, research investments, tuberculosis
1478-4505
1-7
Head, Michael
67ce0afc-2fc3-47f4-acf2-8794d27ce69c
Fitchett, Joseph R.
1eae456d-373c-428b-a276-353f0a75822e
Derrick, Gemma
9403a4d9-e3f2-40d9-9483-7fcad8523468
Wurie, Fatima B.
96223c39-3a27-4a0f-9b4f-328ab85c98e8
Meldrum, Jonathan
dfde362c-dd75-4e7e-a104-b6dfffbe356a
Kumari, Nina
45df1a81-7d5b-4a77-8c47-8d85e1a3f544
Beattie, Benjamin
39cbda89-ba3f-4695-b1a7-eca3643e4ba0
Counts, Christopher J.
a8709815-e794-4847-9307-8f2362828dd2
Atun, Rifat
20f14d3b-facf-4079-8566-eb6d13521a34
Head, Michael
67ce0afc-2fc3-47f4-acf2-8794d27ce69c
Fitchett, Joseph R.
1eae456d-373c-428b-a276-353f0a75822e
Derrick, Gemma
9403a4d9-e3f2-40d9-9483-7fcad8523468
Wurie, Fatima B.
96223c39-3a27-4a0f-9b4f-328ab85c98e8
Meldrum, Jonathan
dfde362c-dd75-4e7e-a104-b6dfffbe356a
Kumari, Nina
45df1a81-7d5b-4a77-8c47-8d85e1a3f544
Beattie, Benjamin
39cbda89-ba3f-4695-b1a7-eca3643e4ba0
Counts, Christopher J.
a8709815-e794-4847-9307-8f2362828dd2
Atun, Rifat
20f14d3b-facf-4079-8566-eb6d13521a34

Head, Michael, Fitchett, Joseph R., Derrick, Gemma, Wurie, Fatima B., Meldrum, Jonathan, Kumari, Nina, Beattie, Benjamin, Counts, Christopher J. and Atun, Rifat (2015) Comparing research investment to United Kingdom institutions and published outputs for tuberculosis, HIV and malaria: a systematic analysis across 1997–2013. Health Research Policy and Systems, 13 (63), 1-7. (doi:10.1186/s12961-015-0052-5).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Background: The “Unfinished Agenda” of infectious diseases is of great importance to policymakers and research funding agencies that require ongoing research evidence on their effective management. Journal publications help effectively share and disseminate research results to inform policy and practice. We assess research investments to United Kingdom institutions in HIV, tuberculosis and malaria, and analyse these by numbers of publications and citations and by disease and type of science.

Methods: Information on infection-related research investments awarded to United Kingdom institutions across 1997–2010 were sourced from funding agencies and individually categorised by disease and type of science. Publications were sourced from the Scopus database via keyword searches and filtered to include only publications relating to human disease and containing a United Kingdom-based first and/or last author. Data were matched by disease and type of science categories. Investment (United Kingdom pounds) and publications were compared to generate an ‘investment per publication’ metric; similarly, an ‘investment per citation’ metric was also developed as a measure of the usefulness of research.

Results: Total research investment for all three diseases was £1.4 billion, and was greatest for HIV (£651.4 million), followed by malaria (£518.7 million) and tuberculosis (£239.1 million). There were 17,271 included publications, with 9,322 for HIV, 4,451 for malaria, and 3,498 for tuberculosis. HIV publications received the most citations (254,949), followed by malaria (148,559) and tuberculosis (100,244). According to UK pound per publication, tuberculosis (£50,691) appeared the most productive for investment, compared to HIV (£61,971) and malaria (£94,483). By type of science, public health research was most productive for HIV (£27,296) and tuberculosis (£22,273), while phase I–III trials were most productive for malaria (£60,491). According to UK pound per citation, tuberculosis (£1,797) was the most productive area for investment, compared to HIV (£2,265) and malaria (£2,834). Public health research was the most productive type of science for HIV (£2,265) and tuberculosis (£1,797), whereas phase I–III trials were most productive for malaria (£1,713).

Conclusions: When comparing total publications and citations with research investment to United Kingdom institutions, tuberculosis research appears to perform best in terms of efficiency. There were more public health-related publications and citations for HIV and tuberculosis than other types of science. These findings demonstrate the diversity of research funding and outputs, and provide new evidence to inform research investment strategies for policymakers, funders, academic institutions, and healthcare organizations.

PDF
s12961-015-0052-5.pdf - Version of Record
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (708kB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 8 October 2015
Published date: 4 November 2015
Keywords: aids, bibliometrics, funding, health policy, hiv, infectious disease, malaria, publications, research impact, research investments, tuberculosis
Organisations: CES General, Clinical & Experimental Sciences

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 386497
URI: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/386497
ISSN: 1478-4505
PURE UUID: eaf7bb40-333d-45bb-a7f7-537b2a807419
ORCID for Michael Head: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-1189-0531

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 01 Feb 2016 16:21
Last modified: 06 Jun 2018 12:21

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Michael Head ORCID iD
Author: Joseph R. Fitchett
Author: Gemma Derrick
Author: Fatima B. Wurie
Author: Jonathan Meldrum
Author: Nina Kumari
Author: Benjamin Beattie
Author: Christopher J. Counts
Author: Rifat Atun

University divisions

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

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×