IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0241062.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using the NIH Research, Condition and Disease Categorization Database for research advocacy: Schizophrenia research at NIMH as an example

Author

Listed:
  • E Fuller Torrey
  • Michael B Knable
  • A John Rush
  • Wendy W Simmons
  • John Snook
  • D J Jaffe

Abstract

In 2008 the National Institutes of Health established the Research, Condition and Disease Categorization Database (RCDC) that reports the amount spent by NIH institutes for each disease. Its goal is to allow the public “to know how the NIH spends their tax dollars,” but it has been little used. The RCDC for 2018 was used to assess 428 schizophrenia-related research projects funded by the National Institute of Mental Health. Three senior psychiatrists independently rated each on its likelihood (“likely”, “possible”, “very unlikely”) of improving the symptoms and/or quality of life for individuals with schizophrenia within 20 years. At least one reviewer rated 386 (90%), and all three reviewers rated 302 (71%), of the research projects as very unlikely to provide clinical improvement within 20 years. Reviewer agreement for the “very unlikely” category was good; for the “possible” category was intermediate; and for the “likely” category was poor. At least one reviewer rated 30 (7%) of the research projects as likely to provide clinical improvement within 20 years. The cost of the 30 projects was 5.5% of the total NIMH schizophrenia-related portfolio or 0.6% of the total NIMH budget. Study results confirm previous 2016 criticisms that the NIMH schizophrenia-related research portfolio disproportionately underfunds clinical research that might help people currently affected. Although the results are preliminary, since the RCDC database has not previously been used in this manner and because of the subjective nature of the assessment, the database would appear to be a useful tool for disease advocates who wish to ascertain how NIH spends its public funds.

Suggested Citation

  • E Fuller Torrey & Michael B Knable & A John Rush & Wendy W Simmons & John Snook & D J Jaffe, 2020. "Using the NIH Research, Condition and Disease Categorization Database for research advocacy: Schizophrenia research at NIMH as an example," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-10, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0241062
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241062
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0241062
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0241062&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0241062?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0241062. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.