IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v110y2017i1d10.1007_s11192-016-2169-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disease burden and the advancement of biomedical knowledge

Author

Listed:
  • David Hsiehchen

    (University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center)

  • Magdalena Espinoza

    (Banner University Medical Center Phoenix)

  • Antony Hsieh

    (Northwestern University)

Abstract

Despite the importance and magnitude of biomedical research, little is known about its development and responsiveness to current health needs. Herein, we characterized the evolution of disease specific biomedical research and assess the alignment of research and translational efforts with disease burden. Publication patterns for approximately 2700 diseases indicated a fluid landscape of modern biomedical interests. In studying a subset of diseases with available data, overall measures of disease burden explained a large fraction of publication variance but only a small portion of NIH funding variance. In addition, discrete measures of mortality and morbidity differentially impacted NIH funding levels, research efforts, and the number of clinical trials in the US. Our findings not only scrutinize the relevance of our current biomedical enterprise, but may also serve as a resource for fostering strategies that adequately prepare the scientific community to address future health needs and promote accountability in the allocation of resources.

Suggested Citation

  • David Hsiehchen & Magdalena Espinoza & Antony Hsieh, 2017. "Disease burden and the advancement of biomedical knowledge," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 321-333, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:110:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-016-2169-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-016-2169-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-016-2169-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-016-2169-x?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leslie A Gillum & Christopher Gouveia & E Ray Dorsey & Mark Pletcher & Colin D Mathers & Charles E McCulloch & S Claiborne Johnston, 2011. "NIH Disease Funding Levels and Burden of Disease," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(2), pages 1-9, February.
    2. Sara Reardon, 2014. "Lobbying sways NIH grants," Nature, Nature, vol. 515(7525), pages 19-19, November.
    3. Radmila Lyubarova & Brandon K Itagaki & Michael W Itagaki, 2009. "The Impact of National Institutes of Health Funding on U.S. Cardiovascular Disease Research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(7), pages 1-8, July.
    4. Richard Van Noorden, 2014. "China tops Europe in R&D intensity," Nature, Nature, vol. 505(7482), pages 144-145, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Patrick Herron & Aashish Mehta & Cong Cao & Timothy Lenoir, 2016. "Research diversification and impact: the case of national nanoscience development," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 629-659, November.
    2. Chris W. Belter, 2013. "A bibliometric analysis of NOAA’s Office of Ocean Exploration and Research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 629-644, May.
    3. Eduardo Martínez-Martínez & María Luisa Zaragoza & Elmer Solano & Brenda Figueroa & Patricia Zúñiga & Juan P Laclette, 2012. "Health Research Funding in Mexico: The Need for a Long-Term Agenda," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(12), pages 1-11, December.
    4. Belén Álvarez-Bornstein & Fernanda Morillo & María Bordons, 2017. "Funding acknowledgments in the Web of Science: completeness and accuracy of collected data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1793-1812, September.
    5. Ciarli, Tommaso & Ràfols, Ismael, 2019. "The relation between research priorities and societal demands: The case of rice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 949-967.
    6. Lin Zhang & Wenjing Zhao & Jianhua Liu & Gunnar Sivertsen & Ying Huang, 2020. "Do national funding organizations properly address the diseases with the highest burden?: Observations from China and the UK," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1733-1761, November.
    7. Vanderelst, Dieter & Speybroeck, Niko, 2013. "Scientometrics reveals funding priorities in medical research policy," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 240-247.
    8. Xun Zhang & Meng Shi & Biao Xu, 2019. "Do Government R&D Subsidies Cultivate Enterprises’ Voluntary National/Industry Standard-Setting for Sustainable Development?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-20, October.
    9. Irwin Feller, 2022. "Assessing the societal impact of publicly funded research," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 632-650, June.
    10. Rafiq, Shuddhasattwa & Salim, Ruhul & Smyth, Russell, 2016. "The moderating role of firm age in the relationship between R&D expenditure and financial performance: Evidence from Chinese and US mining firms," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 122-132.
    11. Pierre Azoulay & Joshua S Graff Zivin & Danielle Li & Bhaven N Sampat, 2019. "Public R&D Investments and Private-sector Patenting: Evidence from NIH Funding Rules," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(1), pages 117-152.
    12. Thomas Fürst & Kigbafori D Silué & Mamadou Ouattara & Dje N N'Goran & Lukas G Adiossan & Yao N'Guessan & Fabian Zouzou & Siaka Koné & Eliézer K N'Goran & Jürg Utzinger, 2012. "Schistosomiasis, Soil-Transmitted Helminthiasis, and Sociodemographic Factors Influence Quality of Life of Adults in Côte d'Ivoire," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(10), pages 1-12, October.
    13. Guo, Di & Guo, Yan & Jiang, Kun, 2016. "Government-subsidized R&D and firm innovation: Evidence from China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1129-1144.
    14. Joseph Millum, 2023. "Should health research funding be proportional to the burden of disease?," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 22(1), pages 76-99, February.
    15. Kaushik Ghosh & Irina Bondarenko & Kassandra L Messer & Susan T Stewart & Trivellore Raghunathan & Allison B Rosen & David M Cutler, 2020. "Attributing medical spending to conditions: A comparison of methods," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-17, August.
    16. Zhang, Lin & ZHAO, Wenjing & Liu, Jianhua & Sivertsen, Gunnar & HUANG, Ying, 2020. "Do national funding organizations properly address the diseases with the highest burden? - Observations from China and the UK," SocArXiv ckpf8, Center for Open Science.
    17. Luba Katz & Rebecca V Fink & Samuel R Bozeman & Barbara J McNeil, 2014. "Using Health Care Utilization and Publication Patterns to Characterize the Research Portfolio and to Plan Future Research Investments," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-12, December.
    18. Liang, Xinning & Liu, Anita M.M., 2018. "The evolution of government sponsored collaboration network and its impact on innovation: A bibliometric analysis in the Chinese solar PV sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1295-1308.
    19. Shibayama, Sotaro & Baba, Yasunori, 2015. "Impact-oriented science policies and scientific publication practices: The case of life sciences in Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 936-950.
    20. Ohid Yaqub & Javier A Luna & Duncan Aq Moore & Alfredo Yegros-Yegros, 2022. "Responding to a disease with resources from other diseases: Evidence from Zika vaccine research dynamics [Protective Efficacy of Multiple Vaccine Platforms against Zika Virus Challenge in Rhesus Mo," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(6), pages 942-950.

    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:spr:scient:v:110:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-016-2169-x. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.