The Returns from Arthritis Research Volume 2

The Case Studies

Steven Wooding, Silvia Anton, Jonathan Grant, Stephen Hanney, Stijn Hoorens, Abigail Lierens, Miriam Shergold, Mark Venema

ResearchPublished Sep 22, 2004

Cover: The Returns from Arthritis Research Volume 2
Download PDF
Additional Downloads

Includes Summary Only

There is increasing pressure for research funders to demonstrate, and seek to maximise, the payback from the research they fund. This report, prepared for and funded by the Arthritis Research Campaign (arc), presents the results of an evaluation of 16 research grants awarded by arc in the early 1990s. The main objective was to develop a system for evaluating arthritis research, with a view to allowing arc to stimulate and manage the exploitation of research advances so that they translate into outcomes of practical benefit to people with arthritis.

Volume 2 of the report presents a collection of the case studies used in the study. These case studies all follow a similar format based on the conceptual model and provide a rich and detailed narrative on the payback of each research grant.

Volume 1 of the report presents a framework that conceptualises the relationship between research inputs, process, output and outcomes. Using this framework, we catalogue a diverse range of research output and outcomes arising from these 16 grants and make a series of quantitative and qualitative assessments comparing, for example, payback from project grants versus programme grants. In conclusion, we make six observations:

  • There is a diversity of research payback.
  • The researcher is the key driver of research translation.
  • Short, focused project grants seem to provide value for money.
  • Intended and unintended flexibility in funding is used advantageously.
  • Referees’ contributions to the peer-review process are of variable benefit.
  • The payback framework could be operationalised and embedded by arc.

Topics

Document Details

  • Copyright: RAND Corporation
  • Availability: Web-Only
  • Year: 2004
  • Pages: 274
  • ISBN/EAN: 978-0-8330-3688-9
  • Document Number: TR-176-ARC

Citation

RAND Style Manual
Wooding, Steven, Silvia Anton, Jonathan Grant, Stephen Hanney, Stijn Hoorens, Abigail Lierens, Miriam Shergold, and Mark Venema, The Returns from Arthritis Research Volume 2: The Case Studies, RAND Corporation, TR-176-ARC, 2004. As of September 14, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR176.html
Chicago Manual of Style
Wooding, Steven, Silvia Anton, Jonathan Grant, Stephen Hanney, Stijn Hoorens, Abigail Lierens, Miriam Shergold, and Mark Venema, The Returns from Arthritis Research Volume 2: The Case Studies. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2004. https://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR176.html.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

The research described in this report was prepared for and funded by the Arthritis Research Campaign (arc) and performed by RAND Europe.

This publication is part of the RAND technical report series. RAND technical reports, products of RAND from 2003 to 2011, presented research findings on a topic limited in scope or intended for a narrow audience; discussions of the methodology employed in research; literature reviews, survey instruments, modeling exercises, guidelines for practitioners and research professionals, and supporting documentation; and preliminary findings. All RAND technical reports were subject to rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.