Better measurement of the complementarity between UK public, charity and private medical research

从医学研究中获得预防或治疗疾病的好处，促进科学知识和创造经济财富，往往涉及私营企业，尽管并非总是如此。私营部门以公共和慈善机构资助的研究和研究人员为基础，并与之互动;它进行自己的进一步研究，开发和商业化用于医疗保健的药物和其他技术。迄今为止发表的理论和应用分析表明，公共/慈善资助的医学研究和私营部门的研发是互补的：医学研究的额外支出刺激了私营部门对研发的额外投资。但迄今为止，衡量这种互补性的唯一尝试都是使用美国的数据，而且有些过时。因此，兰德欧洲公司和OHE建议开发一种方法，用于估计有多少英镑的制药行业研发受到额外的英镑公共或慈善资助的医学研究的刺激。我们将改进早期美国研究中使用的计量经济学分析，并创建一个英国，以及最新的，英国公共，慈善和私人制药行业研究支出的数据集，按治疗领域分类。时间序列数据可用于英国制药行业研发支出总额，但不按治疗领域分类。因此，我们将根据两个不同的代理构建按治疗领域划分的估计支出。首先，我们将使用文献计量学分析的同行评议的研究文章，有私营部门的作者在英国估计的相对权重，由英国行业在其研究中不同的疾病领域。现有必要的文献计量数据库，可对1981年以来的每一年进行分析。其次，我们将按治疗领域对专利进行相应的分析。考虑到不同公司的专利公开意愿和专利申请意愿可能存在差异，并且考虑到不同公司可能专注于不同的治疗领域，我们将探索开发公司的专利公开倾向和专利申请倾向指数。然后，当使用这些数据来代表制药行业研发支出的划分时，这些指数将被用来加权这些公司的出版物和专利。我们将通过对英国12家公司的高级研发经理的采访来测试我们开发的用于按治疗领域划分英国制药行业研发支出总额的代理的合理性（来自英国领先的研发公司），他们还将被问及公司研发影响公共/慈善研究议程的可能性和影响因素。我们将通过分别分析公共资助的医学研究和慈善资助的医学研究来改进迄今为止的分析，我们还将试图确定在相反的方向上是否有可衡量的影响，即更大的私人制药研发投资是否会刺激类似领域的慈善或公共医疗研究支出。

Getting benefits from medical research in terms of preventing or treating illness, advancing scientific knowledge and generating economic wealth often, though not always, involves private industry. The private sector builds on and interacts with public and charity funded research and researchers; it conducts its own further research, develops and commercialises medicines and other technologies for use in health care. Theoretical and applied analyses so far published imply that public/charity funded medical research and private sector R&D are complements: extra spending on medical research stimulates extra private sector investment in R&D. But the only attempts to measure this complementarity so far have used US data and are somewhat out of date.RAND Europe and the OHE therefore propose to develop the methodology for estimating how many £s of pharmaceutical industry R&D are stimulated by an extra £ of public or charity funded medical research. We will improve on the econometric analysis used in the earlier US studies and create a UK, and up to date, dataset of public, charity and private pharmaceutical industry research spending in the UK, disaggregated into therapeutic areas.Time series data are available for total UK pharmaceutical industry R&D spending, but not broken down by therapeutic area. So we will construct estimated splits of spending by therapeutic area on the basis of two different proxies. First, we will use bibliometric analysis of peer reviewed research articles that have private sector authors based in the UK to estimate the relative weights given by the UK industry to different disease areas in its research. The necessary bibliometric database is available and permits analysis for each year from 1981 onwards. Second we will undertake a corresponding analysis of patents by therapeutic area, where that is evident, by year.To allow for likely differences between companies in their willingness to publish and their desire to patent, and given that different companies may focus on different therapeutic areas, we will explore the development of indices of companies' propensity to publish and propensity to patent. The indices will then be used to weight the publications and patents produced by those companies when using those data to proxy the split of pharmaceutical industry R&D spending.We will test the reasonableness of the proxies we develop for splitting total UK pharmaceutical industry R&D spend by therapeutic area via interviews with 12 senior company R&D managers in the UK (from the UK leading R&D companies), who will also be asked about the likelihood of, and the factors affecting, feedback from company R&D influencing public/charity research agendas.We will improve on analyses to date by separately analysing publicly funded medical research and charity funded medical research, not merely aggregating the two.We will also attempt to determine whether there is a measurable impact in the reverse direction, i.e. whether greater private pharmaceutical R&D investment stimulates greater charity or public medical research spending in similar areas.