The Anatomy of Medical Research
US and International
Comparisons
Hamilton Moses III, MD;
David H. M. Matheson, JD, MBA; Sarah Cairns-Smith, PhD; Benjamin P. George, MD,
MPH; Chase Palisch, MPhil; E. Ray Dorsey, MD, MBA
JAMA. 2015;313(2):174-189. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.15939.
ABSTRACT
Importance
Medical research is a
prerequisite of clinical advances, while health service research supports
improved delivery, access, and cost. Few previous analyses have compared the
United States with other developed countries.
Objectives
To quantify total public
and private investment and personnel (economic inputs) and to evaluate
resulting patents, publications, drug and device approvals, and value created
(economic outputs).
Evidence
Review
Publicly available data
from 1994 to 2012 were compiled showing trends in US and international research
funding, productivity, and disease burden by source and industry type. Patents
and publications (1981-2011) were evaluated using citation rates and impact
factors.
Findings
(1) Reduced science
investment: Total US funding increased 6% per year (1994-2004), but rate of
growth declined to 0.8% per year (2004-2012), reaching $117 billion (4.5%) of
total health care expenditures. Private sources increased from 46% (1994) to
58% (2012). Industry reduced early-stage research, favoring medical devices,
bioengineered drugs, and late-stage clinical trials, particularly for cancer
and rare diseases. National Insitutes of Health allocations correlate
imperfectly with disease burden, with cancer and HIV/AIDS receiving
disproportionate support. (2) Underfunding of service innovation: Health
services research receives $5.0 billion (0.3% of total health care
expenditures) or only 1/20th of science funding. Private insurers ranked last
(0.04% of revenue) and health systems 19th (0.1% of revenue) among 22
industries in their investment in innovation. An increment of $8 billion to $15
billion yearly would occur if service firms were to reach median research and
development funding. (3) Globalization: US government research funding declined
from 57% (2004) to 50% (2012) of the global total, as did that of US companies
(50% to 41%), with the total US (public plus private) share of global research
funding declining from 57% to 44%. Asia, particularly China, tripled investment
from $2.6 billion (2004) to $9.7 billion (2012) preferentially for education
and personnel. The US share of life science patents declined from 57% (1981) to
51% (2011), as did those considered most valuable, from 73% (1981) to 59%
(2011).
Conclusions
and Relevance
New investment is required
if the clinical value of past scientific discoveries and opportunities to
improve care are to be fully realized. Sources could include repatriation of
foreign capital, new innovation bonds, administrative savings, patent pools,
and public-private risk sharing collaborations. Given international trends, the
United States will relinquish its historical international lead in the next
decade unless such measures are undertaken.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário