Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Apr 10;14(4):e0214361.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214361. eCollection 2019.

A macroeconomic assessment of the impact of medical research expenditure: A case study of NIHR Biomedical Research Centres

Affiliations

A macroeconomic assessment of the impact of medical research expenditure: A case study of NIHR Biomedical Research Centres

Joel B E Smith et al. PLoS One. .

Erratum in

Abstract

Quantifying the value of investment in medical research can inform decision-making on the prioritisation of research programmes. Existing methodologies to estimate the rate of return of medical research are inappropriate for early-phase translational research due to censoring of health benefits and time lags. A strategy to improve the process of translational research for patient benefit has been initiated as part of the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) investment in Biomedical Research Centres (BRCs) in England. By providing a platform for partnership between universities, NHS trusts and industry, successful BRCs should reduce time lags within translational research whilst also providing an impetus for local economic growth through industry collaboration. We present a novel contribution in the assessment of early-phase biomedical research by estimating the impact of the Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (OxBRC) on income and job creation following the initial NIHR investment. We adopt a macroeconomic assessment approach using Input-Output Analysis to estimate the value of medical research in terms of income and job creation during the early pathway towards translational biomedical research. Inter-industry linkages are assessed by building a model economy for the South East England region to estimate the return on investment of the OxBRC. The results from the input-output model estimate that the return on investment in biomedical research within the OxBRC is 46%. Each £1 invested in the OxBRC generates an additional £0.46 through income and job creation alone. Multiplicative employment effects following a marginal investment in the OxBRC of £98m during the period 2007-2017 result in an estimated additional 196 full time equivalent positions being created within the local economy on top of direct employment within OxBRC. Results from input-output analyses can be used to inform the prioritisation of biomedical research programmes when compared against national minimum thresholds of investment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Supply and use matrix for the South East England regional economy.
A balloon plot for the relative contribution of each industry to the wider regional economy.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Diffusion and inter-industry spillover effects following the initial marginal investment in OxBRC for selected key industries.
A schematic of the diffusion of partial economic effects for key industries following an initial investment in the regional health sector.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Greenhalgh T and Raftery J and Hanney S and Glover M. Research impact: a narrative review. BMC Med. 2016; 14:78 10.1186/s12916-016-0620-8 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rivera SC, Kyte DG, Aiyegbusi OL, Keeley TJ, Calvert MJ. Assessing the impact of healthcare research: A systematic review of methodological frameworks. PLoS Med. 2017; 14(8):1–24. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Milat AJ, Bauman AE, Redman S. A narrative review of research impact assessment models and methods. Health Res Policy Syst. 2015; 13:18 10.1186/s12961-015-0003-1 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Buxton M, Hanney S. How can payback from health services research be assessed?. J Health Serv Res Policy. 1996; 1(1):35–43. 10.1177/135581969600100107 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hanney S, Grant J, Wooding S, Buxton M. Proposed methods for reviewing the outcomes of research: the impact of funding by the UK’s’Arthritis Research Campaign’. Health Res Policy Syst. 2004; 2(4). 10.1186/1478-4505-2-4 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types