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 24;19(1):248.
doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4072-7.

Research funding impact and priority setting - advancing universal access and quality healthcare research in Malaysia

Weng Hong Fun  1 , Sondi Sararaks  2 , Ee Hong Tan  2 , Kar Foong Tang  2 , Diane Woei Quan Chong  2 , Lee Lan Low  2 , Roslinda Abu Sapian  3 , S Asmaliza Ismail  3 , Suresh Kumar Govind  4 , Siti Haniza Mahmud  2 , Shahnaz Murad  5
Affiliations

Research funding impact and priority setting - advancing universal access and quality healthcare research in Malaysia

Weng Hong Fun et al. BMC Health Serv Res. .

Abstract

Background: Health Research Priority Setting (HRPS) in the Ministry of Health (MOH) Malaysia was initiated more than a decade ago to drive effort toward research for informed decision and policy-making. This study assessed the impact of funded prioritised research and identified research gaps to inform future priority setting initiatives for universal access and quality healthcare in Malaysia.

Methods: Research impact of universal access and quality healthcare projects funded by the National Institutes of Health Malaysia were assessed based on the modified Payback Framework, addressing categories of informing policy, knowledge production, and benefits to health and health sector. For the HRPS process, the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative methodology was adapted and adopted, with the incorporation of stakeholder values using weights and monetary allocation survey. Workshop discussions and interviews with stakeholders and research groups were conducted to identify research gaps, with the use of conceptual frameworks to guide the search.

Results: Seventeen ongoing and 50 completed projects were identified for research funding impact analysis. Overall, research fund allocation differed from stakeholders' expectation. For research impact, 48 out of 50 completed projects (96.0%) contributed to some form of policy-making efforts. Almost all completed projects resulted in outputs that contributed to knowledge production and were expected to lead to health and health sector benefits. The HRPS process led to the identification of research priority areas that stemmed from ongoing and new issues identified for universal access and quality healthcare.

Conclusion: The concerted efforts of evaluation of research funding impact, prioritisation, dissemination and policy-maker involvement were valuable for optimal health research resource utilisation in a resource constrained developing country. Embedding impact evaluation into a priority setting process and funding research based on national needs could facilitate health research investment to reach its potential.

Keywords: Health research priority setting; Payback framework; Quality healthcare; Research funding; Research impact; Research priority areas; Stakeholder engagement; Stakeholder values; Universal access.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This was a Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) exercise conducted by the fund-governing agency to assess organisational performance and funding impact within Ministry of Health Malaysia. In this exercise, the funder required detailed feedback from recipients of the research fund. Stakeholders were solicited as part of the engagement process to address their research needs. The undertaking of CHNRI exercises do not usually involve the request for formal ethics review as it does not involve individual sensitive data [42] and this was practised in Malaysia. This M&E was registered in the National Medical Research Register of Malaysia [19] (NMRR-18-1078-42046).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

SS, RAS, SAI, SHM and SM were involved in NIH Malaysia’s fund governance. All remaining authors confirm they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart of projects funded under Universal Access and Quality Healthcare Research, 10th Malaysia Plan
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Rudan I, Gibson JL, Ameratunga S, El Arifeen S, Bhutta ZA, Black M, Black RE, Brown KH, Campbell H, Carneiro I, et al. Setting priorities in global child health research investments: guidelines for implementation of the CHNRI method. Croat Med J. 2008;49(6):720–733. doi: 10.3325/cmj.2008.49.720. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fleurence RL, Togerson DJ. Setting priorities for research. Health Policy. 2004;69(1):1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2003.11.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kapiriri L, Tomlinson M, Chopra M, El AS, Black RE, Rudan I. Setting priorities in global child health research investments: addressing values of stakeholders. Croat Med J. 2007;48(5):618–627. - PMC - PubMed
    1. McGregor S, Henderson KJ, Kaldor JM. How are health research priorities set in low and middle income countries? A systematic review of published reports. PLoS One. 2014;9(10):e108787. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0108787. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Non-Communicable Disease (NCD) Section . National Strategic Plan for Non-Communicable Disease (NSPNCD) 2016–2025. Putrajaya: Ministry of Health Malaysia; 2016.

LinkOut - more resources