IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v50y2023i6p961-976..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Priorities in research portfolios: exploring the need for upstream research in cardiometabolic and mental health

Author

Listed:
  • Wouter van de
  • Alfredo Yegros-Yegros
  • Tim Willemse
  • Ismael Rafols

Abstract

A current issue in mission-oriented research policy is the balance of priorities in research portfolios. In parallel, in health policies, there is a debate on shifting research away from biomedical treatments towards health promotion and well-being. In this study, we examine if research agendas are responsive to these demands in cardiometabolic and mental health. First, we conducted bibliometric analyses which showed that most research remains focused on biomedical and clinical approaches. In contrast, focus groups and interviews suggested that more research is needed upstream, i.e. on broader determinants of health, public health, and health systems. Most experts also saw a need for more intervention-oriented research. Furthermore, comparisons between cardiometabolic and mental health suggested that they require similar upstream knowledge in issues such as health systems, nutrition, labour, or economic conditions. We discuss the reasons for the persistence of current priorities and the implications in the context of funding strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Wouter van de & Alfredo Yegros-Yegros & Tim Willemse & Ismael Rafols, 2023. "Priorities in research portfolios: exploring the need for upstream research in cardiometabolic and mental health," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(6), pages 961-976.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:50:y:2023:i:6:p:961-976.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scad032
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wouter Boon & Jakob Edler, 2018. "Demand, challenges, and innovation. Making sense of new trends in innovation policy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 435-447.
    2. Hackett, Edward J. & Leahey, Erin & Parker, John N. & Rafols, Ismael & Hampton, Stephanie E. & Corte, Ugo & Chavarro, Diego & Drake, John M. & Penders, Bart & Sheble, Laura & Vermeulen, Niki & Vision,, 2021. "Do synthesis centers synthesize? A semantic analysis of topical diversity in research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    3. Jordi Molas-Gallart & Alejandra Boni & Sandro Giachi & Johan Schot, 2021. "A formative approach to the evaluation of Transformative Innovation Policies [The Need for Reflexive Evaluation Approaches in Development Cooperation]," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 431-442.
    4. Davide Consoli & Andrea Mina, 2009. "An evolutionary perspective on health innovation systems," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 297-319, April.
    5. Cristiano Cagnin & Effie Amanatidou & Michael Keenan, 2012. "Orienting European innovation systems towards grand challenges and the roles that FTA can play," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(2), pages 140-152, March.
    6. Cassi, Lorenzo & Lahatte, Agénor & Rafols, Ismael & Sautier, Pierre & de Turckheim, Élisabeth, 2017. "Improving fitness: Mapping research priorities against societal needs on obesity," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 1095-1113.
    7. Matthew L. Wallace & Ismael Rafols, 2015. "Research portfolios in science policy: moving from financial returns to societal benefits," SPRU Working Paper Series 2015-10, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    8. Garfinkel, M.S. & Sarewitz, D. & Porter, A.L., 2006. "A societal outcomes map for health research and policy," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 96(3), pages 441-446.
    9. Jonathan Linton & Nicholas Vonortas, 2015. "From Research Project to Research Portfolio: Meeting Scale and Complexity," Foresight-Russia Форсайт, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», vol. 9(2 (eng)), pages 38-43.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ciarli, Tommaso & Ràfols, Ismael, 2019. "The relation between research priorities and societal demands: The case of rice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 949-967.
    2. Iris Wanzenböck & Joeri H Wesseling & Koen Frenken & Marko P Hekkert & K Matthias Weber, 0. "A framework for mission-oriented innovation policy: Alternative pathways through the problem–solution space," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 47(4), pages 474-489.
    3. Wallace, Matthew L. & Ràfols, Ismael, 2018. "Institutional shaping of research priorities: A case study on avian influenza," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 1975-1989.
    4. Hanna Martin & Roman Martin & Elena Zukauskaite, 2019. "The multiple roles of demand in new regional industrial path development: A conceptual analysis," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 51(8), pages 1741-1757, November.
    5. Julien Chicot & Mireille Matt, 2018. "Public procurement of innovation: a review of rationales, designs, and contributions to grand challenges," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 480-492.
    6. Stephen Brammer & Layla Branicki & Martina Linnenluecke & Tom Smith, 2019. "Grand challenges in management research: Attributes, achievements, and advancement," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 44(4), pages 517-533, November.
    7. Jonas Heiberg & Bernhard Truffer, 2021. "The emergence of a global innovation system – a case study from the water sector," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2021(09), GEIST Working Paper Series.
    8. Thomas Pircher & Conny J. M. Almekinders, 2021. "Making sense of farmers’ demand for seed of root, tuber and banana crops: a systematic review of methods," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 13(5), pages 1285-1301, October.
    9. Alexander Sokolov & Alexander Chulok, 2012. "Russian Science and Technology Foresight – 2030: Key Features and First Results," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 12-25.
    10. Janssen, Matthijs J. & Abbasiharofteh, Milad, 2022. "Boundary spanning R&D collaboration: Key enabling technologies and missions as alleviators of proximity effects?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    11. Rik B Braams & Joeri H Wesseling & Albert J Meijer & Marko P Hekkert, 2022. "Understanding why civil servants are reluctant to carry out transition tasks [“Legitimation” and “development of positive Externalities”: Two Key Processes in the Formation Phase of Technological I," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(6), pages 905-914.
    12. Švarc, Jadranka & Dabić, Marina, 2021. "Transformative innovation policy or how to escape peripheral policy paradox in European research peripheral countries," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    13. Askfors, Ylva & Fornstedt, Helena, 2018. "The clash of managerial and professional logics in public procurement: Implications for innovation in the health-care sector," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 78-90.
    14. Kwan Soo Hong & DonHee Lee, 2018. "Impact of operational innovations on customer loyalty in the healthcare sector," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 12(3), pages 575-600, September.
    15. Rocsana Bucea-Manea-Țoniș & Oliva Maria Dourado Martins & Dragan Ilic & Mădălina Belous & Radu Bucea-Manea-Țoniș & Cezar Braicu & Violeta-Elena Simion, 2020. "Green and Sustainable Public Procurement—An Instrument for Nudging Consumer Behavior. A Case Study on Romanian Green Public Agriculture across Different Sectors of Activity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-25, December.
    16. Fagerberg, Jan, 2018. "Mobilizing innovation for sustainability transitions: A comment on transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1568-1576.
    17. Jan H. Kwakkel & Erik Pruyt, 2015. "Using System Dynamics for Grand Challenges: The ESDMA Approach," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 358-375, May.
    18. Huang, Cui & Yang, Chao & Su, Jun, 2021. "Identifying core policy instruments based on structural holes: A case study of China’s nuclear energy policy," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    19. Martin, Hanna & Martin, Roman & Zukauskaite, Elena, 2018. "The Multiple Roles of Demand in Regional Development A Conceptual Analysis," Papers in Innovation Studies 2018/10, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    20. Roman Jurowetzki, 2015. "Unpacking Big Systems - Natural Language Processing meets Network Analysis. A Study of Smart Grid Development in Denmark," SPRU Working Paper Series 2015-15, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:50:y:2023:i:6:p:961-976.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.