Estimating the potential impact of global research on neglected tropical diseases on population-level indicators of health access, sanitation, and research capacity

Background: Neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) continue to affect over a billion people, disproportionately impacting low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). While scientific research on NTDs has expanded substantially over the last two decades, it remains unclear whether this growth has translated into measurable improvements in population-level health, development, or research capacity. This study aimed to evaluate the potential impact of global NTDs research on population-level indicators related to health systems, socioeconomic conditions, and research and development. Methods: We conducted a longitudinal analysis, integrating bibliometric data from 107,251 NTDs-related publications with country-level indicators from open-access global databases. Countries were stratified by World Bank income classification. Linear regressions, meta-analyses, and meta-regressions were used to examine associations and heterogeneity across indicators and income groups. Results: NTDs research output was significantly associated with reduced out-of-pocket health expenditures and current health spending (as % of GDP) in LICs and LMICs, and with expansion of the NTD drug pipeline in LICs and HICs. Strongest and most consistent effects were observed in the WASH domain, particularly reductions in open defecation and sanitation-related mortality. However, research capacity gains were concentrated in HICs. Conclusions and Implications: While NTDs research has yielded measurable benefits in selected domains and settings, its overall population-level impact remains uneven. Enhancing scientific coherence will require intentional alignment of research agendas with health system needs, equity-driven funding, and stronger translation mechanisms in resource-limited settings. Author summary: The global rise in research on neglected tropical diseases, such as Chagas disease, leishmaniasis, and dengue, has raised important questions about its real-world effects. These diseases continue to affect poor communities, especially across Africa, Latin America, and Asia. Over the past decades, thousands of scientific papers have been published, yet uncertainty remains about whether this growing body of work has led to improvements in sanitation, healthcare access, and local scientific development. To explore this, a longitudinal analysis was conducted, linking published research on neglected tropical diseases with population-level indicators related to health access, sanitation, and research capacity. The findings revealed that progress has been uneven. Most research was produced by high-income countries, while improvements in key indicators were slower in low-income countries, where the burden of disease remains greatest. These results suggest that scientific output does not always translate into equitable health benefits. A better alignment between research priorities and the needs of affected populations appears essential to ensure that scientific progress contributes to real-world impact, especially in the most vulnerable settings.