IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0105722.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Funding Infectious Disease Research: A Systematic Analysis of UK Research Investments by Funders 1997–2010

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph R Fitchett
  • Michael G Head
  • Mary K Cooke
  • Fatima B Wurie
  • Rifat Atun

Abstract

Background: Research investments are essential to address the burden of disease, however allocation of limited resources is poorly documented. We systematically reviewed the investments awarded by funding organisations to UK institutions and their global partners for infectious disease research. Methodology/Principal Findings: Public and philanthropic investments for the period 1997 to 2010 were included. We categorised studies by infectious disease, cross-cutting theme, and by research and development value chain, reflecting the type of science. We identified 6165 funded studies, with a total research investment of UK £2.6 billion. Public organisations provided £1.4 billion (54.0%) of investments compared with £1.1 billion (42.4%) by philanthropic organisations. Global health studies represented an investment of £928 million (35.7%). The Wellcome Trust was the leading investor with £688 million (26.5%), closely followed by the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) with £673 million (25.9%). Funding over time was volatile, ranging from ∼£40 million to ∼£160 million per year for philanthropic organisations and ∼£30 million to ∼£230 million for public funders. Conclusions/Significance: Infectious disease research funding requires global coordination and strategic long-term vision. Our analysis demonstrates the diversity and inconsistent patterns in investment, with volatility in annual funding amounts and limited investment for product development and clinical trials.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph R Fitchett & Michael G Head & Mary K Cooke & Fatima B Wurie & Rifat Atun, 2014. "Funding Infectious Disease Research: A Systematic Analysis of UK Research Investments by Funders 1997–2010," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-13, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0105722
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0105722
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0105722
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0105722&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0105722?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0105722. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.