IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v120y2019i2d10.1007_s11192-019-03129-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative analysis of correlations of research and development indicators for rare diseases among Japan, the US, and Europe

Author

Listed:
  • Hirokuni Mizoguchi

    (The University of Tokyo)

  • Shingo Kano

    (The University of Tokyo)

Abstract

There are many rare diseases and biomedical research efforts for treatment of each disease have been ongoing. However, few reports are available to analyze overall trends for how research and development have been performed for rare diseases generally. In this research, the correlations between research and development indicators of rare diseases were examined with international comparisons among Japan, the US, and Europe. The correlation between the number of clinical studies and orphan drug designations was lower in Japan than that in the US and Europe, while the correlation between the number of orphan drug designations and orphan drug approvals was higher in Japan than in the US and Europe. This analysis clarified differences in the orphan drug designation system, operational characteristics, and beneficial points in the regions. Based on the findings of the analysis of the research/regulatory system, earlier time of orphan drug designation in Japan was proposed as a policy implication.

Suggested Citation

  • Hirokuni Mizoguchi & Shingo Kano, 2019. "Comparative analysis of correlations of research and development indicators for rare diseases among Japan, the US, and Europe," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 361-374, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:120:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-019-03129-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-019-03129-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-019-03129-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-019-03129-5?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
    ---><---

    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. McMillan, G. Steven & Narin, Francis & Deeds, David L., 2000. "An analysis of the critical role of public science in innovation: the case of biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-8, January.
    2. Bryn Lander, 2013. "Sectoral collaboration in biomedical research and development," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 343-357, January.
    3. Desser, Arna S., 2013. "Prioritizing treatment of rare diseases: A survey of preferences of Norwegian doctors," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 56-62.
    4. Carlos B. Amat & François Perruchas, 2016. "Evolving cohesion metrics of a research network on rare diseases: a longitudinal study over 14 years," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(1), pages 41-56, July.
    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. Lai, Kuei-Kuei & Chen, Yu-Long & Kumar, Vimal & Daim, Tugrul & Verma, Pratima & Kao, Fang-Chen & Liu, Ruirong, 2023. "Mapping technological trajectories and exploring knowledge sources: A case study of E-payment technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PB).
    2. Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Li, Ying & Van de Vrande, Vareska, 2009. "The dual role of external corporate venturing in technological exploration," MPRA Paper 26488, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2010.
    3. David Grosse Kathoefer & Jens Leker, 2012. "Knowledge transfer in academia: an exploratory study on the Not-Invented-Here Syndrome," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(5), pages 658-675, October.
    4. Boyack, Kevin W. & Patek, Michael & Ungar, Lyle H. & Yoon, Patrick & Klavans, Richard, 2014. "Classification of individual articles from all of science by research level," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12.
    5. Bekkers, Rudi & Bodas Freitas, Isabel Maria, 2008. "Analysing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1837-1853, December.
    6. Ke, Qing, 2020. "Technological impact of biomedical research: The role of basicness and novelty," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    7. Gianluca Fabiano & Andrea Marcellusi & Giampiero Favato, 2020. "Public–private contribution to biopharmaceutical discoveries: a bibliometric analysis of biomedical research in UK," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 153-168, July.
    8. Albert Banal-Estañol & Inés Macho-Stadler, 2007. "Financial Incentives in Academia: Research versus Development," Working Papers 295, Barcelona School of Economics.
    9. Ying Huang & Donghua Zhu & Yue Qian & Yi Zhang & Alan L. Porter & Yuqin Liu & Ying Guo, 2017. "A hybrid method to trace technology evolution pathways: a case study of 3D printing," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(1), pages 185-204, April.
    10. Kenneth Zahringer & Christos Kolympiris & Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, 2017. "Academic knowledge quality differentials and the quality of firm innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(5), pages 821-844.
    11. Richard Carew, 2005. "Science Policy and Agricultural Biotechnology in Canada," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 27(3), pages 300-316.
    12. Korber Manuela & Paier Manfred, 2014. "R&d networks and regional knowledge production: an agent-based simulation of the Austrian competence centres programme," Экономика региона, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное бюджетное учреждение науки «Институт экономики Уральского отделения Российской академии наук», issue 2, pages 264-275.
    13. Abels, Gabriele, 2000. "Das globale Genom: Forschung und Forschungspolitik zum menschlichen Genom zwischen Kooperation und Konkurrenz," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 85-108.
    14. Jungwon Yoon & Joshua SungWoo Yang & Han Woo Park, 2017. "Quintuple helix structure of Sino-Korean research collaboration in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 61-81, October.
    15. Meyer, Martin, 2006. "Are patenting scientists the better scholars?: An exploratory comparison of inventor-authors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1646-1662, December.
    16. G. Steven McMillan & Robert D. Hamilton, 2007. "The public science base of US biotechnology: A citation-weighted approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(1), pages 3-10, July.
    17. Lehrer, Mark & Asakawa, Kazuhiro, 2004. "Rethinking the public sector: idiosyncrasies of biotechnology commercialization as motors of national R&D reform in Germany and Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 921-938, September.
    18. Michaela Trippl & Joshua von Gabain & Franz Tödtling, 2006. "Policy agents as catalysts of knowledge links in the biotechnology sector," SRE-Disc sre-disc-2006_01, Institute for Multilevel Governance and Development, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    19. Luca Verginer & Massimo Riccaboni, 2021. "Stem cell legislation and its impact on the geographic preferences of stem cell researchers," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 11(1), pages 163-189, March.
    20. Koen Jonkers & Frédérique Sachwald, 2018. "The dual impact of ‘excellent’ research on science and innovation: the case of Europe," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(2), pages 159-174.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Rare disease; Orphan drug; Research and development; Regulatory science; Correlation; Regional comparison;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    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:spr:scient:v:120:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-019-03129-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.