Finding appropriate research funders
PSPs seeking funders for their research priorities need to find those funders with an interest in: particular health problems or in the effects of treatment; and who have funds for a systematic review, a pilot study or a controlled trial or other relevant forms of research.
Funders of research addressing treatment uncertainties can be found in the public sector and the charitable sector, for example:
- The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)
- The Association for Medical Research Charities (AMRC)
- The Medical Research Council (MRC)
Finding out how funders work and targeting them with the research priorities which are within their remit is essential.
Some funding programmes set their priorities for research then advertise for research teams to conduct the research. These are commissioning research programmes. As an example, you can find information about NIHR calls for commissioned research at http://www.nihr.ac.uk/funding-and-support/current-funding-opportunities/
Whether or not research funders set priorities of their own, they may invite researchers to submit their own ideas for conducting research, and may then fund these ideas within their responsive research programmes. You can find information about NIHR responsive or ‘researcher-led’ funding opportunities at http://www.nihr.ac.uk/funding-and-support/current-funding-opportunities/
The Research Design Service (RDS) provides support to health and social care researchers across England to develop grant applications to the NIHR and other national peer-reviewed funding programmes. Its website gives information about the types of research funded by the NIHR research programmes and explains how researchers wishing to prepare grant applications can benefit from its specialist advice and support.
The NIHR Journals Library website provides a searchable archive of published research funded by the NIHR.
Other key information for research funders is:
- the health care setting in which treatments are used, and
- why this research or evidence is important to patients and clinicians.
The response required to a priority topic may be to commission a systematic review, or to update an existing one, rather than necessarily designing and doing primary research.
As well as identifying important questions, priority setting discussions may have identified important outcomes or measures for health research. For example, patients and clinicians have been involved in standardising outcomes for assessment in clinical trials on arthritis and fatigue is a recommended patient-centred outcome measure8. As a result of patient input, fatigue is now one of the core set of recommended outcomes for assessing a range of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis9.
8. Tugwell P, Boers M, Brooks P, Simon L, Strand V, Idzerda L. OMERACT: An international initiative to improve outcome measurement in rheumatology. Trials 2007; 8(38)
9. Kirwan JR, Minnock P, Adebajo A, Bresnihan B, Choy E, de Wit M, Hazes M, Richards P, Saag K, Suarez-Almazor M, Wells G, Hewlett S. Patient perspective: fatigue as a recommended patient centered outcome measure in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2007 34 (5): 1174-7