Michael T Halpern, Sharon McCarthy, Priyanga Tuovinen
{"title":"Current State of Funded National Cancer Institute Grants That Include Economic Analyses.","authors":"Michael T Halpern, Sharon McCarthy, Priyanga Tuovinen","doi":"10.1093/jncimonographs/lgac002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health economics research is an integral part of the transdisciplinary research supported by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). To better understand NCI activities in this area, we conducted a portfolio analysis of funded NCI grants including health economics research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We examined all competitive grants funded by NCI from fiscal years 2015 to 2020 that included economic analyses or outcomes. Grant titles, abstracts, and specific aims were independently reviewed by 2 study team members; content of included grants was then coded for analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total 212 grants were identified from searches; 146 of these included economic analyses and were included in the portfolio analysis. These 146 grants represent approximately 0.9% of all NCI competitively funded grants awarded 2015-2020. Of these grants, 100 were R01 awards, representing approximately 2.4% of all NCI R01 grants funded 2015-2020. The most common study type was interventional randomized controlled-trial, followed by simulation or model. Screening and prevention were the most frequent grant cancer continuum topic; survivorship was included in only 16 grants (11.0%). Cost-effectiveness analysis was the most frequently listed economic outcome (97 grants, 66.4%), whereas policy impact (20 grants, 13.7%) and financial hardship (15 grants, 10.3%) were less-frequently included economic outcomes. However, economic outcomes differed by cancer control continuum topic, with financial hardship being included in a greater proportion of treatment and survivorship grants.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although relatively small, the NCI portfolio of funded grants including economic analyses is diverse, covering a range of cancer types, methods, and economic outcomes, and increasing over time.</p>","PeriodicalId":73988,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs","volume":" ","pages":"4-11"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9255945/pdf/lgac002.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jncimonographs/lgac002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Health economics research is an integral part of the transdisciplinary research supported by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). To better understand NCI activities in this area, we conducted a portfolio analysis of funded NCI grants including health economics research.
Methods: We examined all competitive grants funded by NCI from fiscal years 2015 to 2020 that included economic analyses or outcomes. Grant titles, abstracts, and specific aims were independently reviewed by 2 study team members; content of included grants was then coded for analysis.
Results: A total 212 grants were identified from searches; 146 of these included economic analyses and were included in the portfolio analysis. These 146 grants represent approximately 0.9% of all NCI competitively funded grants awarded 2015-2020. Of these grants, 100 were R01 awards, representing approximately 2.4% of all NCI R01 grants funded 2015-2020. The most common study type was interventional randomized controlled-trial, followed by simulation or model. Screening and prevention were the most frequent grant cancer continuum topic; survivorship was included in only 16 grants (11.0%). Cost-effectiveness analysis was the most frequently listed economic outcome (97 grants, 66.4%), whereas policy impact (20 grants, 13.7%) and financial hardship (15 grants, 10.3%) were less-frequently included economic outcomes. However, economic outcomes differed by cancer control continuum topic, with financial hardship being included in a greater proportion of treatment and survivorship grants.
Conclusions: Although relatively small, the NCI portfolio of funded grants including economic analyses is diverse, covering a range of cancer types, methods, and economic outcomes, and increasing over time.