{"title":"基于实践意义的哈萨克斯坦临床试验开发优先排序算法转化","authors":"Talgat Nurgozhin, Gulnara Kulkayeva, Margarita Graf, Valentina Tarasova, Adlet Tabarov","doi":"10.1002/hpm.3902","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The research relevance is determined by the need for rational use of limited resources in the healthcare sector and the importance of implementing the results of scientific research into medical practice to improve the quality of medical care. The study aims to identify key criteria and develop a system for evaluating clinical trials to prioritise the most promising areas based on their practical applicability in healthcare. The expert evaluation method of 17 research projects in the field of clinical medicine funded by government grants, involving 37 experts, was used to achieve the objective. The experts conducted the assessment using a multi-criteria system, including 4 categories and about 20 individual indicators. The results showed that 58.8% of the projects required a change in the composition of the teams, and in 70.6% of cases, third-party organisations were involved for methodological support. About 41.2% of applications had a solid scientific basis, but the demand for the results of 17.6% of projects decreased due to the COVID-19 pandemic. For 23.5% of projects, the proposed topics were of low public demand. Only 47.1% of the projects demonstrated interest in addressing national health issues. In 17.2% of fundamental projects, assessing the economic efficiency was difficult. In 23.5% of cases, projects could have been financed from other sources. The timeframe of 3 years was assessed as insufficient for 76.5% of highly specialised projects. Based on the analysis, recommendations for improving processes to increase the practical significance of research are formulated. The study contributes to developing an evaluation methodology and improving the efficiency of grant funding in medicine.</p>","PeriodicalId":47637,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Health Planning and Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transformation of the Algorithm for Prioritising Clinical Trial Development in Kazakhstan Based on Practical Significance.\",\"authors\":\"Talgat Nurgozhin, Gulnara Kulkayeva, Margarita Graf, Valentina Tarasova, Adlet Tabarov\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/hpm.3902\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The research relevance is determined by the need for rational use of limited resources in the healthcare sector and the importance of implementing the results of scientific research into medical practice to improve the quality of medical care. The study aims to identify key criteria and develop a system for evaluating clinical trials to prioritise the most promising areas based on their practical applicability in healthcare. The expert evaluation method of 17 research projects in the field of clinical medicine funded by government grants, involving 37 experts, was used to achieve the objective. The experts conducted the assessment using a multi-criteria system, including 4 categories and about 20 individual indicators. The results showed that 58.8% of the projects required a change in the composition of the teams, and in 70.6% of cases, third-party organisations were involved for methodological support. About 41.2% of applications had a solid scientific basis, but the demand for the results of 17.6% of projects decreased due to the COVID-19 pandemic. For 23.5% of projects, the proposed topics were of low public demand. Only 47.1% of the projects demonstrated interest in addressing national health issues. In 17.2% of fundamental projects, assessing the economic efficiency was difficult. In 23.5% of cases, projects could have been financed from other sources. The timeframe of 3 years was assessed as insufficient for 76.5% of highly specialised projects. Based on the analysis, recommendations for improving processes to increase the practical significance of research are formulated. The study contributes to developing an evaluation methodology and improving the efficiency of grant funding in medicine.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47637,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Health Planning and Management\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Health Planning and Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.3902\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Health Planning and Management","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.3902","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Transformation of the Algorithm for Prioritising Clinical Trial Development in Kazakhstan Based on Practical Significance.
The research relevance is determined by the need for rational use of limited resources in the healthcare sector and the importance of implementing the results of scientific research into medical practice to improve the quality of medical care. The study aims to identify key criteria and develop a system for evaluating clinical trials to prioritise the most promising areas based on their practical applicability in healthcare. The expert evaluation method of 17 research projects in the field of clinical medicine funded by government grants, involving 37 experts, was used to achieve the objective. The experts conducted the assessment using a multi-criteria system, including 4 categories and about 20 individual indicators. The results showed that 58.8% of the projects required a change in the composition of the teams, and in 70.6% of cases, third-party organisations were involved for methodological support. About 41.2% of applications had a solid scientific basis, but the demand for the results of 17.6% of projects decreased due to the COVID-19 pandemic. For 23.5% of projects, the proposed topics were of low public demand. Only 47.1% of the projects demonstrated interest in addressing national health issues. In 17.2% of fundamental projects, assessing the economic efficiency was difficult. In 23.5% of cases, projects could have been financed from other sources. The timeframe of 3 years was assessed as insufficient for 76.5% of highly specialised projects. Based on the analysis, recommendations for improving processes to increase the practical significance of research are formulated. The study contributes to developing an evaluation methodology and improving the efficiency of grant funding in medicine.
期刊介绍:
Policy making and implementation, planning and management are widely recognized as central to effective health systems and services and to better health. Globalization, and the economic circumstances facing groups of countries worldwide, meanwhile present a great challenge for health planning and management. The aim of this quarterly journal is to offer a forum for publications which direct attention to major issues in health policy, planning and management. The intention is to maintain a balance between theory and practice, from a variety of disciplines, fields and perspectives. The Journal is explicitly international and multidisciplinary in scope and appeal: articles about policy, planning and management in countries at various stages of political, social, cultural and economic development are welcomed, as are those directed at the different levels (national, regional, local) of the health sector. Manuscripts are invited from a spectrum of different disciplines e.g., (the social sciences, management and medicine) as long as they advance our knowledge and understanding of the health sector. The Journal is therefore global, and eclectic.