Cited by 31Health and Medical Research ImpactsGlobal Health Care IssuesHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

To what extent is health and medical research funding associated with the burden of disease in Australia?

Open access
Aoun, S., Pennebaker, D., Pascal, R.·2004·Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health

Abstract

Objective This study aimed to analyse the association of the National Health and Medical Research Council fund allocations and several measures of burden of disease in Australia, and compare it to similar studies in the United States and Canada.Methods A cross-sectional study comparing disease-specific funding in two time periods (1998-2001 and 2002-03) with data from the Australian Burden of Disease study on four measures of burden of disease (incidence, mortality, years of life lost and disability-adjusted life years in 1996). This association was measured by correlation coefficients. With the use of these measures as predictor variables in a regression analysis, predicted funding was calculated and compared with actual funding.Results The highest correlation coefficients (r = 0.68-0.75) were exhibited by the DALYs and years of life lost to disability and the relation was significant at p < 0.0001 (1998 to 2003). Based on DALYs, the top five under-funded categories (1998-2001) were intentional injuries, cardiovascular diseases, mental disorders, unintentional injuries and chronic respiratory diseases. The top five over-funded categories were infectious and parasitic diseases, nervous system and sense organ disorders, malignant neoplasms, endocrine and metabolic disorders and genitourinary diseases.Conclusions This study revealed a significant relation between NHMRC research funding and burden of disease measures and highlighted that comparison of actual and predicted funding based on different measures of disease can alter conclusions as to whether a disease is over- or under-funded.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1467-842x.2004.tb00637.x

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Aoun, S., Pennebaker, D., & Pascal, R.
Corresponding author
Aoun, S.
Venue
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-02
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
80-86
ISSN
1326-0200 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2083350040
Cited by
31
References
11
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
National Health and Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health and Medical Research Impacts
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Global Health Care Issues
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
health research funding, disease burden, disability-adjusted life years, years of life lost, National Health and Medical Research Council, research funding allocation, disease prioritization, Australia, United States, Canada
MeSH terms
Australia, Canada, Cross-Sectional Studies, Financing, Government, Persons with Disabilities, Humans, Mortality, Regression Analysis, Research Support as Topic, United States, Incidence, Cost of Illness, Quality-Adjusted Life Years, Biomedical Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review