Research for Patient Benefit
Overview of the programme in the West Midlands
Professor Scott Weich
Chair, West Midlands Regional Advisory Committee
Bob Scott
West Midlands Programme Manager
RDS West Midlands
Exploring Research Funding Day
9 October 2013
Today’s presentation
•
•
•
•
•
Background on NIHR and RfPB
RfPB in the West Midlands
Regional statistics update
The application process
Tips for applying and common areas of feedback to
applicants
NIHR Remit
• Aims to create a health research system in which the NHS
supports outstanding individuals, working in world class
facilities, conducting leading edge research focused on the
needs of patients and the public
• A range of programmes with a broad range of health
priorities
• Funding is based on the quality and relevance of the
research to the NHS and personal social services
• Demonstrate the potential to have an impact on the needs of
patients and the public within 5 years of its completion
• The NIHR does not fund basic research or work involving
animals and/or animal tissue
NIHR: a Health Research System
Faculty
Investigators &
Senior Investigators
Trainees
Associates
Infrastructure
Universities
Research
Clinical Research
Networks
NHS Trusts
Research Projects &
Programmes
Patients
&
Public
Clinical Research
Facilities & Centres
Research
Governance
Systems
Systems
Research Units &
Schools
Research
Information
Systems
The central role of NIHR research in the
innovation pathway
INVENTION
Medical
Research
Council
EVALUATION
ADOPTION
DIFFUSION
Basic Research
Development Pathway Funding
Efficacy & Mechanism Evaluation
Invention for Innovation
Biomedical Research Centres
Biomedical Research Units
Experimental Cancer Medicine Centres
Clinical Research Facilities
Patient Safety Translational
Research Centres
Healthcare Technology Co-operatives
National Institute
for Health Research
This pathway covers the full range of
interventions - pharmaceuticals,
biologicals, biotechnologies, procedures,
therapies and practices - for the full range
of health and health care delivery prevention, detection, diagnosis,
prognosis, treatment, care.
Horizon Scanning Centre
Research Schools
Research for Patient Benefit
Public Health Research
Programme Grants for Applied Research
Health Services and Delivery Research
Health Technology Assessment
Centre for Surgical Reconstruction & Microbiology
Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health
Research and Care
Centre for Reviews & Dissemination, Cochrane, TARs
Support for Procurement
NHS Supply Chain
Guidance on Health & Healthcare
National Institute for Health & Clinical Excellence
Access to Evidence
NHS Evidence
Innovation
Academic Health Science Networks
NHS Commissioning Board and Clinical Commissioning Groups
Commissioning
Patient Care
Providers of NHS Services
The RfPB Programme
• Response mode funding programme
• Budget of up to £25 million per year
• Grants may be:
– Costed up to £350,000
– Feasibility applications costed up to £250k
– Up to 36 months in duration
• Three funding competitions per year
• Ten Regional Advisory Committees
• > 540 awards made to date totalling nearly £120m
Aims of Programme
• The research projects will use quantitative or qualitative
methods to:
– Study the way NHS services are provided and used
– Evaluate whether interventions are effective and
provide value for money
– Examine whether alternative means for providing
healthcare would be more effective
– Formally assess innovations and developments in
healthcare
– Pilot or assess feasibility of projects requiring major
applications to other funders
Aims of Programme
• Intends to support research which is related to the dayto-day practice of health service staff and is concerned
with having an impact on the health of users of the NHS
• Funded research projects are likely to fall into the areas
of health service research and public health research,
although other areas are not excluded from the
programme
• Applications which have emerged from interaction with
patients and the public, which relate to patient and
service user experience and which have been drawn up
in association with a relevant group of service users will
be particularly welcome
Research for Patient Benefit
Spend across health category
(2012-2013)
Injuries and Accidents
3%
Musculoskeletal
4%
Oral and
Gastrointestinal
4.5%
Mental Health
23%
Reproductive
4.5%
Cancer
10%
Renal and Urogenital
5%
Metabolic and Endocrine
5%
Cardiovascular
6%
Generic Health
Relevance
9%
Neurological
7.5%
Stroke
8%
RfPB in the West Midlands
• 60 projects funded by RfPB of 398 applications received
• 71% of applications successful at preliminary
scrutiny/scoping stage (69% national average)
• 21% of peer reviewed applications successful for
funding (23% national average)
• Regional Panel Chair – Professor Scott Weich (from Jan 2013)
• Programme Manager – Bob Scott
Preliminary Scrutiny
100
West Midland
Percentage of applications
passing scrutiny
90
Nationally
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Competition
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Recommended for Funding
Percentage of peer reviewed applications
recommended for funding
45
40
West
Midlands
Nationally
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Competition
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Overall Success Rate
Percentage of all submitted applications
offered funding
30
West Midlands
25
Nationally
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Competition
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Application Process
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Once registered on the Research Management System
portal, applicants have access to all CCF programmes
Application form supports full formatting
Edit options allow work to be saved and returned to at a
later time
Invited co-applicants can also edit the form
All co-applicants must confirm their involvement
and approve the application prior to submission
Only the lead applicant can submit the application
Declarations and signatures are due within a week and
must be signed by contracting NHS body
All applications are validated by CCF
Preliminary Scrutiny
• Reduction in the number of submitted applications over
recent competitions
• Appreciation of the effort and resource involved in
preparing an application
• Alternative process to be piloted for Competition 22
• A ‘light-touch’ preliminary scrutiny process to be
carried out on the basis of programme scope
• Fewer applications rejected on the basis of
methodology
• Increased percentage of applications assessed by peer
review and Committee
Peer Review
• A key part of the assessment process and integral to
Committee recommendations
• At least three expert reviews and one public review per
application
• Includes opinion on:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Relevance of the research
Quality of the design and work plan
Strength of the research team
Potential impact of the study
Value for money
Involvement of patients and the public
• Anonymised and redacted reviews provided to
applicants with Committee feedback at outcome
Committee Assessment
• West Midlands Committee comprises 16 academic
members and 3 public members
• Members of the RDS with methodological expertise sit
on committees in neighbouring regions
• Committee meetings held three times a year, with a
maximum of 15 applications at each meeting
• Conflicts are minimised by the re-allocation of
applications to other regions if required.
• All applications are presented to the Committee by two
expert lead assessors and one public member assessor
• Feedback provided to all applicants
Common areas for feedback
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Methodology lacking or design questions
Overall lack of clarity and focus of the application
Inappropriate outcome measures
Expertise lacking in the research team
Insufficient quality of the patient and public involvement
Justification or detail of the intervention lacking
Insufficient detail in background information
Inappropriate statistics or health economics analysis
Concerns about recruitment, sampling or feasibility
Project impact, timescales, generalisability or
dissemination
Feedback to applicants
What makes a successful
RfPB application?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Important question and clear aims
Do your homework & don’t overlook key references
Strong team with appropriate expertise & balance
Convincing research design inc sample size
Explaining how the evidence will benefit patients
Evidence of meaningful patient and public involvement
Justify outcomes & ensure these match aims
Seeking & listening to advice from the RDS
Value for money
If feasibility study, will the full trial be fundable?
Other things to keep in mind
• All project costs are scrutinised by CCF – particular
attention should be paid to NHS service support,
treatment and excess treatment costs
• Patient and public involvement must be adequately
thought through and costed
• Plain English Summary should be reviewed by a public
contributor
• Relevance to patients and NHS is important
• Read the guidance and website resources
• All deadlines are at 1pm exactly so don’t leave it to the
last minute
The costs of R&D in the NHS
Research Costs are the costs of the R&D itself; data collection, analysis and
other activities needed to answer the research questions.
• Research Costs will be met by the research funder (i.e. RfPB)
NHS Support Costs include the additional patient-related care costs
associated with the research, which would end once the R&D activity in question
had stopped, even if the patient care service involved continued to be provided.
• NHS Support Costs will be met by NHS R&D Support Funding (i.e. Networks)
Treatment Costs are the patient care costs which would continue to be
incurred if the patient care service in question continued to be provided after the
R&D activity had stopped. Excess Treatment cost is the difference between
the total Treatment Costs and the costs of the standard treatment currently
provided.
• NHS Treatment Costs will be met through commissioning arrangements for
patient care (i.e. NHS/contracting organisation)
Guidance: Attributing the costs of health and social care Research &
Development (AcoRD) – updated 4 May 2012
Tips for applicants
•
•
•
•
•
•
Read the Guidance for applicants and FAQs (RfPB website)
Ensure originality – thorough literature review
Assemble the right team for the task
Write clearly and for a broad audience
Describe clearly how the research will benefit patients
Don’t be over-ambitious
– Can you recruit in the time available?
– Are recruitment estimates realistic?
• Don’t forget to allow time for gaining ethical approval
• Have you left enough analysis and write-up time?
Thank you
RfPB Helpline : 020 8843 8057
www.rfpb.nihr.ac.uk