• S Wooding, S Hanney, M Buxton, and J Grant.
• RAND Europe, Grafton House, Cambridge, UK. wooding@rand.org
• Rheumatology (Oxford). 2005 Sep 1; 44 (9): 1145-56.

ObjectivesUsing a structured evaluation framework to systematically review and document the outputs and outcomes of research funded by the Arthritis Research Campaign in the early 1990s. To illustrate the strengths and weaknesses of different modes of research funding.MethodsThe payback framework was applied to 16 case studies of research grants funded in the early 1990s. Case study methodology included bibliometric analysis, literature and archival document review and key informant interviews.ResultsA range of research paybacks was identified from the 16 research grants. The payback included 302 peer-reviewed papers, postgraduate training and career development, including 28 PhD/MDs, research informing recommendations in clinical guidelines, improved quality of life for people with RA and the reduction of the likelihood of recurrent miscarriage for women with antiphospholipid syndrome. The payback arising from project grants appeared to be similar to that arising from other modes of funding that were better resourced.ConclusionsThere is a wide diversity of research payback. Short focused project grants seem to provide value for money.

18 keywords...

hide…