PeckhamM.Evidence to the House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology. In: Medical Research and the NHS Reforms, HL Paper 12–1, Session 1994–1995. London: HMSO, 1994.
2.
BuxtonM., HanneyS.How can payback from health services research be assessed?J Health Serv Res Policy1996; 1: 35–43.
3.
BuxtonM., HanneyS.Assessing Payback from Department of Health Research and Development: Preliminary Report: Main Report, Vol. 1. HERG Research Report No. 19. Uxbridge: Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University, 1994.
4.
BuxtonM., HanneyS.Assessing Payback from Department of Health Research and Development: Second Report: Main Report, Vol. 1. HERG Research Report No. 24. Uxbridge: Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University, 1997.
5.
PeckhamM.Research and development for the National Health Service.Lancet1991; 338: 367–71.
6.
Company Reporting.The 1997 UK R&D Scoreboard.London: Department of Trade and Industry,1997.
7.
Office of Science and Technology and Programme for Policy Research in Engineering Science and Technology.Returns to Research and Development Spending.London: HMSO,1993.
8.
MartinB., SlaterA.The Relationship Between Publicly Funded Basic Research and Economic Performance. A Science Policy Research Unit report for H M Treasury. Brighton: SPRU, University of Sussex, 1996.
9.
SwannP.The Economic Value of Publicly Funded Basic Research: a Framework For Assessing the Evidence. A report for DTI, Manchester: Policy Research in Engineering, Science and Technology, University of Manchester, 1996.
10.
National Institutes of Health.Cost Savings Resulting from NIH Research Support, 2nd edn.Bethesda: NIH, 1993.
11.
DetskyA.Are clinical trials a cost-effective investment?JAMA1989; 262: 1795–800.
12.
RobertsonD.Ex-post Evaluation of Selected Transport Research Projects. Research Report No. 86. Crowthorne: Transport Research Laboratory, 1995.
13.
Department of Health.Policy Appraisal and Health.London: Department of Health,1995.
14.
AndersonJ.New Approaches to Evaluation in UK Research Funding. Concept paper No. 9. London: Science Policy Support Group, 1989.
15.
CaveM., HanneyS., KoganM., TrevettG.The Use of Performance Indicators in Higher Education.London: Jessica Kingsley,1988.
16.
Commission of the European Communities.Patents as Indicators of the Utility of European Community R and D Programmes.Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Community,1991.
17.
ChalmersI.Assessing the Effects of Health Technologies. Report from the advisory group on health technology assessment chaired by Iain Chalmers. London: Department of Health, 1992.
18.
RosenburgN.Why do firms do basic research (with their own money).Res Policy1990; 19: 165–74.
19.
GambardellaA.Competitive advantages from in-house scientific research: the US pharmaceutical industry in the 1980s.Res Policy1992; 21: 391–407.
20.
CaveM., BurninghamD., BuxtonM., HanneyS., PollittC., ScanlanM.The Valuation of Changes in Quality in the Public Services.London: HMSO,1994.
21.
MMI Group.Making NHS R&D Pay: The Culyer Report and Beyond, NAHAT Update. Birmingham: NAHAT, 1995.
22.
MansfieldE.Academic research and industrial innovation.Res Policy1991; 20: 1–12.
23.
SmithK.Economic Returns to R&D: Methods, Results and Challenges, Review Paper No. 3. London: Science Policy Support Group, 1991.
24.
MushkinS.Biomedical Research: Costs and Benefits.Cambridge, MA: Callinger,1979.
25.
WeisbrodB.Economics and Medical Research.Washington DC: American Enterprise Institute,1983.
26.
KoopmanschapM., RuttenF.Indirect costs in economic studies: confronting the confusion.PharmacoEconomics1993; 4: 446–54.
27.
BuxtonM., ElliottR., HanneyS., HenkelM., KeenJ., SculpherM.Assessing Payback from Department of Health Research and Development: Preliminary Report: Eight Case Studies, Vol. 2. HERG Research Report No. 19. Uxbridge: Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University, 1994.
28.
HanneyS., BuxtonM. eds. Assessing Payback from Department of Health Research and Development: Second Report: Ten Further Case Studies, Vol. 2. HERG Research Report No. 24. Uxbridge: Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University, 1997.
29.
Department of Health.Methods to Promote the Implementation of Research Findings in the NHS—Priorities For Evaluation.London: Department of Health,1995.
