Taking treatments from bench to bedside, or bench to community, requires a viable pathway connecting molecular science to global need through public and private research funding, clinical development, drug marketing, and policy making. In this paper, the authors present a systematic analysis of the effectiveness of translating basic science into reduced global burden of disease as a proxy for systemic public health impact. They pose a compound research question: Is the current drug development pipeline aligned with current and future global burden of disease, and, if not, where do the disconnections occur?
ShiffmanJ. Donor funding priorities for communicable disease control in the developing world. Health Policy Plan. 2006;21(6):411–420. doi:10.1093/heapol/czl028.
2.
CroghanWPittmanP. The medicine cabinet: what’s in it, why, and can we change the contents?Health Aff (Millwood). 2004;23(1):23–33.
US General Accounting Office. GAO report number GAO-03-829: technology transfer: NIH-private sector partnership in the development of Taxol. June 6, 2003. http://www.gao.gov/assets/240/238442.html.
National Institutes of Health. Definitions under subsection 1 (research objectives), section I (funding opportunity description), part II (full text of announcement), of RFA-RM-07-007: Institutional Clinical and Translational Science Award (U54), March 2007. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-07-007.html. Accessed January 4, 2013.
Committee on the NIH Research Priority-Setting Process, Institute of Medicine. Scientific opportunities and public needs: improving priority setting and public input at the NIH. National Academy Press; 1998. http://www.nap.edu, accessed March 1, 2008.
12.
National Research Council. Scientific Opportunities and Public Needs: Improving Priority Setting and Public Input at the National Institutes of Health. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 1998.
