Article ; Online: A 10-year impact assessment of the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme
Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation, Vol 8, Iss
an independent mixed-method evaluation study
2021 Volume 20
Abstract: Background: The Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme – a Medical Research Council (MRC) and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) partnership – funds trials that evaluate the efficacy of interventions with the potential to promote ... ...
Abstract | Background: The Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme – a Medical Research Council (MRC) and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) partnership – funds trials that evaluate the efficacy of interventions with the potential to promote health and studies that improve our understanding of the mechanisms of underlying diseases and their treatments. Objective: To conduct an independent review of the EME programme’s impact and identify opportunities for future improvement. Design: A mixed-methods approach, including desk research, an analysis of secondary data, stakeholder consultation and the development of impact case studies. Participants: Chief investigators of EME awards, unfunded applicants to the EME programme and key opinion leaders relevant to the programme and research ecosystem. Interventions: No interventions were tested, as this was a retrospective programme evaluation. Main outcome measures: The evaluation was guided by a set of 15 evaluation questions. Results: The EME programme bridges the gap between proof-of-concept and effectiveness studies that are located among other MRC and NIHR schemes and grants from charities in the funding landscape. Mechanistic studies alongside EME trials add value by lending confidence to trial findings and providing insights into the underlying biology. Between 2009 and September 2018, £175.7M in funding was approved for 145 EME projects. EME programme-funded research has started to deliver value to the NHS and patients by improving treatments and providing more efficient use of resources. Of the 43 completed trials, 14% (n = 6) showed that the intervention had a positive effect, whereas 74% (n = 32) of trials did not. The remaining five (12%) trials were unable to recruit participants or did not proceed to the full-trial stage. Seven projects (i.e. 16% of completed trials) have informed clinical guidelines or regulatory approval decisions and another eight projects have the potential to do so in the future, given the nature of their findings. Projects ... |
---|---|
Keywords | eme programme ; health needs ; research funding ; evaluation ; impact ; outcome ; barriers ; enablers ; Medicine ; R |
Subject code | 306 |
Language | English |
Publishing date | 2021-11-01T00:00:00Z |
Publisher | NIHR Journals Library |
Document type | Article ; Online |
Database | BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection) |
Full text online
More links
Kategorien
Inter-library loan at ZB MED
Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.