Project Retrosight

Project Retrosight: Understanding the returns from cardiovascular and stroke research: The Policy Report

Steven Wooding
Stephen Hanney
Alexandra Pollitt
Martin Buxton
Jonathan Grant
Copyright Date: 2011
Published by: RAND Corporation
Pages: 64
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/mg1079rs
  • Cite this Item
  • Book Info
    Project Retrosight
    Book Description:

    This work explores impacts of cardiovascular and stroke research funded 15-20 years ago and draws out aspects associated with high or low impact. It describes 29 case studies of grants from Australia, Canada and UK. Policy summary volume.

    eISBN: 978-0-8330-5954-3
    Subjects: Technology, Biological Sciences

Table of Contents

  1. Front Matter
    (pp. i-iv)
  2. Table of Contents
    (pp. v-v)
  3. Table of figures
    (pp. vi-vi)
  4. Table of tables
    (pp. vi-vi)
  5. Executive summary
    (pp. vii-xii)
  6. Acknowledgements and detailed authorship
    (pp. xiii-xiv)
  7. Consortium members
    (pp. xv-xvi)
  8. Chapter 1 Introduction
    (pp. 1-6)

    Project Retrosight addresses two key challenges facing those involved in supporting and funding research — understanding and predicting the impacts of research and how to support researchers in having greater impacts (Grant and Wood-Wooding, 2010). It has its home in the growing field of the “science of science” and seeks to shed light on what works in research funding (Marburger, 2005; Macilwain, 2010). The “science of science” is concerned with research success and how that success leads to improvements, or impact, in the real world. It aims to understand if there are characteristics that predict impact and, if so, what those...

  9. Chapter 2 Methods
    (pp. 7-16)

    This chapter provides an overview of our approach, alongside some of the checks we carried out to ensure the robustness of our data. We first discuss how we selected our methods, and in particular the Payback Framework as our approach; how we identified the subject area and countries to examine; and how we selected the funding period to focus on. We then step through the stages of our approach: identifying lists of research grants; estimating the payback of each grant through a survey of principal investigators (PIs); selecting a stratified random sample of grants; carrying out the case studies; quantifying...

  10. Chapter 3 Strengths and limitations of the methodology
    (pp. 17-22)

    Project Retrosight was not without some structural, methodological and scope limitations; however, while those must be acknowledged, we feel that they are balanced by the study’s strengths.

    Project Retrosight used more case studies than any other similar study we know of and selected them in a stratified random way designed to minimise biases and subjectivity. The 29 cases were structured using a comprehensive conceptual framework that helped ensure consistency across the full set and allowed for robust comparisons to be made. Case study quality was assured through review of the case studies by both the PI of the research project...

  11. Chapter 4 Findings, observations and policy implications
    (pp. 23-42)

    In this chapter we describe each of the key findings or observations from our analysis and assess the nature of the evidence base for it in our study, and associated policy implications. We describe the findings in three subsections.

    A large and diverse range of research impacts arose from the 29 case studies: the evidence for these findings comes directly from the 29 studies of cardiovascular and stroke research grants.

    The Patterns and extent of impacts are very variable: the analysis for these findings is based on the rating of the 29 case studies described

    in the previous chapter, and...

  12. References
    (pp. 43-46)