Proposed methods for reviewing the outcomes of health research: the impact of funding by the UK's Arthritis Research Campaign

Background: External and internal factors are increasingly encouraging research funding bodiesto demonstrate the outcomes of their research. Traditional methods of assessing research are stillimportant, but can be merged into broader multi-dimensional categorisations of research benefits.The onus has hitherto been on public sector funding bodies, but in the UK the role of medicalcharities in funding research is particularly important and the Arthritis Research Campaign, theleading medical charity in its field in the UK, commissioned a study to identify the outcomes fromresearch that it funds. This article describes the methods to be used.Methods: A case study approach will enable narratives to be told, illuminating how researchfunded in the early 1990s was (or was not) translated into practice. Each study will be organisedusing a common structure, which, with careful selection of cases, should enable cross-case analysisto illustrate the strengths of different modes and categories of research. Three maininterdependent methods will be used: documentary and literature review; semi-structuredinterviews; and bibliometric analysis. The evaluative framework for organising the studies waspreviously used for assessing the benefits from health services research. Here, it has beenspecifically amended for a medical charity that funds a wide range of research and is concerned todevelop the careers of researchers. It was further refined in three pilot studies. The framework hastwo main elements. First, a multi-dimensional categorisation of benefits going from the knowledgeproduced in peer reviewed journal articles through to the health and potential economic gain. Thesecond element is a logic model, which, with various stages, should provide a way of organising thestudies. The stock of knowledge is important: much research, especially basic, will feed into it andinfluence further research rather than directly lead to health gains. The cross-case analysis will lookfor factors associated with outcomes.Conclusions: The pilots confirmed the applicability of the methods for a full study which shouldassist the Arthritis Research Campaign to demonstrate the outcomes from its funding, and provideit with evidence to inform its own policies.