Abstract
BackgroundAllocation of health research funds among diseases has never been evaluated in China. This study aimed to examine the relationship between disease-specific funding levels of National Nature Science Foundation of China (NSFC), the main governmental resource for health research in China, and burden of disease.MethodsFunding magnitudes for 53 diseases or conditions were obtained from the website of NSFC. Measures of disease burden, mortality, years of life lost (YLLs) and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), were derived from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The relationship between NSFC funding and disease burden was analyzed with univariate linear regression. For each measure associated with funding, regression-derived estimates were used to calculate the expected funds for each disease. The actual and expected funds were then compared. We also evaluated the impacts of changes of disease burden metrics since 1990, and differences from the world averages on NSFC funding.ResultsNSFC health research funding was associated with disease burden measured in mortality (R = 0.33, P = 0.02), YLLs (R = 0.39, P = 0.004), and DALYs (R = 0.40, P = 0.003). But none of the changes of mortality (R = 0.22, P = 0.12), YLLs (R = −0.04, P = 0.79) and DALYs (R = −0.003, P = 0.98) since 1990 was associated with the funding magnitudes. None of the differences of mortality (R = −0.11, P = 0.45), YLLs (R = −0.11, P = 0.43) and DALYs (R = −0.12, P = 0.38) from that of the concurrent world averages were associated with the funding magnitudes. Measured by DALY, stroke and COPD received the least funding compared to expected; while leukemia and diabetes received the most funding compared to expected.ConclusionAlthough NSFC funding were roughly associated with disease burden as measured in mortality, YLLs and DALYs. Some major diseases such as stroke were underfunded; while others such as leukaemia were overfunded. Change of disease burden during the last 20 years and country-specialized disease burden were not reflected in current allocation of NSFC funds.
Highlights
In recent years, China is pouring cash into science and technology faster than its economy has expanded [1]
Utilizing the design and methods in previous studies for evaluating association of National Institute of Health (NIH) funding level and disease burden in USA [6,7], this study evaluated the relationship between Nature Science Foundation of China (NSFC) funding levels and measures of disease burden
Diseases were included in this study if 1) they were defined in International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM); 2) their funding levels of NSFC were available; and 3) their measures of the burden of disease were available in Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study 2010 [9]
Summary
China is pouring cash into science and technology faster than its economy has expanded [1]. The central government’s budget on science and technology reached 267.4 billion yuan renminbi (RMB), or US $43.6 billion, in 2014 [2]. Consistent with this trend, the governmental funding for health research is increasing. Still dwarfed by that of US (US $ 3.1 billion for National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) against US $ 30 billion for US National Institute of Health (NIH) in 2014), China’s governmental funds, principally NSFC, are becoming an important supporter for health research in the world [3]. The allocation of research funds among diseases, and its rationality has never been evaluated in China. This study aimed to examine the relationship between disease-specific funding levels of National Nature Science Foundation of China (NSFC), the main governmental resource for health research in China, and burden of disease
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
