Log in
LSE research played a key role in shaping the political and public debate around unpopular and ill-founded plans to introduce identity cards in the UK, showing the proposals to be unsafe, ineffective and costly. Plans for national biometric identity cards were scrapped by the coalition government in May 2010.
Former Home Secretary David Blunkett described the detailed, cross-disciplinary report from academics at LSE as having "changed the culture and atmosphere around, and attitudes towards, the scheme and its intention". An alternative, privacy-friendly identity policy is being developed in its place with LSE researchers playing a significant role in its development. Lessons from the UK continue to influence government identity policy in other countries including India, the Caribbean and Latin America.
The Department of Health seeks to distribute the NHS budget to local commissioning organisations to achieve equal access for equal need and reduce health inequalities. The formula upon which it bases this distribution must be evidence-based, robust and up-to-date. We summarise four pieces of applied econometric research undertaken at the University of Manchester (UoM) and commissioned by the Department of Health that have developed the methodology for setting budgets fairly and determined the content of the formula in use in England from 2008-date. Adoption of the findings of this research by government has led to a substantial redistribution of NHS funding between areas.
Research at York has had a direct impact on national guidance about the use of health technologies in the NHS. It provided methods that are used to assess whether a technology is expected to be a cost-effective use of NHS resources, how uncertain this assessment is likely to be and whether additional evidence is sufficiently valuable to recommend further research to support its widespread use. It has had an impact on the technologies available in the NHS and the evidence available to support their use: improving patient outcomes; saving NHS resources and strengthening the evidence base for clinical practice. It gives an explicit signal and incentive to manufacturers; informing development decisions and the type of evidence collected. It has had an international impact on how the adequacy of evidence is judged and research is prioritised; particularly in recent reforms in the United States (US) where the principles of this value of information (VOI) analysis are informing the prioritisation of $3.8bn for `comparative effectiveness research'. It has also informed the methods used in low and middle income countries, especially national agencies in health care systems in South East Asia and South America, as well as global funding bodies.
Health inequalities are recognised as a critical UK policy issue with life expectancy gaps of up to 28 years between the least and most deprived areas. This case-study demonstrates how Durham University research has led to: (a) changing health service commissioning (with County Durham and Darlington Primary Care Trust [PCT]): (b) influencing NHS funding policy (by generating Parliamentary debate); as well as (c) contributing to the development of the new public health system in England and Wales (as part of the Strategic Review of Health Inequalities in England post-2010 [Marmot Review]).
Professor Trevor Bailey of the University of Exeter led the methodological and computational development of new improved mathematical models to more fairly allocate resources, and particularly mental health resources, to GP practices in the UK within an interdisciplinary research team from the universities of Plymouth, Southampton and St Andrews. The mental health services component of NHS Practice based commissioning (PBC) introduced by the Department of Health (DoH) from 2007 onwards, deals with resource allocation for specialist healthcare for some 400,000 patients with severe mental illness. From 2009 to 2011, the team's mental health estimates, based upon the modelling efforts of Bailey, were used to set practice-level PBC budgets accounting for around £8 billion of NHS funding, the DoH describing this as a `step-change improvement' in how mental health needs are modelled.
The NHS spends about £11bn annually on pharmaceuticals, of which £8bn is on branded drugs, representing about 13% and 10% respectively of available NHS resources. Research at York has been central to the public and policy debate about how branded pharmaceuticals ought to be priced and has made a material contribution to the development of government policy to introduce a value based pricing (VBP) scheme for all new pharmaceuticals. VBP has significance for the prices that the NHS pays for pharmaceuticals, access to new drugs for NHS patients, and the return that manufacturers can expect from future research and development. There is also an international impact in two respects: UK prices are estimated to influence 25% of the world market and York has contributed to a wider policy debate about international pharmaceutical pricing and the potential role of value based pricing in European, North American, South American and South East Asian health care systems.
Empirical evidence generated by UEL research has directly influenced the reform of health financing in two Indian states with total populations of 154 million through changes to provider behaviour, the organisation and use of funds, and treatment verification processes and package rates. The impacts of this work have been commended by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and the World Bank, and attracted interest from states with similar healthcare schemes. More widely, it has helped policymakers in India and the UK recognise the importance of including high quality comprehensive primary care in India's strategic planning for universal health care, and the benefits to the UK in prioritising primary care collaboration with India.
Durham University's Centre for Public Policy and Health (CPPH) has worked closely with the World Health Organisation's (WHO) Regional Office for Europe to help design the European Action Plan for Strengthening Public Health Capacities and Services. The European Action Plan (EAP) draws extensively on three major CPPH research projects on the nature and governance of the public health system in England. The EAP, endorsed by all 53 WHO Member States in September 2012, is a main pillar for the implementation of the WHO's policy framework — Health 2020 — also endorsed by Member States.
This case study highlights a body of research around health Research Priority Setting (RPS) that assists policy makers in effectively targeting research that has the greatest potential health benefit. Empirical research on RPS led to organizational changes, and new policies within the Cochrane Collaboration along with new training resources and new RPS exercises. A research gap on inequalities in the risk of oral cancer in the English South Asian population led to an evidence synthesis exercise being carried out by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the formulation of a new public health guideline.
This case study presents the impact of the Health and Temperature Research Group (HTRG) at Sheffield Hallam University, led by Professor Tod. The group generates novel, collaborative, translational, interdisciplinary (e.g. health, housing and environment, energy and welfare) research with a focus on cold related ill health. The research impact is illustrated here by The Keeping Warm in Later Life Project (KWILLT). KWILLT findings provide a unique understanding of the complex environment and multiple factors influencing older people keeping warm and well in winter. Beneficiaries include NHS, local and national policy makers, and practice organisations.