New ideas on how to treat diseases need to be researched, to know if it actually works, but also if it is safe for patients, how much they need to take and many other aspects. This is why it requires money, to pay salaries and material for the job. The way funding is allocated in medical research is funders determine their priorities, and structure their budget accordingly, offering a certain number of grants to researchers. They designate experts to evaluate candidate projects and select those that will get the grant. When analysing the projects, they start with their medical value and scientific quality. If the value and quality aren't to their satisfaction, things will hold there. If the quality and value are good enough. then the projects are prioritised according to other parameters.
One element that has become almost universal even in public bodies and the third sector is patentability and potential for a follow-on by the pharmaceutical sector. The rationale is reasonable, avoiding to invest in a project that will be too expensive for public funders in later stage and of no interest to the pharmaceutical industry. Therefore, even public funders favor research with potential for patentable outcomes.
This is what determines if the project will get funding or forgotten in a bin.
New ideas on how to treat diseases need to be researched, to know if it actually works, but also if it is safe for patients, how much they need to take and many other aspects. This is why it requires money, to pay salaries and material for the job. The way funding is allocated in medical research is funders determine their priorities, and structure their budget accordingly, offering a certain number of grants to researchers. They designate experts to evaluate candidate projects and select those that will get the grant. When analysing the projects, they start with their medical value and scientific quality. If the value and quality aren't to their satisfaction, things will hold there. If the quality and value are good enough. then the projects are prioritised according to other parameters.
One element that has become almost universal even in public bodies and the third sector is patentability and potential for a follow-on by the pharmaceutical sector. The rationale is reasonable, avoiding to invest in a project that will be too expensive for public funders in later stage and of no interest to the pharmaceutical industry. Therefore, even public funders favor research with potential for patentable outcomes.
This is what determines if the project will get funding or forgotten in a bin.
New ideas on how to treat diseases need to be researched, to know if it actually works, but also if it is safe for patients, how much they need to take and many other aspects. This is why it requires money, to pay salaries and material for the job. The way funding is allocated in medical research is funders determine their priorities, and structure their budget accordingly, offering a certain number of grants to researchers. They designate experts to evaluate candidate projects and select those that will get the grant. When analysing the projects, they start with their medical value and scientific quality. If the value and quality aren't to their satisfaction, things will hold there. If the quality and value are good enough. then the projects are prioritised according to other parameters.
One element that has become almost universal even in public bodies and the third sector is patentability and potential for a follow-on by the pharmaceutical sector. The rationale is reasonable, avoiding to invest in a project that will be too expensive for public funders in later stage and of no interest to the pharmaceutical industry. Therefore, even public funders favor research with potential for patentable outcomes.
This is what determines if the project will get funding or forgotten in a bin.
New ideas on how to treat diseases need to be researched, to know if it actually works, but also if it is safe for patients, how much they need to take and many other aspects. This is why it requires money, to pay salaries and material for the job. The way funding is allocated in medical research is funders determine their priorities, and structure their budget accordingly, offering a certain number of grants to researchers. They designate experts to evaluate candidate projects and select those that will get the grant. When analysing the projects, they start with their medical value and scientific quality. If the value and quality aren't to their satisfaction, things will hold there. If the quality and value are good enough. then the projects are prioritised according to other parameters.
One element that has become almost universal even in public bodies and the third sector is patentability and potential for a follow-on by the pharmaceutical sector. The rationale is reasonable, avoiding to invest in a project that will be too expensive for public funders in later stage and of no interest to the pharmaceutical industry. Therefore, even public funders favor research with potential for patentable outcomes.
This is what determines if the project will get funding or forgotten in a bin.
