Benedicta Natalia Latif , Leanne Coombe , Tim Driscoll , Anita van Zwieten , Catherine Sherrington , Saman Khalatbari-Soltani
{"title":"Public health and prevention research within the Medical Research Future Fund","authors":"Benedicta Natalia Latif , Leanne Coombe , Tim Driscoll , Anita van Zwieten , Catherine Sherrington , Saman Khalatbari-Soltani","doi":"10.1016/j.anzjph.2024.100171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To explore the amount and type of research funded under relevant Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) Initiatives that addressed public health and prevention from 2018 to July 2023.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Projects funded by six MRFF Initiatives, with objectives relevant to public health and public health nominated as “field of research” by >25% of applicants, were evaluated against a set of public health research criteria and were categorised based on levels of prevention.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Fifty-seven per cent of 249 funded projects were categorised as public health research. Projects with curative features, focusing on tertiary (32%) and quaternary (4%) prevention, were as common as projects with earlier preventive features, focussed on primordial (7%) and primary (28%) prevention. The Preventive and Public Health Research Initiative had the lowest proportion of public health research (48%) of the six evaluated Initiatives and a dominance of curative (39%) and non-preventive (26%) research over preventive research (30%).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study highlighted variable levels of public health research across public-health-relevant MRFF Initiatives and generally low proportions of primary and primordial prevention. A greater emphasis on primordial and primary prevention research in public-health-relevant Initiatives could advance prevention in Australia.</p></div><div><h3>Implications for public health</h3><p>There appears to be scope for improvement in the prioritisation of upstream prevention research in public-health-relevant MRFF Initiatives and projects. Addressing this may enhance the benefit of MRFF to Australian public health.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8620,"journal":{"name":"Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health","volume":"48 4","pages":"Article 100171"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1326020024000463/pdfft?md5=7162f4d20493130defb743f7ea4e319e&pid=1-s2.0-S1326020024000463-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1326020024000463","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective
To explore the amount and type of research funded under relevant Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) Initiatives that addressed public health and prevention from 2018 to July 2023.
Methods
Projects funded by six MRFF Initiatives, with objectives relevant to public health and public health nominated as “field of research” by >25% of applicants, were evaluated against a set of public health research criteria and were categorised based on levels of prevention.
Results
Fifty-seven per cent of 249 funded projects were categorised as public health research. Projects with curative features, focusing on tertiary (32%) and quaternary (4%) prevention, were as common as projects with earlier preventive features, focussed on primordial (7%) and primary (28%) prevention. The Preventive and Public Health Research Initiative had the lowest proportion of public health research (48%) of the six evaluated Initiatives and a dominance of curative (39%) and non-preventive (26%) research over preventive research (30%).
Conclusion
This study highlighted variable levels of public health research across public-health-relevant MRFF Initiatives and generally low proportions of primary and primordial prevention. A greater emphasis on primordial and primary prevention research in public-health-relevant Initiatives could advance prevention in Australia.
Implications for public health
There appears to be scope for improvement in the prioritisation of upstream prevention research in public-health-relevant MRFF Initiatives and projects. Addressing this may enhance the benefit of MRFF to Australian public health.
期刊介绍:
The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health (ANZJPH) is concerned with public health issues. The research reported includes formal epidemiological inquiries into the correlates and causes of diseases and health-related behaviour, analyses of public policy affecting health and disease, and detailed studies of the cultures and social structures within which health and illness exist. The Journal is multidisciplinary and aims to publish methodologically sound research from any of the academic disciplines that constitute public health.