IMPROVING HEALTH OUTCOMES IN CHILDREN SUFFERING MAJOR INJURY
Funder
National Health and Medical Research Council
Funding Amount
$521,876.00
Summary
In Australia injury is the leading cause of childhood morbidity - more than cancer and heart disease combined. Yet, there has been no published comprehensive analysis of the processes of care or the systems for treating severe paediatric injury in Australia. Partnered with government and consumers, this study will generate evidence and implement interventions to provide better care for severely injured children and their families
Explaining Social Preferences For Priority Setting In The Health Sector
Funder
National Health and Medical Research Council
Funding Amount
$235,218.00
Summary
This project looks at whether the views of the public regarding the allocation of society's limited health care resources are well-informed and carefully considered. A series of focus groups will be conducted where members of the public can think about the ethical issues involved, discuss them with others, and ask questions. This approach has the potential to improve the legitimacy of health policy decisions by contributing to a better understanding of the values of the public.
Nanny state or good public policy: Do the benefits of mandatory health programs justify the loss of consumer choice? Governments are increasingly turning to mandatory programs to improve health. Such programs are appealing because there are high health benefits from universal participation and low costs for promotion and monitoring the program. However, this apparent benefit relies on restriction of personal choice, which may impose welfare losses on consumers. Evaluations generally ignore loss ....Nanny state or good public policy: Do the benefits of mandatory health programs justify the loss of consumer choice? Governments are increasingly turning to mandatory programs to improve health. Such programs are appealing because there are high health benefits from universal participation and low costs for promotion and monitoring the program. However, this apparent benefit relies on restriction of personal choice, which may impose welfare losses on consumers. Evaluations generally ignore loss of choice, despite evidence suggesting consumers value the ability to choose. This study will estimate the impact and value this loss of consumer choice, explore program specific factors and consumer characteristics influencing the valuation, and determine whether and how restricted choice should be explicitly considered when evaluating public health programs.Read moreRead less
The Value Of Providing Health Interventions For Heroin Use: A Cost Benefit Analysis
Funder
National Health and Medical Research Council
Funding Amount
$599,585.00
Summary
Heroin use and associated harms can be reduced through effective treatment. Past research has shown that treatment for heroin dependence can be relatively cost-effective, but not whether heroin treatment overall is a good investment. This unique study will estimate the net social benefit of heroin treatment, taking into account health, crime and family consequences. The results will help Australia respond better to this devastating health problem.
Improving Patient Access To Novel Cancer Drugs In Australia: Striking The Balance
Funder
National Health and Medical Research Council
Funding Amount
$318,768.00
Summary
Cancer patients in Australia may experience delays before they can benefit from new expensive drugs because of the lengthy existing processes to evaluate new medicines by the Department of Health. I will study how to improve the existing drug evaluation processes to make timely but informed funding decisions. This work will improve patient outcomes from early access to effective new cancer drugs and help the government make a wiser spending of public funds.
Improving The Evidence Base For Suicide Prevention Initiatives
Funder
National Health and Medical Research Council
Funding Amount
$772,209.00
Summary
The burden of suicide persists partly because we don’t know what works and what doesn’t work in suicide prevention. Relatively little research effort has been invested in studies that can tell us how best to direct resources. The problem is compounded by a disconnect between researchers and decision-makers. Through this Fellowship, Jane Pirkis will develop and implement a model for working with decision-makers to generate the best possible evidence upon which to base suicide prevention policy.
Using Health Economics To Strengthen Ties Between Evidence, Policy And Practice In Chronic Disease
Funder
National Health and Medical Research Council
Funding Amount
$1,925,648.00
Summary
There is a major shortage of researchers with health economics expertise in Australia. This grant will provide training and development for a team of health economists to research chronic diseases covering issues such as: What is the value for money from investment in different treatments? How do such diseases affect the economic circumstances of families? How do we ensure that strategies to address illness work in practice and can be sustained? How do these issues get put on the policy agenda?