Evidence on inequality of the impact of the diseases across different population groups.

Background

The analysis team is responsible for two datasets on life sciences activity in the UK and how it compares with other countries. One of its publications, the Bioscience and health technology sector statistics, is an official statistic and captures a detailed breakdown of where life sciences activity occurs in the UK, as well as key economic indicators such as employment and turnover. The analysis team is also responsible for publishing the Life sciences competitiveness indicators, a publication which tracks UK performance against international comparators. These two publications form the bulk of the evidence base that supports OLS policy making and key facts and figures for stakeholders. One of the ambitions of the team is to expand the range of data collected on activity in the sector to encompass a broader range of economic indicators, including Gross Value Added, R&D spending, Wages, and workforce statistics, among others.

In addition to this critical evidence base, OLS is also interested in key research questions and evidence to support the development of policy for the Life Sciences Missions, a set of disease and intervention areas identified in the Life Sciences Vision as key areas of intervention to help the NHS to solve some of the biggest healthcare problems of our generation. These range from establishing a strong evidence base on incidence and its regional distribution to identifying potential innovative technologies that could address them. Additionally, the analysis team is also very interested in deepening our understanding of the economic impact and possibilities of the broad area of genomics, as well as understanding the economic impacts and societal benefits that accrue from conducting clinical trials and other forms of R&D in the life sciences.

On the regulatory front, OLS would like to expand its understanding of the main regulatory barriers to the approval and roll-out of new, innovative technologies, as well as understanding the costs and benefits associated with these regulations. We have a limited evidence base for some products but would like to expand that understanding to be better able to assess the impact of specific regulatory interventions. We would also like to have more comprehensive data on the introduction and adoption of these technologies across the country and through the NHS.

On the investment front, we are particularly interested in building a more comprehensive evidence base on the determinants of investment in both manufacturing and R&D facilities, and how elements of both the commercial and business environment affects company location and investment decisions.

Finally, we are very interested in developing a more comprehensive understanding of the manufacturing landscape in the UK, from being able to interrogate the pipeline of new products and innovations in development, to establishing the UK’s manufacturing capabilities for health and supply chain resilience, as well as understanding key challenges faced by companies in terms of access to skilled workers and finance across the country.

Next steps

If you are keen to register your interest in working and connecting with DSIT Digital Technology and Telecoms Group and/or submitting evidence, then please complete the DSIT-ARI Evidence survey - https://dsit.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_cDfmK2OukVAnirs.
Please view full details: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/department-for-science-innovation-and-technology-areas-of-research-interest/dsit-areas-of-research-interest-2024

Related UKRI funded projects


  • Improving evidence for economic evaluation and healthcare policy in relation to long term conditions using Mendelian Randomization on large cohorts

    Healthcare funders have limited budgets. Choices must be made between spending money on different health conditions, and on the different treatments available for each health condition. An important consideration in thes...

    Funded by: MRC

    Lead research organisation: University of Bristol

    Why might this be relevant?

    The project focuses on generating evidence on long-term conditions and cost-effectiveness, which is relevant to understanding the impact of diseases across different population groups.

  • Africa Research Universities Alliance, Centre of Excellence for Non-Communicable Diseases

    Context. The rise in non-communicable diseases (NCDs) threatens to roll back the progress that has been made in health and development of Africa. Globally, the World Health Organisation (WHO) estimates that in 2008, ther...

    Funded by: GCRF

    Lead research organisation: University of Nairobi

    Why might this be relevant?

    The project addresses the rise in non-communicable diseases in Africa, which is relevant to understanding the impact of diseases across different population groups.

  • Valuing Health Research Network

    Understanding the value of research is central to many public policy questions, including how much to fund public research agencies, how to value the output of public and private research enterprises, and how to maximize...

    Funded by: ESRC

    Lead research organisation: Institute for Fiscal Studies

    Why might this be relevant?

    The project focuses on valuing health research, which is relevant to understanding the economic impact and possibilities of the life sciences sector.

  • Genes & Health Longitudinal Population Study

    Genes & Health is a large study involving British Bangladeshi and Pakistani people in health research. People from these backgrounds experience higher rates of ill health compared to White Europeans (e.g. type 2 diab...

    Funded by: MRC

    Lead research organisation: Queen Mary University of London

  • Exploiting instrumental variables to estimate the effects of time-varying treatments using routine data

    Evidence from clinical trials plays a central role in the evaluation of the benefits and harms of treatments, but for many of them, trial-based evidence is unavailable or insufficient. Government agencies are increasingl...

    Funded by: MRC

    Lead research organisation: University College London

  • Widening the spectrum of health outcomes used in health technology assessment: integrated synthesis and mapping to QALYs

    NICE has to decide whether the NHS should adopt new medicines. To do this the health gains brought about by treatment, in conditions as diverse as heart disease, cancer, eczema, sleep disorders, deafness, etc., must all ...

    Funded by: MRC

    Lead research organisation: University of Bristol

  • Scottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy

    The Scottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy (SCPHRP) was established by the Medical Research Council and the Chief Scientist Office of Scotland in 2007, to build capacity for more informative public ...

    Funded by: MRC

    Lead research organisation: University of Edinburgh

  • The Mexican Biobank Project: Building Capacity for Big Data Science in Medical Genomics in Admixed Populations

    Technological innovation is a major driving force of a nation's economic growth. Unfortunately, such rapid advances frequently exceed society's capability of assimilation and translation into applicable benefits. Genomic...

    Funded by: Newton Fund

    Lead research organisation: University of Oxford

Similar ARIs from other organisations


DHSC's areas of research interest ARI 1: early action to prevent poor health outcomes Research objective: Research to understand and deliver prevention, timely diagnosis and appropriate intervention for people at increased risk of poor health (in particular obesity, cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, mental health and cancer) to prevent excess deaths, improve population health (including the health of the working age population), reduce disparities and reduce reliance on health and social care. Priority research topics: Developing, evaluating and understanding how to implement interventions which prevent health problems developing, accurately identify those at risk, effectively manage risk factors and treat conditions early, and manage health problems to prevent severe disease in the 4 areas set out below. - Prevent: Interventions to prevent health problems, developing effective routes to reach those who are most at risk or marginalised, and understanding how to effectively implement proven interventions at scale (for example, antihypertensives, mental health programmes for children and young people, vaccines for cancer or workplace preventative interventions). - Identify: New ways of identifying those most at risk (for example, predictive analysis of GP records to identify those who would benefit from early intervention, new methods of cancer screening and new approaches to diagnosing the causes of chest pains). - Treat: Interventions early in the course of disease progression (for example, social prescribing, early intervention for cancer or interventions to enable people to remain in or return to work). - Manage: Interventions to improve the management of multiple long-term conditions (for example, how to manage side effects in polypharmacy), prevent acute events (such as heart attacks, strokes and mental health crises) and ensure effective rehabilitation after these events to reduce long-term illness and disability. Department of Health and Social Care, 2023