This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 39/12/3431    most recent STROKEAHA.108.525584v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Johnston, S. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Johnston, S. C. Related Collections Health policy and outcome research AHA Statements and Guidelines

(Stroke. 2008;39:3431.)
© 2008 American Heart Association, Inc.

Special Report

The 2008 William M. Feinberg Lecture

Prioritizing Stroke Research

From the Neurovascular Service, Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, Calif.

Correspondence to S. Claiborne Johnston, MD, PhD, Department of Neurology, Box 0114, University of California, San Francisco, 505 Parnassus Avenue, M-798, San Francisco, CA 94143-0114. E-mail clay.johnston{at}ucsfmedctr.org

Stroke is a tremendous burden to health worldwide both in the developed and developing world. Current levels of research funding do not adequately reflect this burden, particularly when expected increases in stroke rates are considered. Of course, an investment in stroke research is only justified if a return can be expected. The ultimate goal of stroke research is to reduce the burden of disease, and clinical trials are the clearest expression of the value of research because their results can directly impact health. In a review of stroke trials funded by the US National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, we found that the overall impact of the trials was dramatically positive and justified the entire research budget of the Institute. Nonetheless, there were obvious opportunities for improvement. Methods for selecting trials to fund could be improved and better aligned with disease burden and potential impact. Furthermore, clinical trial costs are increasing rapidly and reversing this trend must be a priority. More creative and systematic approaches to defining the research agenda and enhancing trial methods could substantially accelerate the rate of discovery and increase the impact of those discoveries on public health. To get there, we desperately need more research on research—meta-research—on topics not just relevant to stroke, but to the study of all disease.

Key Words: cost of illness • health policy • research impact • resource allocation • stroke care