Multi-component assessment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease : an evaluation of the ADO and DOSE indices and the global obstructive lung disease categories in international primary care data sets

Funding The International Primary Care Respiratory Group (IPCRG) provided funding for this research project as an UNLOCK group study for which the funding was obtained through an unrestricted grant by Novartis AG, Basel, Switzerland. The latter funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript. Database access for the OPCRD was provided by the Respiratory Effectiveness Group (REG) and Research in Real Life; the OPCRD statistical analysis was funded by REG. The Bocholtz Study was funded by PICASSO for COPD, an initiative of Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer and the Caphri Research Institute, Maastricht University, The Netherlands.

Non-pharmacological interventions to reduce the risk of diabetes in people with impaired glucose regulation : a systematic review and economic evaluation

Peer reviewed

Why do health economists promote technology adoption rather than the search for efficiency? A proposal for a change in our approach to economic evaluation in health care

Acknowledgments Financial Support: HERU and HSRU receive a core grant from the Chief Scientist’s Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates, and the Centre for Clinical epidemiology & Evaluation is funded by Vancouver Coastal Health Authority. The model used for the illustrative case study in this paper was developed as part of a NHS Technology Assessment Review, funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Program (project number 09/146/01). The views and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Scottish Government, NHS, Vancouver Coastal Health, NIHR HTA Program or the Department of Health. The authors wish to thank Kathleen Boyd and members of the audience at the UK Health Economists Study Group, for comments received on an earlier version of this paper. We also wish to thank Cynthia Fraser (University of Aberdeen) for literature searches undertaken to inform the manuscript, and Mohsen Sadatsafavi (University of British Columbia) for comments on an earlier draft

A qualitative evaluation of the Scottish Staff and Associate Specialist Development Programme

Acknowledgements Our thanks to all those who took part in the interviews, and to Gillian Campbell for her help in organising these interviews. Our thanks to NHS Education for Scotland for commissioning us to carry out this project. Funding Our thanks to NHS Education for Scotland (NES) for funding this research. JC and PJ received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

What, who and when? Incorporating a discrete choice experiment into an economic evaluation

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The Medman study was funded by the Department of Health for England and Wales and managed by a collaboration of the National Pharmaceutical Association, the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, the Company Chemist Association and the Co-operative Pharmacy Technical Panel, led by the Pharmaceutical Services Negotiating Committee. The research in this paper was undertaken while the lead author MT was undertaking a doctoral research fellowship jointly funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) and the Medical Research Council (MRC). The Health Economics Research Unit (HERU), University of Aberdeen is funded by the Chief Scientific Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorate.

Improving magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations : Development and evaluation of an intervention to reduce movement in scanners and facilitate scan completion

© 2015 The British Psychological Society.

Improving magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations : Development and evaluation of an intervention to reduce movement in scanners and facilitate scan completion

© 2015 The British Psychological Society.

The use of mobile technology in evaluation

Peer reviewed

Important factors in predicting mortality outcome from stroke : findings from the Anglia Stroke Clinical Network Evaluation Study

The Anglia Stroke Clinical Network Evaluation Study (ASCNES) is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Research for Patient Benefit Programme (PB-PG-1208-18240). This paper presents independent research funded by the NIHR under its Research for Patient Benefit (RfPB) programme (Grant Reference Number PB-PG-1208-18240). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. EAW receives funding support from the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre award to Cambridge

Evaluation of thermal gradients and their effects in a bridge box girder using monitoring data

Peer reviewed

Costs, quality of life and cost-effectiveness of open and arthroscopic repair for rotator cuff tears : economic evaluation alongside the UKUFF trial

FUNDING & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme (project number 05/47/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 80. Further information available at: http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/projects/hta/054702 This paper presents independent research commissioned by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, MRC, CCF, NETSCC, the HTA programme or the Department of Health. Due to the confidential nature of the trial data supporting this publication not all of the data can be made accessible to other researchers. Please contact the UKUFF study principal investigator Andrew Carr (andrew.carr@ndorms.ox.ac.uk) for more information. The authors wish to thank the UKUFF trial collaborators for their contribution in managing the conduct of the trial, and for their comments on the interim economic results: Marion Campbell and Hannah Bruhn (Centre for Healthcare Randomised Trials, HSRU, University of Aberdeen), Jonathan Rees MD and David Beard (NDORMS, University of Oxford; NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre), Jane Moser (NDORMS, University of Oxford), Raymond Fitzpatrick and Jill Dawson (NDPH, University of Oxford).