Ethos and economics: examining the rationale underlying stem cell and cloning research policies in the United States, Germany, and Japan

Novel insights into the potential applications of stem cells in pulmonary hypertension therapy

Pulmonary hypertension (PH) refers to a group of deadly lung diseases characterized by vascular lesions in the microvasculature and a progressive increase in pulmonary vascular resistance. The prevalence of PH has increased over time. Currently, the treatment options available for PH patients have limited efficacy, and none of them can fundamentally reverse pulmonary vascular remodeling. Stem cells represent an ideal seed with proven efficacy in clinical studies focusing on liver, cardiovascular, and nerve diseases. Since the potential therapeutic effect of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) on PH was first reported in 2006, many studies have demonstrated the efficacy of stem cells in PH animal models and suggested that stem cells can help slow the deterioration of lung tissue. Existing PH treatment studies basically focus on the paracrine action of stem cells, including protein regulation, exosome pathway, and cell signaling; however, the specific mechanisms have not yet been clarified. Apoptotic and afunctional pulmonary microvascular endothelial cells (PMVECs) and alveolar epithelial cells (AECs) are two fundamental promoters of PH although they have not been extensively studied by researchers. This review mainly focuses on the supportive communication and interaction between PMVECs and AECs as well as the potential restorative effect of stem cells on their injury. In the future, more studies are needed to prove these effects and explore more radical cures for PH.

Stem Cell Statute in Jordan: Leading the Way

The use of stem cells in research has caused much controversy and ethical dilemma. The primary source of stem cells is human embryos, a source which has been confronted with objections based on ethical, moral, and religious positions. Jordan has passed the first of its-kind Statute in the region, aiming at regulating the use of stem cells both for therapeutic and research purposes. The Statute adopted a regulatory approach between the restrictive and intermediate. The Statute, however, pays more attention to stem cell banking in many of its articles. Many critical aspects in regulating stem cell research activities are overlooked. This is including but not limited to the process of informed consent, protecting privacy, maintaining confidentiality, the need for a national entity responsible for regulating embryonic stem cell (ESC) research, and requirements of monitoring activity. The authors recommend further review of the current Statute in light of the deficiencies discussed so as to develop a more comprehensive and coherent Statute.

[Evolution and scientific impact of research grants from the spanish society of cardiology and spanish heart foundation (2000-2006)]

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The Sociedad Española de Cardiología (Spanish Society of Cardiology) every year awards grants to finance research in the field of cardiovascular diseases. The aim of this study is to identify the impact of these investments during the period 2000-2006 from the subsequently published articles in scientific journals.

METHODS

Using the identifying data of each project as search terms, all articles that resulted from these grants were located in the Spanish Índice Médico Español and Índice Bibliográfico Español en Ciencias de la Salud databases, and in Science Citation Index-Expanded and Scopus. Descriptive statistical analysis of these articles included type of grant, number and amount awarded per year, and the recipient's sex and institutional affiliation.

RESULTS

The Sociedad Española de Cardiología awarded €3,270,877 to 207 recipients, an average annual total of €467,268. We identified 231 publications that resulted from 123 (59.42%) of these grants. The average number of articles per grant awarded was 1.12, and 1.9 when taking into account only the awards that led to publication.

CONCLUSIONS

During the period 2000 to 2006, the Sociedad Española de Cardiología/ Fundación Española del Corazón (Spanish Heart Foundation) provided about €500,000 per year to fund research grants, thereby contributing to the fight against cardiovascular diseases. Almost 60% of grants have led to publications, 73% of which were published in international journals, and 91.34% in national or international journals with an impact factor in the Journal Citation Reports.

Analysis of research output parameters: density equalizing mapping and citation trend analysis

BACKGROUND

Burden of disease studies indicate major socio-economic burdens since many years. They should be used for the allocation of funding. However, imbalances are present in funding policies and therefore benchmarking becomes increasingly important in health services research.

METHODS

The present study assessed benchmarking approaches. Using large data base analyses, research was analyzed for different health research output parameters. The fields of cardiovascular and respiratory medicine served as models to assess irregular patterns of health research. For visualization, density equalizing mapping procedures were used.

RESULTS

Specific areas of major research activity were identified for European countries and large differences were found. Spatial distribution of published items for cardiac and cardiovascular systems differed in comparison to the distribution for the respiratory system. In general, large countries dominated the overall number of published items. When qualitative measures such as citation analysis were assessed, differing results were achieved. In this category, mostly Scandinavian countries dominated.

CONCLUSION

The present approach of comparative output benchmarking can be used to assess institutional operating figures at the national and international level and to analyze imbalances in health and research funding.

Interfield dysbalances in research input and output benchmarking: visualisation by density equalizing procedures

Background

Historical, social and economic reasons can lead to major differences in the allocation of health system resources and research funding. These differences might endanger the progress in diagnostic and therapeutic approaches of socio-economic important diseases. The present study aimed to assess different benchmarking approaches that might be used to analyse these disproportions. Research in two categories was analysed for various output parameters and compared to input parameters. Germany was used as a high income model country. For the areas of cardiovascular and respiratory medicine density equalizing mapping procedures visualized major geographical differences in both input and output markers.

Results

An imbalance in the state financial input was present with 36 cardiovascular versus 8 respiratory medicine state-financed full clinical university departments at the C4/W3 salary level. The imbalance in financial input is paralleled by an imbalance in overall quantitative output figures: The 36 cardiology chairs published 2708 articles in comparison to 453 articles published by the 8 respiratory medicine chairs in the period between 2002 and 2006. This is a ratio of 75.2 articles per cardiology chair and 56.63 articles per respiratory medicine chair. A similar trend is also present in the qualitative measures. Here, the 2708 cardiology publications were cited 48337 times (7290 times for respiratory medicine) which is an average citation of 17.85 per publication vs. 16.09 for respiratory medicine. The average number of citations per cardiology chair was 1342.69 in contrast to 911.25 citations per respiratory medicine chair. Further comparison of the contribution of the 16 different German states revealed major geographical differences concerning numbers of chairs, published items, total number of citations and average citations.

Conclusion

Despite similar significances of cardiovascular and respiratory diseases for the global burden of disease, large input and output imbalances have been revealed in the present study which point to a need for changes in funding policies. The present study supplies data that could be used for decision making in the field of health systems funding.

Institutional operating figures in basic and applied sciences: scientometric analysis of quantitative output benchmarking

Background

Institutional operating figures and benchmarking systems are important features for the implementation of efficacy in basic and applied sciences. They are needed for research evaluation and funding policy. However, the current policy settings for research evaluation urgently need review since there may be imbalances present in many areas.

Methods

The present study assessed benchmarking of research output. By the use of large data bases research output was categorized and analyzed. Specific areas of major research activity were identified by comparing publication density on different organ systems and inter- and intrafield comparison was performed for selected countries.

Results

Novel density-equalizing mappings were constructed that illustrate trends of publication activity and identify subsets of major interest in a total of 5,527,558 published items. A dichotomy was present between Western countries such as the US, UK or Germany and Asian countries such as Japan, China or South Korea concerning research focuses.

Conclusion

The present study is the first large scale analysis of global research activity and output over the last 50 years. The presently described assessment of operating figures at the national and international level can be used to identify single areas of research that are heavily focused. Further research on qualitative output benchmarking is needed to improve current policy settings for research evaluation.