ECEVE, UMRS 1123, Université Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, INSERM, Paris, France; AP-HP, URC-Eco, DHU Pepsy, F-75004 Paris, France; Foundation FondaMental, French National Science Foundation, Créteil, France. Electronic address: firstname.lastname@example.org.
As part of the Roamer project, we aimed at revealing the share of health research budgets dedicated to mental health, as well as on the amounts allocated to such research for four European countries. Finland, France, Spain and the United Kingdom national public and non-profit funding allocated to mental health research in 2011 were investigated using, when possible, bottom-up approaches. Specifics of the data collection varied from country to country. The total amount of public and private not for profit mental health research funding for Finland, France, Spain and the UK was €10·2, €84·8, €16·8, and €127·6 million, respectively. Charities accounted for a quarter of the funding in the UK and less than six per cent elsewhere. The share of health research dedicated to mental health ranged from 4·0% in the UK to 9·7% in Finland. When compared to the DALY attributable to mental disorders, Spain, France, Finland, and the UK invested respectively €12·5, €31·2, €39·5, and €48·7 per DALY. Among these European countries, there is an important gap between the level of mental health research funding and the economic and epidemiologic burden of mental disorders.
The growing movement of innovative approaches to chronic disease management in Europe has not been matched by a corresponding effort to evaluate them. This paper discusses challenges to evaluation of chronic disease management as reported by experts in six European countries.
We conducted 42 semi-structured interviews with key informants from Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, The Netherlands and Spain involved in decision-making and implementation of chronic disease management approaches. Interviews were complemented by a survey on approaches to chronic disease management in each country. Finally two project teams (France and the Netherlands) conducted in-depth case studies on various aspects of chronic care evaluation.
We identified three common challenges to evaluation of chronic disease management approaches: (1) a lack of evaluation culture and related shortage of capacity; (2) reluctance of payers or providers to engage in evaluation and (3) practical challenges around data and the heterogeity of IT infrastructure. The ability to evaluate chronic disease management interventions is influenced by contextual and cultural factors.
This study contributes to our understanding of some of the most common underlying barriers to chronic care evaluation by highlighting the views and experiences of stakeholders and experts in six European countries. Overcoming the cultural, political and structural barriers to evaluation should be driven by payers and providers, for example by building in incentives such as feedback on performance, aligning financial incentives with programme objectives, collectively participating in designing an appropriate framework for evaluation, and making data use and accessibility consistent with data protection policies.