Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Should health research funding be proportional to the burden of disease

Bibliographic Data

ID7354237
AuthorsJoseph Millum (0000-0003-0716-9880, University of St Andrews, corresponding author)
Year2022
Volume22
Issue1
Pages76-99
Publication date2022-11-24
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePolitics Philosophy & Economics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1470-594X • E-ISSN: 1741-3060
PublisherSAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/1470594x221138729
OpenAlexW4309874693
LanguageEN
Citations received6
References cited31

Public funders of health research have been widely criticized on the grounds that their allocations of funding for disease-specific research do not reflect the relative burdens imposed by different diseases. For example, the US National Institutes of Health spends a much greater fraction of its budget on HIV/AIDS research and a much smaller fraction on migraine research than their relative contribution to the US burden of disease would suggest. Implicit in this criticism is a normative claim: Insofar as the scientific opportunities are equal, each patient merits research into their condition proportional to the burden of disease for which that condition is responsible. This claim—the proportional view—is widely accepted but has never been fully specified or defended. In this paper, I explain what is required to specify the view, attempt to do so in the most charitable way, and then critically evaluate its normative underpinnings. I conclude that a severity-weighted proportional view is defensible. I close by drawing out five key lessons of my analysis for health research priority-setting

Actuarial science · Criticism · Disease · Economics · Normative · Pathology · Political science · Positive economics · Public economics · Public health · Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life · Healthcare cost, quality, practices · Healthcare Policy and Management · Law · Medicine · Nursing · Psychology

  • Are female-dominated cancers underfunded?

    Open Access•Lídia Farré, Ha Luong et al.•Social Science & Medicine•2026

  • Expediting approval for medical countermeasures to address high burden disease

    Open Access•Mathew Mercuri, Kristy M Hackett et al.•BMJ Global Health•2023

  • Health Research Funders and Justice

    Open Access•Joseph Millum•Bioethics•2026

  • The Health of Nations Fund

    Open Access•Joonhyuk Cho, Manish Singh et al.•PLOS Global Public Health•2026

  • How to Give Ethical Input on Animal Research Transitions

    Open Access•Nico Dario Müller•Journal of Agricultural and…•2025

  • A severely fragmented concept

    Open Access•Mille Sofie Stenmarck, Borgar Jølstad et al.•Social Science & Medicine•2023

  • Political Theory and International Relations

    Charles R Beitz•Political Theory and International…•1999

  • The answer is 17 years, what is the question

    Open Access•Zoë Slote Morris, Steven Wooding et al.•Proceedings of the Royal Society…•2011

  • Equality Versus Priority

    Open Access•Marc Fleurbaey•Economics and Philosophy•2015

  • Global Justice

    Gillian Brock•Global justice•2009

  • The mismatch between the health research and development (R&D) that is needed and the R&D that is undertaken

    Open Access•Roderik F Viergever•Global Health Action•2013

  • Health Research Priority Setting

    Open Access•Leah Pierson, Joseph Millum•Global Public Health•2021

  • Another Defence of the Priority View

    Open Access•Derek Parfit•Utilitas•2012

Unique citing works6
Citations per year2
Citation span2023 - 2026 (4)
Citation velocitycurrent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 5
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae