Connect
MJA
MJA

Clinical effectiveness research: a critical need for health sector research governance capacity

Ian D Davis and Derek P B Chew
Med J Aust 2013; 198 (4): . || doi: 10.5694/mja12.11144
Published online: 4 March 2013

The barriers to conduct of clinical research will require solutions if we are to implement evidence-based health care reform

Reforms in the funding of health services, such as “activity-based” funding initiatives, seek to facilitate changes in how health care is delivered, leading to greater efficiency while maintaining effectiveness. However, often these changes in treatment strategies and service provision evolve without evidence demonstrating effectiveness in terms of patient outcomes. The pressures on health care expenditure (currently around 9% of gross domestic product1) make such an approach untenable and unsustainable. The evidence necessary to support these initiatives can only be derived through carefully conducted clinical research. Most readers would immediately think of clinical trials in terms of pharmaceuticals or clinical devices, and this type of research is critically important, although continuing to decline, in Australia.2 Other questions relate to the effectiveness of changes in health practice or policy, usually (but not always) based on sensible ideas that seem self-evident. However, in order to function with an evidence base, these ideas need to be proven to be clinically effective and cost-effective. Such research can be costly, and many of the questions to be addressed are not ones that would be the subject of an industry-sponsored trial. Researchers, clinicians and health administrators are therefore faced with the problem of how best to measure the outcomes of changes to health care strategies, without the necessary resources to ask and answer the question.


  • 1 Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University and Eastern Health, Melbourne, VIC.
  • 2 Flinders University, Adelaide, SA.


Correspondence: Derek.Chew@flinders.edu.au

Competing interests:

Ian Davis is an NHMRC Practitioner Fellow and is Chair of the Australian and New Zealand Urogenital and Prostate Cancer Trials Group Ltd.

  • 1. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Australia’s health 2012. Canberra: AIHW, 2012. (AIHW Cat. No. AUS 156; Australia’s Health Series No 13.)
  • 2. Medicines Australia. How to save Australia’s declining clinical trials — 18 Feb 2011 [media release]. http://medicinesaustralia.com.au/2011/02/18/how-to-save-australias-declining-clinical-trials (accessed Jan 2013).
  • 3. National Health and Medical Research Council; Australian Research Council; Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee. National statement on ethical conduct in human research. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2007.
  • 4. National Health and Medical Research Council; Australian Research Council; Universities Australia. Australian code for the responsible conduct of research. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2007.
  • 5. National Health and Medical Research Council. Research governance handbook: guidance for the national approach to single ethical review. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2011.
  • 6. National Health and Medical Research Council. Framework for monitoring: guidance for the national approach to single ethical review of multi-centre research. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2012.
  • 7. National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission. A healthier future for all Australians. Final report of the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission. June 2009. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2009.

Author

remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Comment
Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.