You have /5 articles left.
Sign up for a free account or log in.
A new article in Healthcare Transformation warns academic medical centers of the potential risks -- financial, scientific and ethical -- involved in seeking more private investment in their research. In particular, the article looks at the risks posed by the innovation network model, in which an innovation benefactor, such as a foundation dedicated to finding cures for a particular disease, funds a limited number of academic institutions that collaborate on a share research agenda. (Under such a model, academic medical centers maintain rights to the intellectual property generated at their own institutions, but the benefactor benefits from any future commercialized therapy or product.)
In the past, the article says, “the role of the network orchestrator was played by the innovation investor, who would objectively evaluate research proposals and grants, direct research efforts, and distribute funding.” Today, by contrast, it says, “innovation benefactors increasingly fill the seat of the network orchestrator.” Financial conflict potentially occurs, then, when innovation benefactors -- acting as the funding body for research -- also stand to reap financial benefit if a lab generates intellectual property, “thus indirectly placing pressure on labs to show positive results.” Scientifically, the article says, “The interest of the innovation benefactor can place a narrower research aim ahead of scientific interest, potentially missing a broader application of research findings and scientific advancement.” Finally, with regard to ethics, the authors ask, “Can the central hub find a self-governance framework that focuses research interests on high-impact projects, or will the rise of private funding push research efforts only toward proposals with potential strong returns on investment or particular pet projects of the benefactor?”
"The New Age of Private Research Funding: Be Careful Out There!" is coauthored by Gino Inverso, a resident physician in the University of Pennsylvania Health System; Nada Boualam, a student at Penn; and Kevin B. Mahoney, a senior vice president at the Penn Health System. The authors ultimately recommend the appointment of an independent oversight board for innovation networks to curb the potential for conflicts.
