The National Prevention Research Initiative NPRI

1
The National Prevention Research InitiativeNPRI

• Roger Wilson
• Chair NCRI Consumer Liaison Group

2
Background

• NCRI Strategic Analysis 2002
• 2 of spend on prevention
• Compares with 9 in USA
• NCRI Planning Group analysis
• Proposed ongoing funding
• Multi-disciplinary, intervention focus
• UKCRC Strategic Analysis 2005
• 2.5of spend on prevention

3
Committing 11.7m over 5 years
4
Structure

• Programme Board
• Funders
• One lay representative
• Scientific committee
• Chair Prof Ray Fitzpatrick
• 24 members international expertise
• Of which 6 lay representatives
• Management by MRC

5
Progress

• First call late 2004
• 248 outline proposals
• Reviewed April 2005
• 48 invited to apply reviewed October 2005
• 45 submitted full proposals
• 26 projects funded from April 2006
• 70 of initial funding allocated
• Second call in preparation for late 2006

6
Reviewing the Applications

• External review up to 3 respondents
• Two scientific members detailed review
• Good science
• Quality of project team
• Appropriate costs
• One lay member detailed review
• Public value
• Public/patient involvement

7
Process

• Secretariat ensured equality of status
• Chair encouraged open discussion
• Started cautiously keeping to boundaries
• Overlaps started with science issues commented on
  by lay representatives
• Then cautious discussion of public value issues
  by scientists
• No cliques at lunch time
• Ended up with ethical positions taken by
  scientists when lay people were happy

8
Results

• Real multi-disciplinary projects
• 24 interventions leading to pilot stages
• Methodology one study
• Clinical trial one study
• Word got round about involvement
• Those that scored well on involvement usually
  also did well scientifically
• Recommendations on involvement added by
  scientific committee where weak

9
Outcome

• Final selections possibly no different BUT
• Decisions are more valid
• There is more user involvement in projects than
  there would have been
• Returning greater value (assuming promises are
  lived up to)
• Wider ownership of results
• In the whole initiative
• In the communities studied
• Readier political will to fund interventions

10
Conclusions

• Principle of involvement from outset
• Useful to have experience within organisation
• Helped by having one person on the Board
• A clear role is very valuable
• Lay representatives
• Experience adds value
• Confidence to challenge and discuss
• Know when to listen and stay quiet
• A facilitative chair is crucial to success

11

• Roger Wilson
• roger_at_dflair.demon.co.uk