projects left without Academy funding based on their own strategies. The possibilities of joint funding are also being looked into. “We’re running a small pilot group to see how this
kind of cooperation could generate added value for science. If the model works, it’ll be rolled out to cover all research fields that come under the Research Council’s umbrella: all partners who are interested can join in the funding cooperation.”
Weighing the implementation of peer reviews The Research Council started its three-year term by analysing, evaluating and taking steps to develop its own working practices and procedures. Special focus was given to exploring different ways of organising international peer reviews. Both the Research Council and the Health Research
Unit have been working for years to develop the peer review process, but the focus now was to weigh the relative impacts of different approaches. “We came to the conclusion that the best way to
organise the review process is to use panels of experts, although occasionally there is need for targeted one-off evaluations. Virtual panels are a possibility, but face-to-face meetings are certainly more effective. The savings from virtual meetings are not significant enough to justify the difference in quality,” Tamminen says. All funding decisions by the Research Council are
based on the scientific quality of the applications received. Other aspects considered include the innovative value of the research and its impact. Steps have also been taken to increase the
transparency of processes. For instance, the various stages and criteria of evaluation have been introduced at universities and discussed at meetings with researchers around the country.
New model of collaboration rolled out As most of the assessments and development proposals made in the 2012 review concern the Academy as a whole and a number of stakeholders, the Research Council set up a new model of collaboration with universities to maintain closer contact with its key research fields. The Research Council appointed a working group
Health research has better success in securing funding
from the European Research Council
charged with developing this model of collaboration between the Academy and universities, starting with the promotion of clinical research. The working group consists of the deans of all medical faculties in the country as well as representatives of the Research Council. “One of the issues discussed was how, assuming
that the researchers concerned give their consent, university faculties could make use of the clinical research assessments made by the Academy. Faculties could themselves provide funding for good research
www.projectsmagazine.eu.com
New programme, new opportunities The launch in 2014 of the Personalised Health Research Programme is set to open up new opportunities for diverse research activities in this field. The programme is concerned with the use of
personalised information at the genetic and cellular level for purposes of health care and the treatment of illnesses. Among the fields included are pharmaceutical research and information technology as well as the development of self-care and legislation. “The programme includes topics of current interest
and has relevance to the whole field of health care. There’s even been talk about a paradigm shift
health and illness.” The challenge is aligning the programme’s content
and timetable with other corresponding research, development and innovation programmes, particularly with the growth strategy in health sector
★ in
research and innovation that has been
launched jointly by the Ministry of Employment and the Economy, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, and the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture.
39
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112