PCORI’s Patient-Centered Research Applications: What do they tell us so far?

We like to say that PCORI is a “learning organization,” meaning we take seriously the opportunities our initiatives present to provide information that can help us improve our work. That’s why we’re pleased to share with you what we’re learning from preliminary analyses of the applications we’ve received in response to our calls for research proposals, starting with our PCORI Funding Announcements (PFAs).

As the centerpiece of our mission to support rigorous research that will help patients and those who care for them make better-informed health and healthcare decisions, our PFA process can teach us a lot, and not just the details of the projects that applicants propose.

We launched the first cycle of our initial round of PFAs in May; Cycle II opened September 17. Through these regular announcements, we continue to build the portfolio of research outlined in our National Priorities for Research and Research Agenda. Our second round maintains our unique commitment to bringing empowered and activated patients into the process of generating good clinical effectiveness data. We only support research that follows rigorous standards and meaningfully involves patients and other stakeholders throughout the process.

We’re analyzing the Cycle I applications we received (as well as those that came in earlier for our Pilot Projects program), to monitor how well our diverse nation is represented at this early stage of our work. Although our funding decisions are merit based, we have an obligation to support research that is responsive to the many patients, diseases, conditions and healthcare delivery settings that characterize our broad stakeholder community.

So how did we do on this measure? We received 483 research applications in response to the first round of PFAs, and 856 Pilot Project applications. So after just two funding opportunities, we’ve received proposals from 49 states and the District of Columbia.

At least 70 applications were received in response to each of the four priority areas supported in our first PFAs. Proposals for the “Assessment of Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment Options” were most common, accounting for 44% of applications (40% of our PFA funding is dedicated to this priority area).

Many applications, across all of the PFAs, propose to study multiple conditions. Half of all applications (243) include a focus on chronic conditions. At least 80 specifically name cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular health, mental health and acute care. These, and most of the applications received, are responsive to our call for studies that address conditions that pose a significant burden in the United States in terms of prevalence, mortality, morbidity, individual suffering, or loss of productivity. How a study accounts for these issues is one of our primary criteria for reviewing applications.

Among study populations, racial or ethnic minorities (200 applications) and the elderly (167) were most commonly included in proposals, but women (117), children (86), the disabled (71), and veterans (25) also got strong attention. These results line up well with our authorizing legislation, which calls on us to “take into account the potential for differences” that may affect these groups in prevention, diagnosis and treatment.

Another encouraging fact is that 20% of our applicants are young investigators with five or fewer years of experience in the field of comparative effectiveness research. Part of our mission is to expand this discipline, so we’re heartened by the response we’ve seen already by the nation’s young researchers who are eager to help us implement a patient-centered agenda.

Awards for the first cycle of our PFAs will be made by the end of the year. We are encouraged by the broad and diverse response to our first funding announcements and look forward to the next set of proposals, which are due December 17.

In an upcoming blog post, we’ll tell what we’ve learned from our preliminary analysis of applications for our Pilot Projects Program, which addressed a broad range of questions about methods for engaging patients in the health and healthcare research and dissemination process At PCORI, we’re dedicated to expanding our reach and seeking research proposals that incorporate the needs of patients facing a wide spectrum of challenging health and healthcare decisions. We are excited about the growth of our work and the vital role our nation’s researchers play in our mission to generate information patients can trust and use in their decision making.