Research inequality in nanomedicine
The 10-90 gap is an idea in the healthcare literature that less than 10% of all research funding goes to solving health problems that are 90% of the global disease burden. This paper examines whether there is inequality in nanotechnology healthcare research (nanomedicine). To understand the inequali...
|Date of publication on miami:||06.11.2012|
|Source:||Journal of Business Chemistry, 9 (2012) 3, S. 133-146|
|Edition statement:||[Electronic ed.]|
|DDC Subject:||330: Wirtschaft|
|Notes:||Section "Research Paper"|
The 10-90 gap is an idea in the healthcare literature that less than 10% of all research funding goes to solving health problems that are 90% of the global disease burden. This paper examines whether there is inequality in nanotechnology healthcare research (nanomedicine). To understand the inequality in nanomedicine, I conducted a bibliometric review of Web of Science and PubMed databases. Overall there is not large inequality in nanomedicine research. The bibliometric analysis shows that most nanomedicine research is done in high income countries, but their research portfolios extend beyond rich world diseases like Alzheimer’s disease and diabetes to include research on malaria, tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS. Of the nanomedicine articles that are directed towards specific diseases (about 20% in Web of Science and PubMed), the majority of the research (86%) will help both the rich and the poor, while only 7% of the research focuses solely on rich world diseases and 7% focus solely on diseases of poverty. The most researched nanomedicine topic is cancer. It accounts for 16% of nanomedicine literature. Overall less than 20% of nanomedicine research goes to solving health problems that are 50% of the global disease burden. Given nanotechnology is so linked to chemistry and the chemicals industry, the inequality within nanomedicine will impact how those industries supply materials, supplies and information to the various stakeholders involved in nanotechnology and healthcare.