Getting grant applications funded: lessons from the past and advice for the future

Throughout the world respiratory research is underfunded with a large discrepancy between the proportion of patients suffering from lung diseases and the amount of research funds awarded by our national agencies.^1–4 In fact, many governments—including the current British government—acknowledge this and are committed to directing more resources into an area where the diseases often affect the most vulnerable in our society. In this editorial I have attempted to analyse how we have got into this “Cinderella” state, and try to propose practical approaches to help us get more funding into respiratory research. The discussion focuses on Britain, but it is hoped that some of the suggestions might resonate with respiratory colleagues in other countries where similar underfunding is in danger of undermining valuable clinical strengths that have been nurtured over many years.

This article predominantly assesses the state of affairs in the more basic science, but it is hoped that it will also promote debate around more clinical and translational research which is so central to progress in patient care. In this area it is my sense that the respiratory community still has a strong reputation. However, whereas in the past these studies were predominantly supported by government agencies, the recent trend is for more and more dependency on pharmaceutical companies. This may be inevitable—and even desirable—as we seek new drugs and refine old ones, but at the very least the trend requires analysis.

WHY IS RESPIRATORY RESEARCH CURRENTLY UNDERFUNDED?

There has, for as long as I can remember, been a feeling that respiratory research is poorly funded compared with other disciplines where patient numbers are comparable. This feeling is also borne out by the numbers provided by the major funding bodies such as the Wellcome Trust and the Medical Research …