The NIHR Invention for Innovation (i4i) Programme: A Review of Progress and Contributions to Innovation in Healthcare Technologies.

The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Invention for Innovation (i4i) programme supports the development of innovative medical technologies for patient benefit. The i4i product development stream involves collaborative projects between at least two partners from academia, the NHS and industry. Medical technology innovators apply for funding for one to three years, through a peer review-based process that includes presentation to a selection panel. The funding and business advice provided by i4i support the development of early-stage innovations, generally at proof of concept and prototype stages. Since its inception the product development stream has identified and supported 170 projects, led by 146 principal investigators (PIs). RAND Europe evaluated the programme, with the aim of identifying its outputs and impacts and examining the factors influencing performance. The evaluation findings should help inform the future of the programme. The evaluation used a multi-method approach, including a focused review of background information from i4i, scoping interviews with key informants, a survey of programme participants and case studies of projects representing diverse technologies and health needs.

[1]  Wilbert S. Aronow,et al.  Management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease , 2006, Comprehensive therapy.

[2]  O. Holz.  Catching breath: monitoring airway inflammation using exhaled breath condensate , 2005, European Respiratory Journal.

[3]  H. Mitsumoto,et al.  Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology Evidence-based Review) : Report of the Quality Standards Management, and Cognitive/behavioral Impairment (an Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: Multidisciplinary Care, Symptom Practice Parameter Update: the Care of the Patient With , 2022 .

[4]  P. Barnes,et al.  Exhaled biomarkers. , 2006, Chest.

[5]  Eric M Meslin,et al.  Mapping the translational science policy ‘valley of death’ , 2013, Clinical and Translational Medicine.

[6]  E. Wouters.  Economic analysis of the Confronting COPD survey: an overview of results. , 2003, Respiratory medicine.

[7]  N. Nagaratnam,et al.  Motor neurone disease , 1972, Journal of Neurology.

[8]  P. Jones,et al.  Outcomes and markers in the assessment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease , 2006, European Respiratory Journal.

[9]  W. MacNee,et al.  Standards for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with COPD: a summary of the ATS/ERS position paper , 2004, European Respiratory Journal.

[10]  Richard W Orrell,et al.  Diagnosis and management of motor neurone disease. , 2016, The Practitioner.

[11]  富野 康日己,et al.  Annual review 腎臓 , 1987 .

[12]  M Cazzola,et al.  Outcomes for COPD pharmacological trials: From lung function to biomarkers. , 2008, Revista portuguesa de pneumologia.

[13]  P. Thompson.  COPD , 2004 .

[14]  C. Roberts,et al.  UK National COPD Audit 2003: impact of hospital resources and organisation of care on patient outcome following admission for acute COPD exacerbation , 2006, Thorax.

[15]  H. Dale,et al.  Wellcome Trust , 2021, The Grants Register 2022.

[16]  R. Hubbard.  The burden of lung disease , 2006, Thorax.