[Medical philanthropy in the United States]. / La philanthropie médicale aux États-Unis.

Philanthropic foundations played a crucial role in rationalizating and organizing American society in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The promotion of science was applied to medical reform, leading to the advent of genuine medical research within the framework of brand-new university hospital faculties. With the two world wars, the state became heavily involved in the field of healthcare. After 1945, it became the main source of funding for biomedical research. Philanthropy did not disappear from the institutional landscape; it continued to work in tandem with public authorities. Its role in medical research is now minor in terms of funding volume, but a strategic one in the development of projects aimed at advancing basic science and knowledge of various diseases.

Title: La philanthropie médicale aux États-Unis. Abstract: Les fondations philanthropiques ont pris une part décisive dans la rationalisation et l'organisation de la médecine dans la société américaine des débuts du xxe siècle, période pendant laquelle la promotion de la science a donné lieu à l'avènement d'une véritable recherche médicale spécialisée dans le cadre des nouvelles facultés hospitalo-universitaires. Avec les deux guerres mondiales, l'État fédéral s'est fortement engagé dans le champ de la santé. Au point qu'après 1945, il est devenu la principale source de financement de l'innovation biomédicale. La philanthropie ne disparaît pas pour autant du paysage institutionnel. Elle continue de fonctionner en tandem avec les pouvoirs publics. Son rôle est aujourd'hui minoritaire en termes de volume de financement, mais stratégique dans l'avènement de projets visant à faire avancer les connaissances sur des processus fondamentaux ainsi que sur de nombreuses maladies.

Spatial and temporal patterns in Canadian COVID-19 crowdfunding campaigns.

Online charitable crowdfunding has become an increasingly prevalent way for Canadians to deal with costs that they would otherwise not be able to shoulder on their own. With the onset of COVID-19 and related lockdown measures, there is evidence of a surge in crowdfunding use relating to the pandemic. This study gathered, classified, and analysed Canadian crowdfunding campaigns created in response to COVID-19 from GoFundMe.com, a popular crowdfunding platform. Spatio-temporal analysis of classified campaigns allowed for observation of emergent trends in the distribution of pandemic-related need incidence and financial support throughout the pandemic. Campaigns raising money on behalf of established charities were the most common in the sample, and accounted for the greatest portion of funding raised, while campaigns for businesses made up a small proportion. Dense metropolitan areas accounted for the vast majority of campaign locations, and total sample funding was disproportionately raised by campaigners in Ontario and British Columbia.

Current trends in and future potential of crowdfunding to finance R&D of treatments for neglected tropical diseases.

A serious lack of funding exists for the research and development (R&D) of therapeutics, diagnostics, and preventive measures for neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). Hence, crowdfunding to finance R&D for NTDs has high importance, because it is a new and alternate source of capital. This study explores current trends of crowdfunding for R&D for NTDs. Our study showed that, although the number of crowdfunding campaigns for NTDs has been increasing since 2010, crowdfunding overall has not reached its full potential. Several factors contributing positively to the success of crowdfunding campaigns were identified. These and the promotion of the crowdfunding ecosystem could aid the unlocking of its potential as a complementary financing source to conventional funding practices of R&D for NTDs.

A Comparison of Online Medical Crowdfunding in Canada, the UK, and the US.

Importance: Despite major differences in their health care systems, medical crowdfunding is increasingly used to finance personal health care costs in Canada, the UK, and the US. However, little is known about the campaigns designed to raise monetary donations for medical expenses, the individuals who turn to crowdfunding, and their fundraising intent. Objective: To examine the demographic characteristics of medical crowdfunding beneficiaries, campaign characteristics, and their association with funding success in Canada, the UK, and the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study extracted and manually reviewed data from GoFundMe campaigns discoverable between February 2018 and March 2019. All available campaigns on each country domain's GoFundMe medical discovery webpage that benefitted a unique patient(s) were included from Canada, the UK, and the US. Data analysis was performed from March to December 2019. Exposures: Campaign and beneficiary characteristics. Main Outcomes and Measures: Log-transformed amount raised in US dollars. Results: This study examined 3396 campaigns including 1091 in Canada, 1082 in the UK, and 1223 in the US. Campaigns in the US (median [IQR], $38 204 [$31 200 to $52 123]) raised more funds than campaigns in Canada ($12 662 [$9377 to $19 251]) and the UK ($6285 [$4028 to $12 348]). In the overall cohort per campaign, Black individuals raised 11.5% less (95% CI, -19.0% to -3.2%; P = .006) than non-Black individuals, and male individuals raised 5.9% more (95% CI, 2.2% to 9.7%; P = .002) than female individuals. Female (39.4% of campaigns vs 50.8% of US population; difference, 11.3%; 95% CI, 8.6% to 14.1%; P < .001) and Black (5.3% of campaigns vs 13.4% of US population; difference, 8.1%; 95% CI, 6.8% to 9.3%; P < .001) beneficiaries were underrepresented among US campaigns. Campaigns primarily for routine treatment expenses were approximately 3 times more common in the US (77.9% [272 of 349 campaigns]) than in Canada (21.9% [55 of 251 campaigns]; difference, 56.0%; 95% CI, 49.3-62.7%; P < .001) or the UK (26.6% [127 of 478 campaigns]; difference, 51.4%; 95% CI, 45.5%-57.3%; P < .001). However, campaigns for routine care were less successful overall. Approved, inaccessible care and experimental care raised 35.7% (95% CI, 25.6% to 46.7%; P < .001) and 20.9% (95% CI, 13.3% to 29.1%; P < .001), respectively, more per campaign than routine care. Campaigns primarily for alternative treatment expenses (16.1% [174 of 1079 campaigns]) were nearly 4-fold more common for cancer (23.5% [144 of 614 campaigns]) vs noncancer (6.5% [30 of 465 campaigns]) diagnoses. Conclusions and Relevance: Important differences were observed in the reasons individuals turn to medical crowdfunding in the 3 countries examined that suggest racial and gender disparities in fundraising success. More work is needed to understand the underpinnings of these findings and their implications on health care provision in the countries examined.

Recent setbacks in measles elimination: the importance of investing in innovations for immunizations.

The recent setbacks in efforts to achieve measles elimination goals are alarming. To reverse the current trends, it is imperative that the global health community urgently intensify efforts and make resource commitments to implement evidence-based elimination strategies fully, including supporting research and innovations. The Immunization Agenda 2030: A Global Strategy to Leave No One Behind (IA2030) is the new global guidance document that builds on lessons learned and progress made toward the GVAP goals, includes research and innovation as a core strategic priority, and identifies measles as a "tracer" for improving immunisation services and strengthening primary health care systems. To achieve vaccination coverage and equity targets that leave no one behind, and accelerate progress toward disease eradication and elimination goals, sustained and predictable investments are needed for the identified research and innovations priorities for the new decade.

Media portrayal of illness-related medical crowdfunding: A content analysis of newspaper articles in the United States and Canada.

BACKGROUND: Medical crowdfunding is a growing phenomenon, and newspapers are publishing on the topic. This research analyzed how illness-related crowdfunding and crowdfunding campaigns have recently been represented in newspapers that are popular in the United States and Canada. METHODS: A sample of 336 articles about medical crowdfunding published during the two year time period from October 7, 2015 to October 6, 2017 was produced using a Factiva search of the English language newspapers with the largest Canadian and United States readership. A coding frame was developed for and applied to the sample to analyze content. RESULTS: Articles portrayed crowdfunding campaigns positively (43.75%) and neutrally (47.92%), but rarely negatively (4.76%). Articles mostly mentioned the crowdfunding phenomenon with a neutral characterization (93.75%). Few (8.63%) articles mentioned ethical issues with the phenomenon of crowdfunding. Ailments most commonly precipitating the need for a campaign included cancer (49.11%) and rare disease (as stated by the article, 36.01%). Most articles (83.04%) note where donations and contributions can be made, and 59.23% included a hyperlink to an online crowdfunding campaign website. Some articles (26.49%) mentioned a specific monetary goal for the fundraising campaign. Of the 70 (20.83%) articles that indicated the treatment sought may be inefficacious, was unproven, was experimental or lacked regulatory approval, 56 (80.00%) noted where contributions can be made and 36 (51.43%) hyperlinked directly to an online crowdfunding campaign. CONCLUSIONS: Crowdfunding campaigns are portrayed positively much more often than negatively, many articles promote campaigns for unproven therapies, and links directly to crowdfunding campaign webpages are present in most articles. Overall, crowdfunding is often either implicitly or explicitly endorsed.

When Brain Beats Behavior: Neuroforecasting Crowdfunding Outcomes.

Although traditional economic and psychological theories imply that individual choice best scales to aggregate choice, primary components of choice reflected in neural activity may support even more generalizable forecasts. Crowdfunding represents a significant and growing platform for funding new and unique projects, causes, and products. To test whether neural activity could forecast market-level crowdfunding outcomes weeks later, 30 human subjects (14 female) decided whether to fund proposed projects described on an Internet crowdfunding website while undergoing scanning with functional magnetic resonance imaging. Although activity in both the nucleus accumbens (NAcc) and medial prefrontal cortex predicted individual choices to fund on a trial-to-trial basis in the neuroimaging sample, only NAcc activity generalized to forecast market funding outcomes weeks later on the Internet. Behavioral measures from the neuroimaging sample, however, did not forecast market funding outcomes. This pattern of associations was replicated in a second study. These findings demonstrate that a subset of the neural predictors of individual choice can generalize to forecast market-level crowdfunding outcomes-even better than choice itself.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Forecasting aggregate behavior with individual neural data has proven elusive; even when successful, neural forecasts have not historically supplanted behavioral forecasts. In the current research, we find that neural responses can forecast market-level choice and outperform behavioral measures in a novel Internet crowdfunding context. Targeted as well as model-free analyses convergently indicated that nucleus accumbens activity can support aggregate forecasts. Beyond providing initial evidence for neuropsychological processes implicated in crowdfunding choices, these findings highlight the ability of neural features to forecast aggregate choice, which could inform applications relevant to business and policy.

Global funding trends for malaria research in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic analysis.

BACKGROUND: Total domestic and international funding for malaria is inadequate to achieve WHO global targets in burden reduction by 2030. We describe the trends of investments in malaria-related research in sub-Saharan Africa and compare investment with national disease burden to identify areas of funding strength and potentially neglected populations. We also considered funding for malaria control. METHODS: Research funding data related to malaria for 1997-2013 were sourced from existing datasets, from 13 major public and philanthropic global health funders, and from funding databases. Investments (reported in US$) were considered by geographical area and compared with data on parasite prevalence and populations at risk in sub-Saharan Africa. 45 sub-Saharan African countries were ranked by amount of research funding received. FINDINGS: We found 333 research awards totalling US$814·4 million. Public health research covered $308·1 million (37·8%) and clinical trials covered $275·2 million (33·8%). Tanzania ($107·8 million [13·2%]), Uganda ($97·9 million [12·0%]), and Kenya ($92·9 million [11·4%]) received the highest sum of research investment and the most research awards. Malawi, Tanzania, and Uganda remained highly ranked after adjusting for national gross domestic product. Countries with a reasonably high malaria burden that received little research investment or funding for malaria control included Central African Republic (ranked 40th) and Sierra Leone (ranked 35th). Congo (Brazzaville) and Guinea had reasonably high malaria mortality, yet Congo (Brazzaville) ranked 38th and Guinea ranked 25th, thus receiving little investment. INTERPRETATION: Some countries receive reasonably large investments in malaria-related research (Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda), whereas others receive little or no investments (Sierra Leone, Central African Republic). Research investments are typically highest in countries where funding for malaria control is also high. Investment strategies should consider more equitable research and operational investments across countries to include currently neglected and susceptible populations. FUNDING: Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.