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.

Safeguarding cancer research funding by European charities amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 outbreak has affected cancer research and cancer care. European cancer charities need to reconsider strategies for safeguarding income and supporting cancer researchers, in times when sustaining cancer research funding is more crucial than ever.

How to Engage Funders and Get Money: the 10 Rs You Need to Know.

Tips from a foundation insider for researchers and nurse leaders.

Organizational Characteristics Associated With Fundraising Performance of Nonprofit Hospitals.

Fundraising has become increasingly important to nonprofit hospitals as access to capital has grown more difficult and reimbursement for services more complex. This study analyzes the variation in organizational characteristics and fundraising performance among nonprofit acute care hospitals in the United States to identify and measure critical factors related to one key fundraising performance indicator: public support. Results indicate that the presence of an endowment, along with its value, investments in fundraising, and the geographic location of the organization, account for approximately 46% of variance in public support among nonprofit hospitals. The use of a separate foundation for the fundraising operation is not necessarily associated with measures of fundraising success; however, a majority of hospitals do use a foundation, signaling a strategic choice that may be made for numerous reasons. The study results and limitations are discussed and recommendations are made for maximizing the effectiveness of the fundraising enterprise within nonprofit hospitals. Increasing awareness of challenges associated with fundraising success will enhance the strategic management of fundraising operations by hospital executives and board members.

Ceci n'est pas science.

Biomedical research is not immune to economic imperatives. But as the realities of profit encroach ever closer on what was once regarded as an idealistic and selfless endeavor, the author reflects on four trends that are hollowing out the research enterprise.

Best practices in philanthropy in medical schools.

This paper is for academic leaders and administrators who are interested in growing their philanthropic revenue stream. Growing the philanthropic revenue stream will be especially meaningful to leaders and administrators who have seen their other revenue streams decline or stagnate in the last few years. This paper focuses on four best practices for a high-performing development program and gives examples about how to execute on these best practices.

Stakeholders in cutaneous investigation: patients and patient advocates are essential.

A diverse array of stakeholders supports biomedical investigation, the major goal of which is to improve human health. For patients with dermatological disease, the Coalition of Skin Diseases (CSD) has for more than two decades provided a base from which public advocacy, education, fund-raising, and communication have flourished. Their efforts, combined with that of investigators and national funding agencies, have advanced scientific enterprise and, ultimately, human health.