Subscribe to the BioNews newsletter for free

Login
Advanced Search

Search for
BioNews


Print Page Follow BioNews on Twitter BioNews RSS feed

Like the Progress Educational Trust on Facebook



King's College London - Health: More than a medical matter






Event Review: All-Party Parliamentary Group on Medical Research Summer Reception

13 August 2012

By Dr Vanita Rasiah

Paediatric Registrar, London

Appeared in BioNews 668

Summer Reception

Organised by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Medical Research

Members' Dining Room, Palace of Westminster, London SW1A 0AA, UK

Wednesday 11 July 2012

Summer Reception organised by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Medical Research, Wednesday 11 July 2012


Here's an idea - what if the key to improved treatment of some of the most problematic medical conditions lay buried in a vast mass of patient data siloed in archaic computer systems? What if researchers couldn't get to it thanks to an impenetrable cat's cradle of red tape?

Well, dispense with the what ifs, because that's what the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Medical Research say is happening, and they want to stop it. Their summer reception was dedicated to 'How data saves lives - unlocking the research potential of information'.

All well and good. But the APPG is comprised of parliamentarians, so are they lobbying themselves for new legislation? BioNews, I'm afraid, invited a medic who is a complete political naïf to attend this event for them - I was surprised to learn that some special interest groups have apparently lobbied some APPGs so hard that they are now embedded within. Everyone makes common cause, not at all how I thought it worked.

The APPG on Medical Research is accordingly supported by the medical charity big guns: Cancer Research UK; Wellcome Trust; The Academy of Medical Sciences; Medical Research Council; and the Association of Medical Research Charities.

So, then, confessions of a political naïf, part one - I'd never been inside the Houses of Parliament before, much less the august Members' Dining Room, the venue for this event.

The scene, I can report, was one of a dinner party in some grand old stately home. A hubbub of conversation ebbed and flowed, punctuated by the occasional clink of wine glass on wine glass. Chandeliers hung overhead and along one side of the room lay The Spread of the Gods: pink profiteroles; the creamiest tarts; the daintiest cupcakes; possibly every species of patisserie known to man. 'You'll have to have them all pulled out', sang my inner George Harrison, 'after the Savoy Truffle'.

APPG member Lord Willis of Knaresborough opened the speeches and got my mind back to business. He introduced the idea of the NHS being 'research-led' (which, however well intentioned, set my teeth on edge; 'patient-centred', 'outcomes-focused' – how many buzzword constructs can one health service survive?) and discussed the creation of a NHS database to support medical and health research.

Professor Nic Jones, Cancer Research UK's chief scientist, built the data theme up further. About a quarter of medical research is reliant on patient data, he said. The current web of legislation means that researchers have to apply to several different bodies, who can give conflicting advice, before (if they're lucky) being granted access to data.

But a speech by a man called Anthony Cox was the most effective. Cox is in his seventies and has Parkinson's disease, a condition where all current treatments are inadequate.

He was articulate and witty. Researchers are seeking improved access to anonymised patient data, but some people are still concerned for patient-doctor confidentiality. Not Cox, who imagined a visit to a GP's. To a packed waiting room, a receptionist would call out: 'Mr Cox! The erectile dysfunction nurse is ready to see you!' True enough - the safeguards for data anonymity put in place for researchers would likely not be infallible but should still be better than is often the case in the NHS.

By contrast, Earl Howe, under-secretary of state for health, was - understandably - much more on-message. My notes show references to an 'unrivalled health research system'; to the UK being a 'place of choice for investment'; to things being of benefit 'to patients, the NHS and to the national economy'.

The poster presentations were more substantive: 16 pieces of research, all data-themed in some way. There was much work on currently incurable diseases like Alzheimer's or multiple sclerosis. Most of these were epidemiological studies, involving large cohorts of patients, trying to discover contributing lifestyle factors.

Other presentations focused on the benefits of improved data access or on initiatives like UK Biobank, a collection of anonymised patient data from 500,000 men and women which can be accessed on request by researchers (reported in BioNews 651).

Clearly, in research, data is hot at the moment. In fact, many of the ideas bandied about at the reception are coming into force: the Health Research Authority was born at the end of 2011 to simplify the process for researchers seeking to access data; the Government will soon begin a public consultation on whether, unless patients choose to opt out, all patient notes should be funnelled into an anonymised data resource for use in approved research.

Don't get me wrong – I like most, perhaps all, of this. But the air around data access still smells of hype to me. The NHS has a painful history when it comes to IT management. I shudder to think of the cost and complexity involved in creating one gigantic anonymised database. As a doctor, I wondered how much extra time I'd have to spend inputting notes and ticking more boxes.

And then, for what? Epidemiological research would get a boost, for sure, but medical science cannot live by epidemiology alone. It's hard to see how the great improvements in treatment hinted at here would actually come to light.

In hospital-based medicine it's the little things that count. By that I mean like staying vigilant on seeing the thousandth screaming, feverish baby because this time it just might be meningitis; like listening to patients when they disagree with you because despite all your clever-clogs medical training you can still be wrong; like being bold enough to question a colleague's diagnosis.

But paying attention to these matters - clinical governance, in medicalese - is not as sexy as swish computer systems or promises of bleeding-edge medical research. It probably wouldn't make the UK 'a place of choice for investment'. But it's a surer route to improved patient care than anything presented here.

Again, don't get me wrong - I don't doubt that some good may come of the push for data access and I don't begrudge the medical research lobbyists their success. All the same, I left the summer reception feeling sceptical about much that I'd heard.

 

SOURCES & REFERENCES
AMRC Policy Blog | 11 July 2012
 

RELATED ARTICLES FROM THE BIONEWS ARCHIVE

10 June 2013 - by Shanya Sivakumaran 
Leading international healthcare, research, funding, and technology organisations will work together in a non-profit alliance to enable large-scale sharing of genetic data... [Read More]
17 December 2012 - by Nicola Davis 
Do we need more scientists in Parliament? The Society of Biology recently embarked on a series of public debates on science policy, launching with this probing question... [Read More]
28 August 2012 - by James Brooks 
I'll brook no cynicism, the Olympics was the finest example of what makes Britain great. Which is to say: marketing, PR and all-around hype... [Read More]

02 April 2012 - by Cait McDonagh 
The world's largest database of medical information has opened online, allowing researchers around the world to access its contents. The UK Biobank holds anonymous information from more than 500,000 British people, making it a 'globally unique resource' according to England's chief medical officer, Dame Sally Davies... [Read More]
19 December 2011 - by Sharmila Nebhrajani 
Our medical records include some of the most personal and sensitive information about us. So it's understandable that two items in David Cameron's life sciences strategy caused considerable stir... [Read More]
05 December 2011 - by Professor Barbara Prainsack and Dr Alena Buyx 
What do research biobanks, social media and the NHS have in common?... [Read More]
30 August 2010 - by Simon Denegri 
In these uncertain times, a single regulator for research is one of the safer bets you might place.... [Read More]

HAVE YOUR SAY
Be the first to have your say.

You need to Login or Register to add comments.

By posting a comment you agree to abide by the BioNews terms and conditions

 


 

- click here to enquire about using this story.

Printer Friendly Page

Published by the Progress Educational Trust
RISK ASSESSMENT:
BREAST CANCER, PREDICTION AND SCREENING
FREE public event in central London, 6.30pm on Thursday 8 May 2014 - find out more HERE

DataLabel Supplying Printed Labels To The UK For Over 15 Years

ANNIVERSARY APPEAL
Please donate HERE, so that the Progress Educational Trust can continue throughout 2014 (and beyond) while keeping BioNews FREE for you to read

The Progress Educational Trust was shortlisted for the Charity Times Awards 2011

Advertise your products and services HERE - click for further details

Good Fundraising Code

Become a Friend of PET HERE, and give the Progress Educational Trust a regular donation