Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Linking outputs in papers by leading malaria researchers to their budgets gave a global estimate of between US$290 and 333 million for the annual investment in malaria research. Using the acknowledgements, funding sources were determined for one third of the papers, and the fraction of malaria research expenditure attributable to individual leading agencies was estimated. This gave good agreement with agencies' own estimates. Thus output indicators can be used to derive robust input indicators for research, and will give a better idea of global spend than the sum of individual agency budgets. The new method does, however, miss the research that is not covered in the Science Citation Index, much of which will be from developing countries.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lewison et al. (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: