We definitely need research on the outcome side to understand. Are we flattening that line as the incidence goes up and up? Are we reducing the burden of disease, or are we at least decreasing the rate at which it is increasing?
Outcomes-type research that gives us an idea of how well programs and therapies are impacting people is very important, I think. As I mentioned, I think that funding research towards where there are knowledge gaps to understanding disease mechanism is important, as are implementation strategies, health services research, and things that would give us an idea of what is impacting the lives of people with diabetes today.
In terms of funding, I think there is a combination of mechanisms. If the CIHR-based funding is strong and increasing, I think the top diabetes research ideas will bubble to the top and get funded, and that will lead to new discovery. Then, targeted initiatives and partnerships—for example, the $30-million clinical trials partnership between JDRF and CIHR—allow us to look at the impact of potential new drugs on disease in clinical trials. I think there are innovative ways to fund in a targeted way with partners, but also to maintain that base funding so that the best diabetes research and research capacity will still be there.