NC3Rs | 20 Years: Pioneering Better Science

Funding scheme outputs 2024

NC3Rs funding scheme outputs

Background

We use the Researchfish platform to gather information on the outcomes that arise from the research and early career awards we fund. The data allows us to monitor progress and identify trends as well as providing information we can use in case studies, corporate reports and funding bids. 

NC3Rs grant holders report outputs into Researchfish that have resulted from, or are directly linked to, their awards. Researchfish is open to researchers all year round, but there is an annual submission period when researchers are asked to confirm their information is accurate and up to date. All NC3Rs grant holders are required to submit a report during the submission period for each year of their grant and typically for five years following the grant’s completion. 

The most recent Researchfish submission period ran from 3 February 2024 to 14 March 2024. We had 484 awards (excluding CRACK IT Challenges contracts) on the Researchfish system, of these 247 were expected to submit in the 2024 submission period. In practice data from 480 grants from 401 grant holders has been submitted to date, representing approximately £89.4M of awards. In this report we summarise the 2024 data collection, including data reported on 3Rs impacts, publications, further funding secured and examples of policy influences and engagement activities. 

There are a number of points to note:

  • We have collected data via Researchfish annually since 2013 and in 2017 3Rs impacts were included as an additional question set. Some grant holders with awards that pre-date this have chosen to use Researchfish, where this data has been submitted it has been included in analysis, although the dataset is not complete.

  • The data submitted to Researchfish is ‘cleaned’ by the NC3Rs team liaising with grant holders where necessary to check for accuracy, completeness and avoid duplication of data.

  • Each graph includes an ‘n’ number, which indicates the total sample presented in the graph. Differences between header statements (in highlighted boxes) and graph ‘n’ numbers are due to incomplete data for some of the categories of information presented in graphs. 0% indicates a value less than 1% that has been rounded down during analysis.

  • All averages have been calculated as the mean of data between 2013 and 2023 only as this is the period we have a complete set of reported Researchfish data. 

Researchfish data summary

Figure 1 shows the number of grants reporting a 3Rs impact. Many of the grants that have not reported 3Rs impacts are active awards, with 19 of these grants starting in the 12 months before the submission period.

A bar graph showing 256 (66%) NC3Rs awards have reported a 3Rs impact to date and 130 (34%) have not.

 

Figure 2 shows the breakdown by ‘R’ of those grants that report a 3Rs impact.

A bar graph showing 172 (63%) replacement grants have reported a 3Rs impact, 46 (68%) reduction grants and 39 (81%) refinement grants.

 

Figure 3 shows the percentage of awards by ‘R’ where the grant holder has reported a 3Rs impact in their own laboratory. 

A bar graph showing 138 (51%) of replacement grants have reported an impact in the grant holder's laboratory, 42 (62%) of reduction grants and 39 (81%) of refinement grants.

 

Figure 4 shows the percentage of awards that have included the development of a 3Rs method, tool or technology, including further development of existing models. [1]

A bar graph showing 188 (87%) of NC3Rs awards have involved the development of a method, tool or technology, which includes further development of an existing approach and 184 (86%) have shown their approach is fit-for-purpose in their own lab.

 

Figure 5 shows the percentage of awards where the 3Rs approach developed has been validated [2] or used by another laboratory. 

A bar graph showing 123 awards (32%) have been independently validated or replicated by another lab and 162 awards (42%) have had an approach applied to a different research question.

 

Figure 6 shows the percentage of grants by ‘R’ that have led to the 3Rs approaches developed being used in laboratories nationally or internationally (i.e. beyond that of the grant holder).

A bar graph showing 93 (34%) of replacement awards have had a national impact, 23 (34%) of reduction awards and 22 (46%) of refinement awards. 77 (29%) of replacement awards have had an international impact, 26 (38%) of reduction awards and 20 (42%) of refinement awards.

 

Figure 7 shows the types of research materials developed and the relative proportions.

A pie chart with 11 categories, n=359 29% of research materials developed are technology/assays/reagents, 16% of models are in vitro models of mechanisms or symptoms, 13% are cell lines, 9% are non-mammalian models of mechanisms or symptoms, 8% are physiological assessments or outcome measures, 7% are biological samples, 7% are mammalian models of mechanisms or symptoms, 5% are human models of mechanisms or symptoms, 4% are improvements to infrastructure, 2% are DNA products and 0% software.

 

Figure 8 shows the sectors with which NC3Rs grant holders report collaborations with. Note 84% of all collaborations were reported as active collaborations at the time of Researchfish submission (data not shown).

A pie chart with 6 categories of collaboration sectors, n=1162 73% of collaborations were with academic/university, 13% with industry, 6% with public, 5% with charity/non profit, 3% with hospitals and 0% with learned society.

 

Figure 9 shows the number of publications arising from NC3Rs grants from the start of the award. Note the average time taken for an NC3Rs grant holder to report a publication is three years after their grant begins (data not shown).

A bar graph showing 153 grants had papers the same year they were awarded, 374 1 year after, 464 2 years after, 476 3 years after, 421 4 years after and the slope declines rapidly to 1 paper 16 years after the grant started.

 

Figure 10 shows the types of journal articles published by NC3Rs grant holders and the relative proportions by article type.

A bar graph showing 1439 journal articles were primary papers, 105 were methods papers, 354 were reviews and 217 that did not fit these categories.

 

Figure 11 shows the length of time it takes for NC3Rs grant holders to secure further funding after their NC3Rs award has started. Further funding secured in the same year as the NC3Rs grant starts is marked as 0 years.

A bar graph showing 55 grants received further funding the year they were awarded, 130 awards 1 year after they begun, 171 after 2 years, 174 after 3 years, 166 after 4 years and the graph declines rapidly to 1 award having received funding after 14 years.

 

Figure 12 shows the types of further funding secured by NC3Rs grant holders and the relative proportions by grant type.

A bar graph with 5 bars showing 489 instances of further funding were research grants, 159 were studentships, 113 were travel or small personal awards, 61 were Fellowships and 27 were capital/infrastructure (including equipment).

 

Figure 13 shows the sectors from which investment is secured by NC3Rs grant holders and the relative breakdown. 

A bar graph with six bars showing 348 instances of further funding were from the public sector, 294 from charity/non profit, 112 from academic/university, 59 from industry, 8 from learned society and 4 from hospitals.

 

Figure 14 shows the amount of further funding received by NC3Rs grant holders.

A bar graph with 5 bars showing 54 instances of further funding were between 0 and 1,000 pounds, 120 between 1,001 and 10,000 pounds, 307 between 10,001 and 100,000 pounds, 307 between 100,001 and 1,000,000 pounds and 59 over 1,000,000 pounds.

 

Table 1 shows the spin-out companies established as a result of NC3Rs research funding.

CompanyYear established
SimOmics2013
Xenobics2014
Neuralixer2014
Renovos Biologics Limited2017
Bioflares Ltd2021
Science Engineered Limited2022
Theragenix Ltd2022
Peptimatrix Limited2023
Sansanima Limited2024

 

Figure 15 shows the types of policy influences that NC3Rs grant holders have had and the relative breakdown by policy types.

A pie chart with 8 categories, n=174 showing 49% of policy influences were influencing training of practitioners/researchers, 21% participation in an advisory committee, 15% membership of a guideline committee, 5% contribution to a national consultation/review, 4% contribution to new/improved professional practice, 2% citation in policy documents, 2% implementation in a circular/rapid advice and 2% citation in systematic reviews.

Figure 16 shows the types of engagement activities performed by NC3Rs grant holders and the relative breakdown by activity type.

A pie chart with 8 categories, n=2681. 52% of engagement activities were a talk or presentation, 26% participation in an activity/workshop, 6% a formal working group, 6% participation in an open day/research visit, 4% a press release, 3% engagement focused website/blog/social media, 2% a magazine/newsletter, 1% a broadcast.

Figure 17 shows the reach of the engagement activities by NC3Rs grant holders reported by geographical location from local to international. 

A bar graph with 4 bars showing 1212 engagement activities had an international reach, 702 a national reach, 538 a local reach and 397 a regional reach.

Figure 18 shows the audience size of reported engagement activities.

A bar graph with 5 bars showing 114 engagement activities had 1 – 10 attendees, 755 had 11 – 50 attendees, 747 had 51 – 100 attendees, 705 had 101 – 500 attendees and 417 had more than 500 attendees.

Figure 19 shows the audiences reached through the engagement activities described in Figure 16, with the relative breakdown by audience type. 

A pie chart with 16 categories, n=2842, 32% of audiences were professional practitioners, 16% were public, 12% postgraduate students, 9% other audiences, 8% schools, 5% industry, 3% media, 3% undergraduate students, 3% other academic audiences, 3% policymakers, 2% research participants, 2% patients, 1% supporters, 0% study participants, 0% health professionals and 0% third sector organisations.

Figure 20 shows the personal awards and types of recognition that NC3Rs grant holders have reported, with a breakdown by type. 

A pie chart with 11 categories, n=853, 47% of awards and recognition were being personally asked as a conference key note speaker, 15% research prizes, 11% poster/abstract prize, 10% prestigious position in an external body, 6% appointed as editor/advisor to journal or book series, 4% honorary learned society membership, 4% visiting staff/user to research group, 2% medal, 1% honorary degree, 0% NIHR award and 0% national honour.

Figure 21 shows the next destination of people who change position during, or after, an NC3Rs award with a breakdown by sector. 

A pie chart describing next destinations with 6 categories, n=368. Academic/University makes up 73% of next destinations, industry 14%, public 5%, charity/non profit 5%, hospital 3% and multiple 0%.

[1] Due to these questions being added in 2023, this dataset contains responses from 215 grant holders only. 

[2] This includes studies focusing on generating an evidence base to demonstrate that the 3Rs model, tool or technology is appropriate for the intended scientific purpose and will have an impact on the use of animals such as characterisation, feasibility, comparative or reproducibility studies.

Enquiries

If you have any questions, comments or feedback on this report please contact the NC3Rs funding team.