{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030012004801920768, 'fraction_numerical': 0.030012004801920768, 'mean_word_length': 5.132352941176471, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
All conditions are not equal and all questions cannot be answered

More than £4 are being avoidably wasted for every £1 invested in useful medical research according to Chalmers et al. (Lancet 2009; 374: 86-9). This is particularly important for a broad specialty such as Obstetrics and Gynaecology that only benefits from just over 5% of the total medical research funding according to the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Open Data. The Lancet have subsequently published a series of articles under the theme 'Research: increasing value, reducing waste' providing guidance to avoid pitfalls at different levels of biomedical research. Priority setting had been given increased consideration due to the modest correlation between disease burden and public funding of research (Chalmers et al. Lancet 2014; 383: 156-65).