Medical Infrastructure/Users Forum (MIUF)


The MIUF is composed of experts from...

... Research Infrastructures:
- BBMRI (Biobanking and BioMolecular resources Research Infrastructure)   
- EATRIS (European Infrastructure for Translational Medicin) 
- ECRIN (European Clinical Research Infrastructure Network) 
- ELIXIR (bioinformatics and research data integration) 
- EU-Openscreen (European Infrastructure of Open Screening Platforms for Chemical Biology) 
- EuroBioImaging (biomedical imaging infrastructure) 
- INFRAFRONTIER (European research infrastructure for the development, phenotyping, archiving
   and distribution of mammalian models) 
- INSTRUCT (Integrated Structural Biology Infrastructure) 
- MIRRI (Microbial Resource Research Infrastructure) 

... ERA-Nets (European research Area Network):
- ERA-CVD (Cardiovascular Diseases) 
- ERARE3 (Rare Diseases)
- EuroNanoMed3 (nanomedicine)
- NEURON (Neuroscience research)
- TRANSCAN2 (Cancer)  

... JPIs (Joint Programming Initiative):
- AMR (Antimicrobial Resistance)
- HDHL (Healthy Diet for healthy Life)
- JPND (Neurodegenerative Disease) 

... other initiatives:
- EPCTRI (European Paediatrics Clinical Trials Research Infrastructure)
- EURORDIS (Rare Diseases Patients organisation) 
- OECI (Organisation of European Cancer Institutes) 
- ROAMER (A Roadmap for mental Health Research in Europe) 
- TRANSVAC (European Network of Vaccine Research and Development)   



MIUF Survey

A questionnaire was created to collect the needs and expectations of medical research communities and overall users of RIs. The responses have been collected and analysed and will be used as input to gather recommendations for continuous improvement and development of new, transversal services.
The main findings of the survey are:

  1. Overall, RIs are acknowledged as scientific service providers. The added value for users in collaborating with RIs was greatly appreciated by most of the survey participants
  2. The  scientific  coverage  and  the  quality  of  services  provided  by  RIs  were  found consistent with the expectations and the needs of the medical research community
  3. The  access  procedures  were  found  to  be  rather  efficient  and  the  websites  were evaluated as quite informative
  4. Suggestions  were  made  to  improve  the  dissemination  of  information  related  to services available as well as the visibility of RIs both at national and international level

The complete report can be downloaded here.