Misleading Rankings of Research in Business

2009 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 352-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sönke Albers
Keyword(s):  
Research Productivity ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
Clear Indication ◽  
Business Research ◽  
Economics Journals

Abstract The attempts by Schulze and colleagues and Ritzberger to develop a joint ranking of journals for economics and business research are critically evaluated. Their lists suggest that the quality of top business journals is substantially lower than that of many economics journals. If, however, the authors of these lists do not want to claim a general superiority of one discipline (economics) over another one (business), they should give a clear indication that these lists are only applicable for economists. This warning appears to be necessary because Fabel and colleagues derive a ranking of universities and departments with respect to research productivity in business from the business research discriminating list RbR_IMP by Schulze and colleagues. While Diamantopoulos and Wagner already show a lack of face validity of these results, this article explains that the reason for this lies not only in the downgrading and also biased weighting of the business journals across subfields, but even more importantly, in a remarkable incompleteness of the database.

A Model of the Academic Review Process with Informed Authors

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 865-889 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ofer H. Azar
Keyword(s):  
Research Productivity ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Noisy Signal ◽  
Average Quality ◽  
Academic Review ◽  
Journal Policies

Abstract Research on the academic review process may help to improve research productivity. The article presents a model of the review process in a top journal, in which authors know their paper’s quality whereas referees obtain a noisy signal about quality. Increased signal noisiness, lower submission costs and more published papers all reduce the average quality of published papers in the journal. The model allows analyzing how the submission cost, the accuracy of referees and the number of published papers affect additional equilibrium characteristics. Implications of the model for journal policies are also discussed.

scholarly journals Economic journals in the optics of scientometrics

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-215
Author(s):  
А.Ya. Rubinstein ◽  
◽  
N.A. Burakov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Citation Rate ◽  
Basic Unit ◽  
Public Examination ◽  
Scientific Authority ◽  
Analysis Methodology ◽  
Science Index ◽  
Multiway Data Analysis ◽  
Economic Journals ◽  
Economics Journals

The paper discusses the ranking of journals based on the alternative to Scientometrics, where the basic unit of information is not the citation rate of publications, but their qualitative characteristics, obtained on the basis of the regular sociological survey of the economists’ community conducted by the “Journal of NEA” in 2020. The empirical data obtained made it possible to determine the size of the audience of each journal. The paper shows that the size of the journals’ readership has a direct impact on the respondents’ assessments of the quality of publications and scientific authority of the journals. The ranking of economics journals by each particular criterion — “Interest in Journal Publications”, “Scientific Level of Journals” and “Public Prestige of Journals” is presented. Use of the “Multiway data analysis” methodology has provided measurement not only of particular criteria that reflect hidden relations between their characteristics, but also determined the weight function of their aggregation in the aggregate ranking of journals — the “Ranking-2020”. The article also contains a comparative analysis of ranking the journals on the basis of the “Rating-2020” and re-rating of the RSCI and criticizes RSCI criteria “Science Index” and “Public Examination”.

scholarly journals Individual recovery of health-related quality of life during 18 months post-burn using a retrospective pre-burn measurement: an exploratory study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elise Boersma-van Dam ◽  
Rens van de Schoot ◽  
Helma W. C. Hofland ◽  
Iris M. Engelhard ◽  
Nancy E. E. Van Loey
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
Burn Severity ◽  
Ptsd Symptoms ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Population Norms ◽  
Level Of Functioning ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related

Abstract Purpose This study explored the individual trajectories of health-related quality of life (HRQL) compared to recalled pre-burn level of HRQL and investigated whether burn severity and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms increase the risk of not returning to pre-burn level of HRQL. Methods Data were obtained from 309 adult patients with burns in a multicenter study. Patients completed the EQ-5D-3L questionnaire with a Cognition bolt-on shortly after hospital admission, which included a recalled pre-injury measure, and, again, at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months post-burn. Burn severity was indicated by the number of surgeries, and PTSD symptoms were assessed with the IES-R at three months post-burn. Pre- and post-injury HRQL were compared to norm populations. Results Recalled pre-injury HRQL was higher than population norms and HRQL at 18 months post-burn was comparable to population norms. Compared to the pre-injury level of functioning, four HRQL patterns of change over time were established: Stable, Recovery, Deterioration, and Growth. In each HRQL domain, a subset of patients did not return to their recalled pre-injury levels, especially with regard to Pain, Anxiety/Depression, and Cognition. Patients with more severe burns or PTSD symptoms were less likely to return to pre-injury level of functioning within 18 months post-burn. Conclusion This study identified four patterns of individual change. Patients with more severe injuries and PTSD symptoms were more at risk of not returning to their recalled pre-injury HRQL. This study supports the face validity of using a recalled pre-burn HRQL score as a reference point to monitor HRQL after burns.

Pilot of a novel theoretically derived intervention for cancer-related anxiety with patients with advanced or recurred disease

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Leah Curran ◽  
Louise Sharpe ◽  
Phyllis Butow
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Retention Rates ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Early Stage Disease ◽  
Fear Of Progression ◽  
Traumatic Symptoms

Abstract Background: Treatments for cancer-related anxiety show modest benefits, but most have been trialled in patients with early stage disease or patients who are currently disease free. However, many patients with cancer have incurable disease, or their disease is slowly progressing or likely to recur. Treating anxiety in the context of realistic threat and ongoing uncertainty is particularly challenging. Based on a theoretical model of cancer-related anxiety, we developed a transdiagnostic intervention for patients with advanced or recurred disease who are experiencing clinically significant anxieties. The intervention was a novel integration of traditional and contemporary CBT. Aims: To evaluate the feasibility, acceptability and preliminary efficacy of the intervention in a pilot with patients with advanced or recurred cancer. Method: Twelve patients with advanced or recurred cancer, who were experiencing anxiety, participated. Feasibility and acceptability were assessed with participant’s ratings and adherence and retention rates. Psychological outcomes (anxiety, traumatic symptoms, fear of progression, depression, death anxiety and quality of life) were assessed pre-intervention, post-intervention and at 2-month follow-up. Results: Eleven of the 12 participants completed at least five therapy sessions of whom eight completed all nine sessions. Participants rated the intervention as having excellent face validity. Post-intervention, statistically significant improvements were demonstrated for anxiety, traumatic symptoms, fear of progression, depression and quality of life. These improvements were maintained at follow-up for anxiety, traumatic symptoms and depression. Conclusions: This pilot provides preliminary evidence for the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of the novel intervention for cancer-related anxiety in the context of advanced disease.

scholarly journals Quality of informed consent documents among US. hospitals: a cross-sectional study

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. e033299
Author(s):  
Erica S Spatz ◽  
Haikun Bao ◽  
Jeph Herrin ◽  
Vrunda Desai ◽  
Sriram Ramanan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
Fee For Service ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Consent Document ◽  
Informed Consent Document ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Quality Threshold

ObjectiveTo determine whether informed consent for surgical procedures performed in US hospitals meet a minimum standard of quality, we developed and tested a quality measure of informed consent documents.DesignRetrospective observational study of informed consent documents.Setting25 US hospitals, diverse in size and geographical region.CohortAmong Medicare fee-for-service patients undergoing elective procedures in participating hospitals, we assessed the informed consent documents associated with these procedures. We aimed to review 100 qualifying procedures per hospital; the selected sample was representative of the procedure types performed at each hospital.Primary outcomeThe outcome was hospital quality of informed consent documents, assessed by two independent raters using an eight-item instrument previously developed for this measure and scored on a scale of 0–20, with 20 representing the highest quality. The outcome was reported as the mean hospital document score and the proportion of documents meeting a quality threshold of 10. Reliability of the hospital score was determined based on subsets of randomly selected documents; face validity was assessed using stakeholder feedback.ResultsAmong 2480 informed consent documents from 25 hospitals, mean hospital scores ranged from 0.6 (95% CI 0.3 to 0.9) to 10.8 (95% CI 10.0 to 11.6). Most hospitals had at least one document score at least 10 out of 20 points, but only two hospitals had >50% of their documents score above a 10-point threshold. The Spearman correlation of the measures score was 0.92. Stakeholders reported that the measure was important, though some felt it did not go far enough to assess informed consent quality.ConclusionAll hospitals performed poorly on a measure of informed consent document quality, though there was some variation across hospitals. Measuring the quality of hospital’s informed consent documents can serve as a first step in driving attention to gaps in quality.

EORTC QLQ CR-29 evaluation in 500 patients with colorectal cancer.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 429-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
José Pedro Carvalho Moreira da Silva
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Global Health ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Neoadjuvant Treatment ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Disease Recurrence ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
Patient Acceptability

429 Background: Colorectal cancer represents the 4th most frequent cancer in the world and is the 2nd leading cause of death due to cancer. This disease has a negative impact in the Quality of Life (QoL), due to its associated symptoms and due to the used treatments (surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy). Therefore it is fundamental to evaluate and assure a good quality of life of this patients and define the best QoL instrument in Colorectal cancer. Methods: Type of study: Transversal study The main objective was: validate for Portuguese population CR29 instrument. The QLQ-CR29 was administered with the QLQ-C30, core questionnaire, to 500 portuguese patients. Questionnaire scaling and reliability were established and clinical and psychometric validity examined. Patient acceptability and understanding were assessed with a debriefing questionnaire. Results: 57.4% (287) are male with a median of age of 66,67 years (Min.: 34 e Máx.: 88), 55.2% had rectal cancer (35.7% were Stage III disease at diagnosis. 46.4% had adjuvant and 27.4% had neoadjuvant treatment. The mean value of the QLQ-C30 Global Health Status was 58,75. The CR29 Multi-trait scaling analyses and face validity refined the module to four scales assessing urinary frequency, faecal seepage, stool consistency and body image and single items assessing other common problems following treatment for colorectal cancer identifying different groups of patients. High scores of cognitive and social functioning scales (QLQ C30), Subscale Corporal Image and the functional item Female Sexual function (QLQ-CR29) were related with good QoL. Low scores of Emotional Functioning subscales (QLQ C30) and Anxiety (QLQ-CR29), were related with poor QoL. A multivariable analysis reveals that sex, scholarship, marital status, distance between home and hospital and disease recurrence affect significantly the global health score. Conclusions: QLQ-CR29 Scale did not correlate with QLQ-C30 scales, demonstrating construct validity and it is a good instruments to identify a poor QoL in patients with colorectal cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document