scholarly journals Evidence-based Nomenclature and Taxonomy of Research Impact Indicators

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 33-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mudassar Arsalan ◽  
Omar Mubin ◽  
Abdullah Al Mahmud
Keyword(s):  
Policy Development ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Development Economic ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
Scientific Disciplines ◽  
Research Impact Assessment ◽  
Impact Indicators ◽  
Environment Sustainability ◽  
The Impact

AbstractPurposeThis study aims to classify research impact indicators based on their characteristics and scope. A concept of evidence-based nomenclature of research impact (RI) indicator has been introduced for generalization and transformation of scope.Design/methodology/approchLiterature was collected related to the research impact assessment. It was categorized in conceptual and applied case studies. One hundred and nineteen indicators were selected to prepare classification and nomenclature. The nomenclature was developed based on the principle—“every indicator is a contextual-function to explain the impact”. Every indicator was disintegrated into three parts, i.e. Function, Domain, and Target Areas.FindingsThe main functions of research impact indicators express improvement (63%), recognition (23%), and creation/development (14%). The focus of research impact indicators in literature is more towards the academic domain (59%) whereas the environment/sustainability domain is least considered (4%). As a result, research impact related to the research aspects is felt the most (29%). Other target areas include system and services, methods and procedures, networking, planning, policy development, economic aspects and commercialisation, etc.Research limitationsThis research applied to 119 research impact indicators. However, the inclusion of additional indicators may change the result.Practical implicationsThe plausible effect of nomenclature is a better organization of indicators with appropriate tags of functions, domains, and target areas. This approach also provides a framework of indicator generalization and transformation. Therefore, similar indicators can be applied in other fields and target areas with modifications.Originality/valueThe development of nomenclature for research impact indicators is a novel approach in scientometrics. It is developed on the same line as presented in other scientific disciplines, where fundamental objects need to classify on common standards such as biology and chemistry.

scholarly journals Brain drain and brain gain in Russia: Analyzing international migration of researchers by discipline using Scopus bibliometric data 1996–2020

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Subbotin ◽  
Samin Aref
Keyword(s):  
Brain Drain ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
Donor Country ◽  
International Mobility ◽  
Science System ◽  
Migration Rates ◽  
Net Migration ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
Five Disciplines ◽  
The Impact

AbstractWe study international mobility in academia, with a focus on the migration of published researchers to and from Russia. Using an exhaustive set of over 2.4 million Scopus publications, we analyze all researchers who have published with a Russian affiliation address in Scopus-indexed sources in 1996–2020. The migration of researchers is observed through the changes in their affiliation addresses, which altered their mode countries of affiliation across different years. While only 5.2% of these researchers were internationally mobile, they accounted for a substantial proportion of citations. Our estimates of net migration rates indicate that while Russia was a donor country in the late 1990s and early 2000s, it has experienced a relatively balanced circulation of researchers in more recent years. These findings suggest that the current trends in scholarly migration in Russia could be better framed as brain circulation, rather than as brain drain. Overall, researchers emigrating from Russia outnumbered and outperformed researchers immigrating to Russia. Our analysis on the subject categories of publication venues shows that in the past 25 years, Russia has, overall, suffered a net loss in most disciplines, and most notably in the five disciplines of neuroscience, decision sciences, mathematics, biochemistry, and pharmacology. We demonstrate the robustness of our main findings under random exclusion of data and changes in numeric parameters. Our substantive results shed light on new aspects of international mobility in academia, and on the impact of this mobility on a national science system, which have direct implications for policy development. Methodologically, our novel approach to handling big data can be adopted as a framework of analysis for studying scholarly migration in other countries.

scholarly journals The challenge of bringing evidence in decision-making for public health emergencies: can preparedness reach out to HTA?

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
C E Chronaki ◽  
A Miglietta
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Resource Planning ◽  
Public Health Emergency ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Public Health Emergencies ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Evidence Based Decision Making

Abstract Evidence-based decision-making is central to public health. Implementing evidence-informed actions is most challenging during a public health emergency as in an epidemic, when time is limited, scientific uncertainties and political pressures tend to be high, and reliable data is typically lacking. The process of including data for preparedness and training for evidence-based decision making in public health emergencies is not systematic and is complicated by many barriers as the absence of common digital tools and approaches for resource planning and update of response plans. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is used with the aim to improve the quality and efficiency of public health interventions and to make healthcare systems more sustainable. Many of today's public health crises are also cross-border, and countries need to collaborate in a systematic and standardized way in order to enhance interoperability to share data and to plan coordinated response. Digital health tools have an important role to play in this setting, facilitating use of knowledge about the population that can potentially affected by the crisis within and across regional and national borders. To strengthen the impact of scientific evidence on decision-making for public health emergency preparedness and response, it is necessary to better define and align mechanisms through which interdisciplinary evidence feeds into decision-making processes during public health emergencies and the context in which these mechanisms operate. Activities and policy development in the HTA network could inform this process. The objective of this presentation is to identify barriers for evidence-based decision making during public health emergencies and discuss how standardization in digital health and HTA processes may help overcome these barriers leading to more effective coordinated and evidence-based public health emergency response.

Introduction: critical reflections on research impact

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Katherine E. Smith ◽  
Justyna Bandola-Gill ◽  
Nasar Meer ◽  
Ellen Stewart ◽  
Richard Watermeyer
Keyword(s):  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Empirical Investigation ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Research Impact Assessment ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Critical Reflections

This chapter briefly explains what we mean by ‘the impact agenda’ and what the UK approach to research impact assessment involves. This chapter also makes the case for why an empirical investigation of the recent changes associated with research impact assessment is required and provides key definitions and an overview of the rest of the book.

A Study on Methodologies for Research Impact Assessment: Responses of the UK Research Councils to the Warry Report

2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 393-397 ◽  
Author(s):  
André Luiz de Campos
Keyword(s):  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Impact Studies ◽  
Research Impact Assessment ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Research Councils ◽  
The Impact

The experience of the UK Research Councils in assessing the impacts of their research funding is discussed, including a report on the findings of research which reviewed the impact studies implemented by the Research Councils. The response of the Councils to the challenge of demonstrating the impacts of their funding and the main methodologies used are presented and the implications of both for the Research Councils and policy makers elsewhere are outlined.

scholarly journals Research Impact Through Matchmaking (RITM): Why and How to Connect Researchers and Practitioners

2019 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 265-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Seth Levine
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Organizational Diversity ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
The Impact ◽  
New Evidence

ABSTRACTResearchers and practitioners increasingly want to learn from one another and work together to solve problems. This article presents results from a new evidence-based approach for connecting them, called Research Impact Through Matchmaking (RITM). This method leverages research on organizational diversity to initiate new relationships between diverse people. The article describes the method and presents data from 37 new connections between practitioners working at nonprofits and social scientists. To my knowledge, this is the first dataset describing reasons why a large variety of nonprofit practitioners value social science research. I also document the impact of these matches. Overall, this article provides actionable guidance for those who want to initiate their own new connections (i.e., match themselves) and/or to broker new connections between others.

scholarly journals Graphical representation of the body of the evidence: the essentials for understanding the evidence gap map approach

Medwave ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (03) ◽  
pp. e8164-e8164
Author(s):  
Bastián Schuller-Martínez ◽  
Nicolás Meza ◽  
Javier Pérez-Bracchiglione ◽  
Juan Víctor Ariel Franco ◽  
Cristóbal Loezar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Policy Development ◽  
Graphical Representation ◽  
Clinical Epidemiology ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
The Body ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
Outcome Framework ◽  
Objective Evidence

The significant increase in scientific evidence production has led to the creation of methods to facilitate evidence review and synthesis. This has turned, this has resulted in the emergence of different designs depending on the review’s objective. Evidence gap maps constitute a novel approach for literature review. They are thematic collections of a broad field of evidence, using a systematic search strategy that identifies gaps in knowledge and engages, early on, the target audience to design a friendly graphic product. Evidence maps are a tool to be considered in the roster of options available for research funders in that they are particularly useful for evidence-based decision-making and evidence-based policy development. The most commonly used formats to display the findings of evidence gap search designs are the bubble plot and the intervention-outcome framework. This article corresponds to the sixth of a series of narrative reviews on general topics of biostatistics and clinical epidemiology. The purpose of this review is to describe the principal features of evidence gap maps, highlighting their main objectives and utility, exploring the most commonly used mapping formats, and comparing this approach with other evidence synthesis designs.

The Impact Agenda

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Smith ◽  
Justyna Bandola-Gill ◽  
Nasar Meer ◽  
Ellen Stewart ◽  
Richard Watermeyer
Keyword(s):  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Empirical Examination ◽  
Societal Benefit ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Research Impact Assessment ◽  
Academic Practices ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

As international interest in promoting and assessing the impact of research grows, this book examines the ensuing controversies, consequences and challenges. It places a particular emphasis on learning from experiences in the UK, since this is the country at the forefront of a range of new approaches to incentivising, monitoring and rewarding research impact achievements. The book aims to understand the origins and rationale for these changes and to critically assess their consequences for academic practice. Combining a review of existing literature with a range of new qualitative data (from interviews, focus groups and documentary analysis), The Impact Agenda is unique in providing a comprehensive, cross-disciplinary empirical examination of the ways in which various forms of research impact assessment are shaping academic practices. Although the primary focus of the book is on the UK, the book also considers the different approaches that other countries with an interest in research impact are taking (notably Australia, Canada and the Netherlands). While noting the benefits that the increasing emphasis on outward facing work is bringing, the book draws attention to a wide range of challenges and controversies associated with research impact assessment and, in particular, with the UK’s chosen approach. It concludes by using the insights in the book to propose an alternative, more theoretically robust approach to incentivising and rewarding efforts to undertake and use academic research for societal benefit.

scholarly journals Evaluating cancer research impact: lessons and examples from existing reviews on approaches to research impact assessment

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine R. Hanna ◽  
Kathleen A. Boyd ◽  
Robert J. Jones
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Research ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Impact Evaluation ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Review Articles ◽  
Research Impact Assessment ◽  
Literature Reviews ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Performing cancer research relies on substantial financial investment, and contributions in time and effort from patients. It is therefore important that this research has real life impacts which are properly evaluated. The optimal approach to cancer research impact evaluation is not clear. The aim of this study was to undertake a systematic review of review articles that describe approaches to impact assessment, and to identify examples of cancer research impact evaluation within these reviews. Methods In total, 11 publication databases and the grey literature were searched to identify review articles addressing the topic of approaches to research impact assessment. Information was extracted on methods for data collection and analysis, impact categories and frameworks used for the purposes of evaluation. Empirical examples of impact assessments of cancer research were identified from these literature reviews. Approaches used in these examples were appraised, with a reflection on which methods would be suited to cancer research  impact evaluation going forward. Results In total, 40 literature reviews were identified. Important methods to collect and analyse data for impact assessments were surveys, interviews and documentary analysis. Key categories of impact spanning the reviews were summarised, and a list of frameworks commonly used for impact assessment was generated. The Payback Framework was most often described. Fourteen examples of impact evaluation for cancer research were identified. They ranged from those assessing the impact of a national, charity-funded portfolio of cancer research to the clinical practice impact of a single trial. A set of recommendations for approaching cancer research impact assessment was generated. Conclusions Impact evaluation can demonstrate if and why conducting cancer research  is worthwhile. Using a mixed methods, multi-category assessment organised within a framework, will provide a robust evaluation, but the ability to perform this type of assessment may be constrained by time and resources. Whichever approach is used, easily measured, but inappropriate metrics should be avoided. Going forward, dissemination of the results of cancer research impact assessments will allow the cancer research community to learn how to conduct these evaluations.

scholarly journals Impact through Engagement

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Nelson ◽  
Frances Burns
Keyword(s):  
Administrative Data ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Research Partnership ◽  
Public Benefit ◽  
Academic Knowledge ◽  
Key Stakeholders

BackgroundThe Administrative Data Research Centre Northern Ireland (ADRC NI) is a research partnership between Queen’s University Belfast and Ulster University to facilitate access to linked administrative data for research purposes for public benefit and for evidence-based policy development. This requires a social licence extended by publics which is maintained by a robust approach to engagement and involvement. ApproachPublic engagement is central to the ADRC NI’s approach to research. Research impact is pursued and secured through robust engagement and co-production of research with publics and key stakeholders. This is done by focusing on data subjects (the cohort of people whose lives make up the datasets, placing value on experts by experience outside of academic knowledge, and working with public(s) as key data advocates, through project steering committees and targeted events with stakeholders. The work is led by a dedicated Public Engagement, Communications and Impact Manager. DiscussionWhile there are strengths and weaknesses to the ADRC NI approach, examples of successful partnerships and clear pathways to impact demonstrate its utility and ability to amplify the positive impact of administrative data research. Working with publics as data use becomes more ubiquitous in a post-COVID-19 world will become more critical. ADRC NI’s model is a potential way forward.

scholarly journals Engaging with research impact assessment for an environmental science case study

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirstie A. Fryirs ◽  
Gary J. Brierley ◽  
Thom Dixon
Keyword(s):  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Science ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Research Field ◽  
Rating Systems ◽  
Research Impact Assessment ◽  
Impact Pathway ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Impact assessment is embedded in many national and international research rating systems. Most applications use the Research Impact Pathway to track inputs, activities, outputs and outcomes of an invention or initiative to assess impact beyond scholarly contributions to an academic research field (i.e., benefits to environment, society, economy and culture). Existing approaches emphasise easy to attribute ‘hard’ impacts, and fail to include a range of ‘soft’ impacts that are less easy to attribute, yet are often a dominant part of the impact mix. Here, we develop an inclusive 3-part impact mapping approach. We demonstrate its application using an environmental initiative.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document