DORA-compliant measures of research quality and impact to assess the performance of researchers in biomedical institutions: Review of published research, international best practice and Delphi survey

被引：5

作者：

Gagliardi, Anna ^{[1
]}

Chen, Rob H. C. ^{[2
]}

Boury, Himani S. ^{[1
]}

Albert, Mathieu ^{[3
]}

Chow, James ^{[4
]}

DaCosta, Ralph ^{[5
]}

Hoffman, Michael ^{[5
]}

Keshavarz, Behrang ^{[6
]}

Kontos, Pia ^{[6
]}

Liu, Jenny ^{[7
]}

McAndrews, Mary Pat ^{[7
]}

Protze, Stephanie ^{[8
]}

机构：

[1] Univ Hlth Network, Toronto Gen Hosp Res Inst, Toronto, ON, Canada

[2] Univ Hlth Network, UHN Res Solut & Serv, Toronto, ON, Canada

[3] Univ Hlth Network, Inst Educ Res, Toronto, ON, Canada

[4] Univ Hlth Network, Techna Inst, Toronto, ON, Canada

[5] Univ Hlth Network, Princess Margaret Canc Ctr, Toronto, ON, Canada

[6] Univ Hlth Network, Toronto Rehabil Inst KITE, Toronto, ON, Canada

[7] Univ Hlth Network, Krembil Res Inst, Toronto, ON, Canada

[8] Univ Hlth Network, McEwen Stem Cell Inst, Toronto, ON, Canada

来源：

PLOS ONE | 2023年 / 18卷 / 05期

关键词：

EXPERIENCES; GUIDANCE; CARE;

D O I：

10.1371/journal.pone.0270616

中图分类号：

O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];

学科分类号：

07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;

摘要：

ObjectiveThe San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) advocates for assessing biomedical research quality and impact, yet academic organizations continue to employ traditional measures such as Journal Impact Factor. We aimed to identify and prioritize measures for assessing research quality and impact. MethodsWe conducted a review of published and grey literature to identify measures of research quality and impact, which we included in an online survey. We assembled a panel of researchers and research leaders, and conducted a two-round Delphi survey to prioritize measures rated as high (rated 6 or 7 by >= 80% of respondents) or moderate (rated 6 or 7 by >= 50% of respondents) importance. ResultsWe identified 50 measures organized in 8 domains: relevance of the research program, challenges to research program, or productivity, team/open science, funding, innovations, publications, other dissemination, and impact. Rating of measures by 44 panelists (60%) in Round One and 24 (55%) in Round Two of a Delphi survey resulted in consensus on the high importance of 5 measures: research advances existing knowledge, research plan is innovative, an independent body of research (or fundamental role) supported by peer-reviewed research funding, research outputs relevant to discipline, and quality of the content of publications. Five measures achieved consensus on moderate importance: challenges to research productivity, potential to improve health or healthcare, team science, collaboration, and recognition by professional societies or academic bodies. There was high congruence between researchers and research leaders across disciplines. ConclusionsOur work contributes to the field by identifying 10 DORA-compliant measures of research quality and impact, a more comprehensive and explicit set of measures than prior efforts. Research is needed to identify strategies to overcome barriers of use of DORA-compliant measures, and to "de-implement" traditional measures that do not uphold DORA principles yet are still in use.

引用

页数：16