Cargando…
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
OBJECTIVE: The 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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10180594/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37172046 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270616 |
_version_ | 1785041371864760320 |
---|---|
author | Gagliardi, Anna R. Chen, Rob H. C. Boury, Himani Albert, Mathieu Chow, James DaCosta, Ralph S. Hoffman, Michael Keshavarz, Behrang Kontos, Pia Liu, Jenny McAndrews, Mary Pat Protze, Stephanie |
author_facet | Gagliardi, Anna R. Chen, Rob H. C. Boury, Himani Albert, Mathieu Chow, James DaCosta, Ralph S. Hoffman, Michael Keshavarz, Behrang Kontos, Pia Liu, Jenny McAndrews, Mary Pat Protze, Stephanie |
author_sort | Gagliardi, Anna R. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: The 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. METHODS: We 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. RESULTS: We 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. CONCLUSIONS: Our 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10180594 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101805942023-05-13 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 Gagliardi, Anna R. Chen, Rob H. C. Boury, Himani Albert, Mathieu Chow, James DaCosta, Ralph S. Hoffman, Michael Keshavarz, Behrang Kontos, Pia Liu, Jenny McAndrews, Mary Pat Protze, Stephanie PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVE: The 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. METHODS: We 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. RESULTS: We 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. CONCLUSIONS: Our 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. Public Library of Science 2023-05-12 /pmc/articles/PMC10180594/ /pubmed/37172046 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270616 Text en © 2023 Gagliardi et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Gagliardi, Anna R. Chen, Rob H. C. Boury, Himani Albert, Mathieu Chow, James DaCosta, Ralph S. Hoffman, Michael Keshavarz, Behrang Kontos, Pia Liu, Jenny McAndrews, Mary Pat Protze, Stephanie 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 |
title | 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 |
title_full | 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 |
title_fullStr | 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 |
title_full_unstemmed | 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 |
title_short | 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 |
title_sort | 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 |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10180594/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37172046 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270616 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gagliardiannar doracompliantmeasuresofresearchqualityandimpacttoassesstheperformanceofresearchersinbiomedicalinstitutionsreviewofpublishedresearchinternationalbestpracticeanddelphisurvey AT chenrobhc doracompliantmeasuresofresearchqualityandimpacttoassesstheperformanceofresearchersinbiomedicalinstitutionsreviewofpublishedresearchinternationalbestpracticeanddelphisurvey AT bouryhimani doracompliantmeasuresofresearchqualityandimpacttoassesstheperformanceofresearchersinbiomedicalinstitutionsreviewofpublishedresearchinternationalbestpracticeanddelphisurvey AT albertmathieu doracompliantmeasuresofresearchqualityandimpacttoassesstheperformanceofresearchersinbiomedicalinstitutionsreviewofpublishedresearchinternationalbestpracticeanddelphisurvey AT chowjames doracompliantmeasuresofresearchqualityandimpacttoassesstheperformanceofresearchersinbiomedicalinstitutionsreviewofpublishedresearchinternationalbestpracticeanddelphisurvey AT dacostaralphs doracompliantmeasuresofresearchqualityandimpacttoassesstheperformanceofresearchersinbiomedicalinstitutionsreviewofpublishedresearchinternationalbestpracticeanddelphisurvey AT hoffmanmichael doracompliantmeasuresofresearchqualityandimpacttoassesstheperformanceofresearchersinbiomedicalinstitutionsreviewofpublishedresearchinternationalbestpracticeanddelphisurvey AT keshavarzbehrang doracompliantmeasuresofresearchqualityandimpacttoassesstheperformanceofresearchersinbiomedicalinstitutionsreviewofpublishedresearchinternationalbestpracticeanddelphisurvey AT kontospia doracompliantmeasuresofresearchqualityandimpacttoassesstheperformanceofresearchersinbiomedicalinstitutionsreviewofpublishedresearchinternationalbestpracticeanddelphisurvey AT liujenny doracompliantmeasuresofresearchqualityandimpacttoassesstheperformanceofresearchersinbiomedicalinstitutionsreviewofpublishedresearchinternationalbestpracticeanddelphisurvey AT mcandrewsmarypat doracompliantmeasuresofresearchqualityandimpacttoassesstheperformanceofresearchersinbiomedicalinstitutionsreviewofpublishedresearchinternationalbestpracticeanddelphisurvey AT protzestephanie doracompliantmeasuresofresearchqualityandimpacttoassesstheperformanceofresearchersinbiomedicalinstitutionsreviewofpublishedresearchinternationalbestpracticeanddelphisurvey |