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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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