Cargando…
Consensus Guidelines for Digital Scholarship in Academic Promotion
INTRODUCTION: As scholarship moves into the digital sphere, applicant and promotion and tenure (P&T) committee members lack formal guidance on evaluating the impact of digital scholarly work. The P&T process requires the appraisal of individual scholarly impact in comparison to scholars acro...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7390542/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32726260 http://dx.doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2020.4.46441 |
_version_ | 1783564470770991104 |
---|---|
author | Husain, Abbas Repanshek, Zachary Singh, Manpreet Ankel, Felix Beck-Esmay, Jennifer Cabrera, Daniel Chan, Teresa M. Cooney, Robert Gisondi, Michael Gottlieb, Michael Khadpe, Jay Repanshek, Jennifer Mason, Jessica Papanagnou, Dimitrios Riddell, Jeff Trueger, N. Seth Zaver, Fareen Brumfield, Emily |
author_facet | Husain, Abbas Repanshek, Zachary Singh, Manpreet Ankel, Felix Beck-Esmay, Jennifer Cabrera, Daniel Chan, Teresa M. Cooney, Robert Gisondi, Michael Gottlieb, Michael Khadpe, Jay Repanshek, Jennifer Mason, Jessica Papanagnou, Dimitrios Riddell, Jeff Trueger, N. Seth Zaver, Fareen Brumfield, Emily |
author_sort | Husain, Abbas |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: As scholarship moves into the digital sphere, applicant and promotion and tenure (P&T) committee members lack formal guidance on evaluating the impact of digital scholarly work. The P&T process requires the appraisal of individual scholarly impact in comparison to scholars across institutions and disciplines. As dissemination methods evolve in the digital era, we must adapt traditional P&T processes to include emerging forms of digital scholarship. METHODS: We conducted a blended, expert consensus procedure using a nominal group process to create a consensus document at the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors Academic Assembly on April 1, 2019. RESULTS: We discussed consensus guidelines for evaluation and promotion of digital scholarship with the intent to develop specific, evidence-supported recommendations to P&T committees and applicants. These recommendations included the following: demonstrate scholarship criteria; provide external evidence of impact; and include digital peer-review roles. As traditional scholarship continues to evolve within the digital realm, academic medicine should adapt how that scholarship is evaluated. P&T committees in academic medicine are at the epicenter for supporting this changing paradigm in scholarship. CONCLUSION: P&T committees can critically appraise the quality and impact of digital scholarship using specific, validated tools. Applicants for appointment and promotion should highlight and prepare their digital scholarship to specifically address quality, impact, breadth, and relevance. It is our goal to provide specific, timely guidance for both stakeholders to recognize the value of digital scholarship in advancing our field. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7390542 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73905422020-07-31 Consensus Guidelines for Digital Scholarship in Academic Promotion Husain, Abbas Repanshek, Zachary Singh, Manpreet Ankel, Felix Beck-Esmay, Jennifer Cabrera, Daniel Chan, Teresa M. Cooney, Robert Gisondi, Michael Gottlieb, Michael Khadpe, Jay Repanshek, Jennifer Mason, Jessica Papanagnou, Dimitrios Riddell, Jeff Trueger, N. Seth Zaver, Fareen Brumfield, Emily West J Emerg Med Research Publishing INTRODUCTION: As scholarship moves into the digital sphere, applicant and promotion and tenure (P&T) committee members lack formal guidance on evaluating the impact of digital scholarly work. The P&T process requires the appraisal of individual scholarly impact in comparison to scholars across institutions and disciplines. As dissemination methods evolve in the digital era, we must adapt traditional P&T processes to include emerging forms of digital scholarship. METHODS: We conducted a blended, expert consensus procedure using a nominal group process to create a consensus document at the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors Academic Assembly on April 1, 2019. RESULTS: We discussed consensus guidelines for evaluation and promotion of digital scholarship with the intent to develop specific, evidence-supported recommendations to P&T committees and applicants. These recommendations included the following: demonstrate scholarship criteria; provide external evidence of impact; and include digital peer-review roles. As traditional scholarship continues to evolve within the digital realm, academic medicine should adapt how that scholarship is evaluated. P&T committees in academic medicine are at the epicenter for supporting this changing paradigm in scholarship. CONCLUSION: P&T committees can critically appraise the quality and impact of digital scholarship using specific, validated tools. Applicants for appointment and promotion should highlight and prepare their digital scholarship to specifically address quality, impact, breadth, and relevance. It is our goal to provide specific, timely guidance for both stakeholders to recognize the value of digital scholarship in advancing our field. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine 2020-07 2020-07-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7390542/ /pubmed/32726260 http://dx.doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2020.4.46441 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Husain et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Research Publishing Husain, Abbas Repanshek, Zachary Singh, Manpreet Ankel, Felix Beck-Esmay, Jennifer Cabrera, Daniel Chan, Teresa M. Cooney, Robert Gisondi, Michael Gottlieb, Michael Khadpe, Jay Repanshek, Jennifer Mason, Jessica Papanagnou, Dimitrios Riddell, Jeff Trueger, N. Seth Zaver, Fareen Brumfield, Emily Consensus Guidelines for Digital Scholarship in Academic Promotion |
title | Consensus Guidelines for Digital Scholarship in Academic Promotion |
title_full | Consensus Guidelines for Digital Scholarship in Academic Promotion |
title_fullStr | Consensus Guidelines for Digital Scholarship in Academic Promotion |
title_full_unstemmed | Consensus Guidelines for Digital Scholarship in Academic Promotion |
title_short | Consensus Guidelines for Digital Scholarship in Academic Promotion |
title_sort | consensus guidelines for digital scholarship in academic promotion |
topic | Research Publishing |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7390542/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32726260 http://dx.doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2020.4.46441 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT husainabbas consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT repanshekzachary consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT singhmanpreet consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT ankelfelix consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT beckesmayjennifer consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT cabreradaniel consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT chanteresam consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT cooneyrobert consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT gisondimichael consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT gottliebmichael consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT khadpejay consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT repanshekjennifer consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT masonjessica consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT papanagnoudimitrios consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT riddelljeff consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT truegernseth consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT zaverfareen consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion AT brumfieldemily consensusguidelinesfordigitalscholarshipinacademicpromotion |