Lewison Grant, Thornicroft Graham, Szmukler George, Tansella Michele
Evaluametrics Ltd., Kew, Richmond, Surrey and School of Library, Archive and Information Studies, University College London, London SE5 8AF, UK.
Br J Psychiatry. 2007 Apr;190:314-8. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.106.024919.
Use of bibliometric assessments of research quality is growing worldwide. So far, a narrow range of metrics have been applied across the whole of biomedical research. Without specific sets of metrics, appropriate to each sub-field of research, biased assessments of research excellence are possible.
To discuss the measures used to evaluate the merits of psychiatric biomedical research, and to propose a new approach using a multidimensional selection of metrics appropriate to each particular field of medical research.
Three steps: (a) a definition of scientific 'domains', (b) translating these into 'filters' to identify publications from bibliometric databases, leading to (c) the creation of standardised measures of merit.
We propose using: (a) established metrics such as impact factors and citation indices, (b) new derived measures such as the 'worldscale' score, and (c) new indicators based on journal peer esteem, impact on clinical practice, medical education and health policy.
No single index or metric can be used as a fair rating to compare nations, universities, research groups, or individual investigators across biomedical science. Rather, we propose using a multidimensional profile composed of a carefully selected array of such metrics.
研究质量的文献计量评估在全球范围内的应用日益广泛。到目前为止，在整个生物医学研究中应用的指标范围较窄。如果没有适用于每个研究子领域的特定指标集，就有可能对卓越研究进行有偏差的评估。
讨论用于评估精神科生物医学研究价值的措施，并提出一种新方法，即使用适合医学研究每个特定领域的多维指标选择。
分三步：(a) 定义科学“领域”，(b) 将这些领域转化为“筛选条件”，以从文献计量数据库中识别出版物，从而 (c) 创建标准化的价值衡量标准。
我们建议使用：(a) 诸如影响因子和引用指数等既定指标，(b) 诸如“世界规模”分数等新的派生指标，以及 (c) 基于期刊同行认可度、对临床实践、医学教育和卫生政策影响的新指标。
没有单一的指数或指标可以作为公平的评级来比较生物医学领域的不同国家、大学、研究团队或个体研究者。相反，我们建议使用由精心挑选的此类指标组成的多维概况。
