Suppr超能文献

卫生研究组开展的研究的社会效益和使用情况。

Societal output and use of research performed by health research groups.

机构信息

Technopolis Group the Netherlands, Herengracht 141, 1015 BH Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

出版信息

Health Res Policy Syst. 2010 Oct 12;8:30. doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-8-30.

Abstract

The last decade has seen the evaluation of health research pay more and more attention to societal use and benefits of research in addition to scientific quality, both in qualitative and quantitative ways. This paper elaborates primarily on a quantitative approach to assess societal output and use of research performed by health research groups (societal quality of research). For this reason, one of the Dutch university medical centres (i.e. the Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC)) was chosen as the subject of a pilot study, because of its mission to integrate top patient care with medical, biomedical and healthcare research and education. All research departments were used as units of evaluation within this university medical centre.The method consisted of a four-step process to reach a societal quality score per department, based on its (research) outreach to relevant societal stakeholders (the general public, healthcare professionals and the private sector). For each of these three types of stakeholders, indicators within four modes of communication were defined (knowledge production, knowledge exchange, knowledge use and earning capacity). These indicators were measured by a bottom-up approach in a qualitative way (i.e. all departments of the LUMC were asked to list all activities they would consider to be of societal relevance), after which they were converted into quantitative scores. These quantitative scores could then be compared to standardised scientific quality scores that are based on scientific publications and citations of peer-reviewed articles.Based on the LUMC pilot study, only a weak correlation was found between societal and scientific quality. This suggests that societal quality needs additional activities to be performed by health research groups and is not simply the consequence of high scientific quality. Therefore we conclude that scientific and societal evaluation should be considered to be synergistic in terms of learning for the future, accountability and advocacy.This quantitative approach to assess societal quality in a quantitative sense is based on indicators that function as proxies for society quality on different levels, based on the communication of researchers with their societal stakeholders (i.e. knowledge production, knowledge exchange and knowledge use). The methodology presented is just a first attempt to compare scientific quality scores (publication and citation scores) with societal quality scores in a quantitative way. This comparison can be used by organisations (e.g. university medical centres) in their planning and control cycle.

摘要

过去十年,除了科学质量外,人们越来越关注健康研究的评估,包括研究的社会利用和效益,无论是定性的还是定量的。本文主要阐述了一种定量方法,用于评估健康研究小组(研究的社会质量)所进行的社会产出和研究利用。出于这个原因,荷兰的一家大学医学中心(即莱顿大学医学中心(LUMC))被选为试点研究的主题,因为它的使命是将顶级患者护理与医学、生物医学和医疗保健研究和教育相结合。在这个大学医学中心内,所有研究部门都被用作评估单位。

该方法包括一个四步过程,为每个部门提供一个社会质量得分,该得分基于其(研究)与相关社会利益相关者(公众、医疗保健专业人员和私营部门)的联系。对于这三种类型的利益相关者中的每一种,都在四种沟通模式内定义了指标(知识生产、知识交流、知识利用和盈利能力)。这些指标通过自下而上的定性方法(即要求 LUMC 的所有部门列出他们认为与社会相关的所有活动)进行测量,然后将其转换为定量分数。这些定量分数然后可以与基于科学出版物和同行评议文章引用的标准化科学质量分数进行比较。

基于 LUMC 的试点研究,仅发现社会质量和科学质量之间存在微弱的相关性。这表明社会质量需要健康研究小组开展更多的活动,而不仅仅是高科学质量的结果。因此,我们得出结论,科学和社会评估应该被视为互补的,以便为未来的学习、问责制和倡导提供信息。

这种定量方法是基于研究人员与社会利益相关者沟通的指标(即知识生产、知识交流和知识利用),从不同层面上对社会质量进行定量评估。所提出的方法只是首次尝试以定量方式将科学质量分数(出版和引用分数)与社会质量分数进行比较。组织(例如大学医学中心)可以在其规划和控制周期中使用这种比较。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84bd/2964714/ce512410865c/1478-4505-8-30-1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验