Iriart Jorge Alberto Bernstein, Deslandes Suely Ferreira, Martin Denise, Camargo Kenneth Rochel de, Carvalho Marilia Sá, Coeli Cláudia Medina
Instituto de Saúde Coletiva, Universidade Federal da Bahia, Salvador, Brasil.
Instituto Nacional de Saúde da Mulher, da Criança e do Adolescente Fernandes Figueira, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil.
Cad Saude Publica. 2015 Oct;31(10):2137-47. doi: 10.1590/0102-311X00065515.
The aim of this study was to discuss the limits of the quantitative evaluation model for scientific production in Public Health. An analysis of the scientific production of professors from the various subareas of Public Health was performed for 2010-2012. Distributions of the mean annual score for professors were compared according to subareas. The study estimated the likelihood that 60% of the professors in the graduate studies programs scored P50 (Very Good) or higher in their area. Professors of Epidemiology showed a significantly higher median annual score. Graduate studies programs whose faculty included at least 60% of Epidemiology professors and fewer than 10% from the subarea Social and Human Sciences in Health were significantly more likely to achieve a "Very Good" classification. The observed inequalities in scientific production between different subareas of Public Health point to the need to rethink their evaluation in order to avoid reproducing iniquities that have harmful consequences for the field's diversity.
本研究的目的是探讨公共卫生领域科研产出定量评估模型的局限性。对2010 - 2012年公共卫生各子领域教授的科研产出进行了分析。根据子领域比较了教授的年均得分分布。该研究估计了研究生课程中60%的教授在其领域得分达到P50（非常好）或更高的可能性。流行病学教授的年均得分中位数显著更高。其教师中至少60%为流行病学教授且来自健康领域社会与人文科学子领域的教师少于10%的研究生课程更有可能获得“非常好”的评级。公共卫生不同子领域之间在科研产出方面观察到的不平等表明，有必要重新思考对它们的评估，以避免重现对该领域多样性产生有害后果的不公平现象。
