Downes Amia, Novicki Emily, Howard John
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Am J Eval. 2019 Jun;40(2):177-189. doi: 10.1177/1098214018767046. Epub 2018 Apr 29.
Interest from Congress, executive branch leadership, and various other stakeholders for greater accountability in government continues to gain momentum today with government-wide efforts. However, measuring the impact of research programs has proven particularly difficult. Cause and effect linkages between research findings and changes to morbidity and mortality are difficult to prove. To address this challenge, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health program evaluators used a modified version of contribution analysis (CA) to evaluate two research programs. CA proved to be a useful framework for assessing research impact, and both programs received valuable, actionable feedback. Although there is room to further refine our approach, this was a promising step toward moving beyond bibiliometrics to more robust assessment of research impact.
如今，国会、行政部门领导层以及其他各方利益相关者对提高政府问责制的关注，随着全政府范围的努力而不断升温。然而，事实证明，衡量研究项目的影响尤为困难。研究结果与发病率和死亡率变化之间的因果联系很难得到证实。为应对这一挑战，美国国家职业安全与健康研究所的项目评估人员使用了一种改进版的贡献分析（CA）来评估两个研究项目。结果证明，贡献分析是评估研究影响的一个有用框架，两个项目都收到了有价值且可付诸行动的反馈。尽管我们的方法仍有进一步完善的空间，但这是朝着超越文献计量学、对研究影响进行更有力评估迈出的充满希望的一步。
