首页> 外文期刊>Health Research Policy and Systems >Institutional operating figures in basic and applied sciences: Scientometric analysis of quantitative output benchmarking
【24h】

Institutional operating figures in basic and applied sciences: Scientometric analysis of quantitative output benchmarking

机译:基础科学和应用科学中的机构运营数据:定量产出基准的科学计量分析

获取原文
       

摘要

Background Institutional operating figures and benchmarking systems are important features for the implementation of efficacy in basic and applied sciences. They are needed for research evaluation and funding policy. However, the current policy settings for research evaluation urgently need review since there may be imbalances present in many areas. Methods The present study assessed benchmarking of research output. By the use of large data bases research output was categorized and analyzed. Specific areas of major research activity were identified by comparing publication density on different organ systems and inter- and intrafield comparison was performed for selected countries. Results Novel density-equalizing mappings were constructed that illustrate trends of publication activity and identify subsets of major interest in a total of 5,527,558 published items. A dichotomy was present between Western countries such as the US, UK or Germany and Asian countries such as Japan, China or South Korea concerning research focuses. Conclusion The present study is the first large scale analysis of global research activity and output over the last 50 years. The presently described assessment of operating figures at the national and international level can be used to identify single areas of research that are heavily focused. Further research on qualitative output benchmarking is needed to improve current policy settings for research evaluation.
机译:背景机构操作数据和基准系统是在基础科学和应用科学中实现功效的重要特征。研究评估和资助政策需要它们。但是,当前的研究评估政策设置迫切需要审查,因为许多领域可能存在不平衡现象。方法本研究评估了研究成果的基准。利用大型数据库对研究成果进行分类和分析。通过比较不同器官系统上的出版物密度,确定了主要研究活动的特定领域,并对选定的国家进行了田间和田间比较。结果构建了新颖的密度均衡映射,可说明出版活动的趋势并在总共5,527,558个出版项目中识别出主要关注的子集。美国,英国或德国等西方国家与日本,中国或韩国等亚洲国家之间在研究重点上存在分歧。结论本研究是近50年来全球研究活动和产出的首次大规模分析。目前在国家和国际层面对运营数据进行的评估可用于确定重点突出的单个研究领域。需要对定性产出基准进行进一步研究,以改善当前的研究评估政策设置。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号