| Title |
Research impact: a narrative review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12916-016-0620-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors | |
| Abstract |
Impact occurs when research generates benefits (health, economic, cultural) in addition to building the academic knowledge base. Its mechanisms are complex and reflect the multiple ways in which knowledge is generated and utilised. Much progress has been made in measuring both the outcomes of research and the processes and activities through which these are achieved, though the measurement of impact is not without its critics. We review the strengths and limitations of six established approaches (Payback, Research Impact Framework, Canadian Academy of Health Sciences, monetisation, societal impact assessment, UK Research Excellence Framework) plus recently developed and largely untested ones (including metrics and electronic databases). We conclude that (1) different approaches to impact assessment are appropriate in different circumstances; (2) the most robust and sophisticated approaches are labour-intensive and not always feasible or affordable; (3) whilst most metrics tend to capture direct and proximate impacts, more indirect and diffuse elements of the research-impact link can and should be measured; and (4) research on research impact is a rapidly developing field with new methodologies on the horizon. |
Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 60 | 32% |
| Australia | 13 | 7% |
| United States | 11 | 6% |
| Canada | 11 | 6% |
| Spain | 5 | 3% |
| New Zealand | 4 | 2% |
| India | 3 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 3 | 2% |
| Mexico | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 22 | 12% |
| Unknown | 56 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 117 | 62% |
| Scientists | 49 | 26% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 19 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 5 | 3% |
Mendeley demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 616 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 101 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 87 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 78 | 12% |
| Other | 37 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 25 | 4% |
| Other | 116 | 18% |
| Unknown | 185 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 126 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 63 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 45 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 30 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 20 | 3% |
| Other | 129 | 21% |
| Unknown | 216 | 34% |