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

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Fischer Axel (Author), Kölzow Silvana (Author), Kreiter Carolin (Author), Scutaru Cristian (Author), Groneberg-Kloft Beatrix (Author), Quarcoo David (Author)
Format: Book
Published: BMC, 2008-06-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000 am a22000003u 4500
001 doaj_c2d15b055d3d49e183c1b6c5ee02cbe9
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Fischer Axel  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Kölzow Silvana  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Kreiter Carolin  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Scutaru Cristian  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Groneberg-Kloft Beatrix  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Quarcoo David  |e author 
245 0 0 |a Institutional operating figures in basic and applied sciences: Scientometric analysis of quantitative output benchmarking 
260 |b BMC,   |c 2008-06-01T00:00:00Z. 
500 |a 10.1186/1478-4505-6-6 
500 |a 1478-4505 
520 |a <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>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.</p> 
546 |a EN 
690 |a Public aspects of medicine 
690 |a RA1-1270 
655 7 |a article  |2 local 
786 0 |n Health Research Policy and Systems, Vol 6, Iss 1, p 6 (2008) 
787 0 |n http://www.health-policy-systems.com/content/6/1/6 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/1478-4505 
856 4 1 |u https://doaj.org/article/c2d15b055d3d49e183c1b6c5ee02cbe9  |z Connect to this object online.