Key Points of Discussion in Scientific Research Evaluation: Peer Review, Bibliometrics and Relevance

被引:7
作者
Fernanda Sarthou, Nerina [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Nacl San Martin, Ciencia Polit, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[2] Consejo Nacl Invest Cient & Tecn, RA-1033 Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[3] Univ Nacl Ctr Prov, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
关键词
Bibliometrics (Thesaurus); research evaluation; peer review; relevance (Author's keywords); SCIENCE; IMPACT; POLICY; STATE; BIAS;
D O I
10.7440/res58.2016.06
中图分类号
D58 [社会生活与社会问题]; C913 [社会生活与社会问题];
学科分类号
摘要
This article seeks to bring together in a single document the set of issues surrounding the definition and implementation of mechanisms and criteria relating to the evaluation of scientific research. It revisits and orders the basic agreements regarding their defects and the proposals for countering them based on a bibliographical review revolving around three questions: who participates in the assessment; how the assessment is carried out; and what is to be evaluated. Finally, it briefly presents some notes referring to the specific literature generated from Latin America, highlighting the limited space dedicated to this topic until now.
引用
收藏
页码:76 / 86
页数:11
相关论文
共 39 条
  • [31] Peer Review Practices for Evaluating Biomedical Research Grants A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association
    Liaw, Lucy
    Freedman, Jane E.
    Becker, Lance B.
    Mehta, Nehal N.
    Liscum, Laura
    [J]. CIRCULATION RESEARCH, 2017, 121 (04) : E9 - E19
  • [32] The evaluation of research papers in the XXI century. The Open Peer Discussion system of the World Economics Association
    Ietto-Gillies, Grazia
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN COMPUTATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2012, 6
  • [33] Scientific and Regulatory Policy Committee Points to Consider: Review of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Guidance on Pathology Peer Review in Nonclinical Toxicology Studies
    McDorman, Kevin S.
    Bennet, Bindu M.
    Colman, Karyn
    Fikes, James D.
    Keirstead, Natalie D.
    Lanning, Lynda
    Munch, Barbara
    Romeike, Annette
    Schafer, Kenneth A.
    Schorsch, Frederic
    Thibodeau, Michael S.
    Thomas, Heath C.
    Troth, Sean
    Vahle, John L.
    Geoly, Frank J.
    [J]. TOXICOLOGIC PATHOLOGY, 2024, 52 (2-3) : 138 - 148
  • [34] Post-publication Peer Review with an Intention to Uncover Data/Result Irregularities and Potential Research Misconduct in Scientific Research: Vigilantism or Volunteerism?
    Yeo-Teh, Nicole Shu Ling
    Tang, Bor Luen
    [J]. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS, 2023, 29 (04)
  • [35] What makes peer review helpfulness evaluation in online review communities? An empirical research based on persuasion effect
    Wang, Yani
    Wang, Jun
    Yao, Tang
    Li, Ming
    [J]. ONLINE INFORMATION REVIEW, 2020, 44 (06) : 1267 - 1286
  • [36] Practice and Challenge of International Peer Review: A Case Study of Research Evaluation of CAS Centers for Excellence
    Fang Xu
    Xiaoxuan Li
    [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2019, (03) : 22 - 34
  • [37] Practice and Challenge of International Peer Review: A Case Study of Research Evaluation of CAS Centers for Excellence
    Xu, Fang
    Li, Xiaoxuan
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DATA AND INFORMATION SCIENCE, 2019, 4 (03) : 22 - 34
  • [38] Do they agree? Bibliometric evaluation versus informed peer review in the Italian research assessment exercise Reply
    Baccini, Alberto
    De Nicolao, Giuseppe
    [J]. SCIENTOMETRICS, 2016, 108 (03) : 1675 - 1684
  • [39] Self-evaluation and peer review -: an example of action research in promoting self-determination of patients with rheumatoid arthritis
    Lofman, Paivi
    Pletila, Anna-Maija
    Haggman-Laitila, Arja
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2007, 16 (3A) : 84 - 94