Skip to main content
. 2017 Jan 1;6(4):14.

Table 2.

Metrics for Assessing and Communicating the Value of Biomedical Research, by Potential Data Sources

Bibliometric analysis Analysis of research administrative documents Analysis of wider institutional records Internal policy documents Funder records Records of external academic bodies Educational outcomes and workforce tracking data Quality improvement data Public health data Electronic health records data StarMetrics data Patent database Review of key policy documents Clippings service Social media analysis Feedback forms from events and courses PI survey Departmental secretary survey Wider staff survey Alumni survey Survey or interviews with companies Survey or interviews with research participants Survey or interviews with community partners PI interviews Staff interviews External researcher site visits or peer review Representative case studies High impact case studies Labor market analysis
Research impacts 1 Number of journal articles published y
2 Number of citations y
3 Number of research output downloads y
4 Mentions in social media y
5 Number and size of grant awards y y
6 Number and size of awards from major funders y y y
7 Number of different research funders supporting research y y y
8 Success rate of applications y
9 Catalogue of infrastructure y y
10 Use of infrastructure by other researchers y y
Measures of prestige 11 Number of editorships of high profile journals y y
12 Number of staff on relevant boards and committees y y
13 Number of academy members y
14 Number and type of prizes y y
15 Number of (international) speaker invitations/conference invitations y
16 Number of media mentions y y
17 Number of applications per open post y
18 Percentage of out-of-state and international applications per research job/PhD post y
19 Track record of new hires y y y
20 Undergraduate applications y
21 Grade Point Average of incoming students y
Teaching and career development impacts 22 Grade Point Average of graduates y y
23 Longitudinal data on career progression of students y y
24 Number of PhD graduates y y
25 Completion rate of PhD graduates y y
26 Number of publications per PhD graduate y y
27 5/10/15-year career outcomes for PhD graduates y y
28 K to R conversion rate y y
29 Career outcomes for researchers y y
30 Subject coverage of the professional development programme y
31 Uptake of the professional development programme y
32 Feedback on the professional development programme y
33 Improved educational attainment/reduced drop out rate y
Research and institutional processes 34 Start-up time for research projects y
35 Start-up time for clinical trials y
36 Average time from funding to publication y
37 Proportion of funds spent on administration y
38 Support staff to researcher ratio y
39 Prompt payment of community partners y y
40 How hiring decisions are made y y
41 How decisions are made to apply for grants y y
42 How publications decisions are made y y
43 Proportion of publications that are open access y y
44 Proportion of trials where protocol and findings are published y y
45 Description of institution's policy on health equity in research y
46 Proportion of projects which consider health equity in their design and conduct y y y
Networks and dissemination 47 Number of collaborations on grant applications and projects y y y
48 Levels of co-authorship y
49 Bilbiometric networks y
50 Total number of different collaborators across all projects y y y
51 Description of range of collaborations y y
52 Number of research projects engaging community partners y y
53 Number of research projects engaging community partners for the entire duration of the project y y
54 Number of articles co-authored with community partner y
55 Existence of specifically tailored material for different community groups y y y
56 Size of communications office y
57 Number of staff engaged in outreach y y
58 Number of people attending outreach events and their perceptions y y
59 Level of participation in clinical trials y
60 Number of projects with an industry partner y y
61 Industrial research funding for PhD/secondment positions in industry and PhD scholarships y y
62 Number of policy secondments y y
Policy impacts 63 Number of invitations from policy makers y
64 Number of citations on clinical guidelines y y
65 Number of citations in policy documents y y
Health impacts 66 Improved health of patients y y y
67 Improved quality of care metrics y y y
68 Number of lives touched y y
69 Narrowing of health/health-care disparities y y
70 Improved awareness of preventative measures in the community y
71 Number of treatment developed in house y
72 Number of new treatments available (adopted from elsewhere) y y
73 Percentage, number, and range of types of clinicians on research projects y y y
74 Number of uses of research infrastructure in clinical practice y y
Economic impacts and commercialisation 75 Level of (local) spending y y
76 Amount of direct employment y y
77 Number and type of new offices (including subsidiaries) in the area y y
78 Size of tech transfer office y
79 Existence of Intellectual Property policy y
80 Number of patent applications y y y y
81 Number of patents awarded y y y
82 Number of patent citations y
83 Number of licensing agreements and licensing revenue y
84 List/examples of know-how taken up by industry y y
85 Number of private sector innovations/products/devices brought to market y
86 Number of spin outs y y
87 VC money invested in startups y
88 Number and size of consultancy agreements y
89 Contract funding from industry y
90 Number of and list of new treatments y y
91 Fraction of indirect costs covered y
92 Cost/benefit calculations y y y y y y
Broader metrics 93 Perceptions of equity, quality, access y y
94 Perceptions of staff y y y y
95 Perceptions of community partners y
96 Perceptions of external experts y
97 Perceptions of people participating in research y
98 Attitudes of participants towards science and towards research y
99 Narratives of success y
100 Narratives of performance y
NOTE: This table does not represent an exhaustive list, but rather highlights the potential data sources that stand out as most appropriate for each metric.