Table 2.
“Reliable” evaluation criteria
| Criteria | Percent |
|---|---|
| Originality | 67 |
| Impact factora | 41 |
| Applicability of results in field/clinic | 37 |
| Continuity of research | 33 |
| Number of publications | 27 |
| Citation index | 27 |
| Training of young scientists | 23 |
| Interdisciplinarity | 12 |
| Funding profile | 12 |
| Impact on policy | 8 |
| Patents | 4 |
| Academic prizes | 3 |
According to the opinion of 78 senior scientists these criteria were regarded to be reliable for evaluating a research group working on infectious diseases. Three criteria were supposed to be chosen out of the 12 given.
a
Concerning the use and misuse of impact factors in evaluating research, see e.g. Seglen, 1997.