Using categorisations of citations when assessing the outcomes from health research |
| |
| Authors: | Steve Hanney Iain Frame Jonathan Grant Martin Buxton Tracey Young Grant Lewison |
| |
| Affiliation: | (1) Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, UK;(2) Policy Unit, Wellcome Trust, London (UK);(3) RAND Europe, Cambridge (UK);(4) Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University, Uxbridge (UK);(5) Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University, Uxbridge (UK);(6) Department of Information Science, City University, London (UK) |
| |
| Abstract: | Summary This paper describes an attempt to explore how far a categorisation of citations could be used as part of an assessment of
the outcomes from health research. A large-scale project to assess the outcomes from basic, or early clinical, research is
being planned, but before proceeding with such a project it was thought important to test and refine the developing methods
in a preliminary study. Here we describe the development, and initial application, of one element of the planned methods:
an approach to categorising citations with the aim of tracing the impact made by a body of research through several generations
of papers. The results from this study contribute to methodological development for the large-scale project by indicating
that: only for a small minority of citing papers is the cited paper of considerable importance; the number of times a paper
is cited can not be used to indicate the importance of that paper to the articles that cite it; and self-citations could play
an important role in facilitating the eventual outcomes achieved from a body of research. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录！ |
|
