Conceptual frameworks and empirical approaches used to assess the impact of health research: an overview of reviews
2011

Assessing the Impact of Health Research

publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Rita Banzi, Lorenzo Moja, Vanna Pistotti, Andrea Facchini, Alessandro Liberati

Primary Institution: Centro Cochrane Italiano, Istituto Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri, Milano, Italia

Hypothesis

How can the impact of health research be effectively assessed?

Conclusion

A comprehensive conceptual framework for assessing research impact is still lacking, and its components are valued differently across models.

Supporting Evidence

  • Twenty-two reports were identified belonging to four systematic reviews and 14 primary studies.
  • Five broad categories of impact were identified: advancing knowledge, capacity building, informing decision-making, health benefits, and broad socio-economic benefits.
  • The 'payback model' was the most frequently used framework for assessing research impact.

Takeaway

This study looks at how we can measure the good things that come from health research, like better health and smarter decisions. It finds that we still need a better way to do this.

Methodology

The authors systematically searched literature and included systematic reviews, theoretical papers, and empirical case studies on evaluating research impact.

Potential Biases

Retrospective studies may lead to selective recall or reporting bias, focusing more on positive results.

Limitations

The study retrieval process faced challenges due to the lack of standard terminology and the heterogeneity of definitions for 'research impact'.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1186/1478-4505-9-26

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication