Peer Review Research Evaluation in Iran: Strengths, Weaknesses and Suggestions
Background: Peer based evaluation is a qualitative assessment done in different fields and levels. The aim of this study was to express the results of peer review evaluation in selected Iranian clinical research centers.
Methods: Four main domains consist of Leadership and governance, Structure, Knowledge products and Impact in thirty Iranian clinical research centers were evaluated based on peer review in 2019. Strengths and weak points with peer`s suggestions were extracted based on qualitative analysis.
Results: Governance and impact domains have been more weak points than others. Equipment, facilities, physical space and human resource have been desirable in many research centers, and also there were some good developments in research publication. The most important suggestion was pay more attention to technology in planning, infra-structure and impact levels.
Conclusion: Review missions of clinical research centers with more emphasis on health impact is necessary to clinical improvement.
2. Geuna Aldo, Martin Ben (2003). University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison. Minerva, 41(4): 277-304.
3. Evans Mark, Campbell Lan (2003). A comparative evaluation of industrial design models produced using rapid prototyping and workshop-based fabrication techniques. Rapid Prototyping Journal, 9(5): 344-351.
4. Alshawi Sarmad, Alalwany Hamid (2003). E‐government evaluation: Citizen's perspective in developing countries. Information Technology for Development, 15(3): 193-208.
5. Georghiou Luke, Keith Smith, Otto Toivanea et al (2003). Evaluation of the Finnish innovation support system. Publications, 5: 2003.
6. Reale Emanuela, Barbara Anna, Costantini Antonio (2007). Peer review for the evaluation of academic research: lessons from the Italian experience. Research Evaluation, 16(3): 216-228.
7. Thorbecke Erik, Charumilind Chutatong (2002). Economic inequality and its socioeconomic impact. World Development, 30(9): 1477-1495.
8. Vanclay Frank, Esteves Anna (2011). New directions in social impact assessment: conceptual and methodological advances, Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc. USA.
9. Owlia Parviz, Eftekhari Monir, Forouzan Setareh et al (2011). Health research priority setting in Iran: Introduction to a bottom up approach. Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 16(5): 691-8.
10. Falahat Katayoun, Baradaran Eftekhari Monir, Habibi Elham et al (2013). Trend of knowledge production of research centers in the field of medical sciences in Iran. Iran J Public Health, 42(Supple 1):55-9.
11. Esfandiari Nura, Babavalian Mohammad Reza, Eftekhari Amir et al (2014). Knowledge discovery in medicine: Current issue and future trend. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(9): 4434-4463.
12. Aminpour Farzaneh, Kabiri Payam (2009). Science production in Iran: The scenario of Iranian medical journals. J Res Med Sci, 14(5): 313–322.
13. Akhondzadeh Shahin, Ebadifar Asghar, Eftekhari MB et al (2017). Medical science and research in Iran. Arch Iran Med, 20(11): 665-672.
14. Akhondzadeh Shahin (2013). Iranian science shows world's fastest growth: ranks 17th in science production in 2012. Avicenna J Med Biotechnol, 5(3):139.
15. Djalalinia Shirin, Talei Bagher, Barhemmat Farzaneh et al (2017). Development of Health Research Structures Over the Last 25 Years: Main Achievements and Challenges. Arch Iran Med, 20(11):659-664
16. Martin Ben (2011). The Research Excellence Framework and the ‘impact agenda’: are we creating a Frankenstein monster? Research Evaluation, 20(3): 247-254.
17. Ebadifar Asghar, Baradaran Eftekhari Monir, Owlia Parviz et al (2017). How to assess quality of research in Iran, from input to impact? Introduction of peer-based research evaluation model in Iran. Arch Iran Med, 20(11): 680-685.
|Issue||Vol 50 No 6 (2021)|
|Peer evaluation Clinical field Research center Governance Structure Impact|
|Rights and permissions|
|This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.|