Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure.
Moher, David; Naudet, Florian; Cristea, Ioana A; Miedema, Frank; Ioannidis, John P A; Goodman, Steven N.
Afiliação
  • Moher D; Centre for Journalology, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.
  • Naudet F; Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
  • Cristea IA; Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
  • Miedema F; INSERM CIC-P 1414, Clinical Investigation Center, CHU Rennes, Rennes 1 University, Rennes, France.
  • Ioannidis JPA; Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
  • Goodman SN; Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
PLoS Biol ; 16(3): e2004089, 2018 03.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29596415
ABSTRACT
Assessment of researchers is necessary for decisions of hiring, promotion, and tenure. A burgeoning number of scientific leaders believe the current system of faculty incentives and rewards is misaligned with the needs of society and disconnected from the evidence about the causes of the reproducibility crisis and suboptimal quality of the scientific publication record. To address this issue, particularly for the clinical and life sciences, we convened a 22-member expert panel workshop in Washington, DC, in January 2017. Twenty-two academic leaders, funders, and scientists participated in the meeting. As background for the meeting, we completed a selective literature review of 22 key documents critiquing the current incentive system. From each document, we extracted how the authors perceived the problems of assessing science and scientists, the unintended consequences of maintaining the status quo for assessing scientists, and details of their proposed solutions. The resulting table was used as a seed for participant discussion. This resulted in six principles for assessing scientists and associated research and policy implications. We hope the content of this paper will serve as a basis for establishing best practices and redesigning the current approaches to assessing scientists by the many players involved in that process.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Pesquisa / Docentes / Pessoal de Laboratório Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: PLoS Biol Assunto da revista: BIOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Canadá

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Pesquisa / Docentes / Pessoal de Laboratório Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: PLoS Biol Assunto da revista: BIOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Canadá