Various Academic Achievements In The Evaluation Of Scientific Research Level Of Clinicians: Advantages,Disadvantages And Improving Measures

Background and objectives Clinical researches play a great role in a clinician's life.A lot of academic achievements have been produced,and the evaluation of scientific research has become an important part of the evaluation of clinicians.Academic papers is one of the major forms of the academic achievements,which is widely used in the evaluation of scientific research.The papers indexed by Science Citation Index(SCI)were usually regarded as an important indicator for assessment of scientific achievements.Howerver,more and more researchers pointed out that SCI play a negalive role in assessment of scientific achievement.In addition to academic papers,academic achievements also include academic monographs,patents,technical standards,academic materials,academic tools,etc.,which have more practical value.Therefore,in the academic evaluation of clinicians,how to balance the relationship between academic papers and other academic achievements become a problem to be discussed.Methods In order to establish a scientific evaluation system including a variety of academic achievements for clinicians,the present study(1)analyzing the effects of various academic achievements on scientific evaluation,and their advantages and disadvantages;(2)doing questionnaire survey on clinicians from a large general hospitals,collecting the data and making statistical analysis,to analyze the output of scientific research,such as academic papers,monographs/materials/books,technical standard,patent and foundation,then evaluating the significance of all the academic achievements by a simple expert consultation;(3)according to the survey results,establishing the hierarchical structure model of AHP,scoring a 9 degree evaluation method,constructing judgment matrix,calculating the weight of each level index,and constructing the scientific research evaluation system.Results With a variety of academic achievement as the evaluation index of scientific research has an objective,quantitative analysis,a relatively comprehensive reflection of the level of scientific research,the development of different standards for different standards and other advantages.After investigation,the academic papers and funds of the clinical research papers,patents and academic monographs / textbook / tool output of medium,low technical standard output.Expert consultation results show that academic papers and fund project was of the highest importance,and weights are 0.228;followed by technical standards and patents,weights were 0.200 and 0.198,the importance of the lowest is academic monographs and textbooks and reference books,the weight is 0.147.AHP method to construct the evaluation system of scientific research clinicians include academic papers,monographs,books / material / tools / specifications,technical standards and patent fund project 5 level index,which is divided into the number of academic papers,the grade,the influence of 3 level two indexes,academic monographs / materials / books into the Editor / 3 index AP,works quantity,type of work two,technical standards / specifications for standard / specification standards / specifications quantity,grade,standard / specification type 3 two indicators,patent into the patent number,patent type,patent conversion 3 level two index fund project is divided into subject number 3,a subject index level and the number of funds two.In the first level indicators,the Fund subject to the weight of the largest,followed by patents,academic papers,technical standards / specifications,academic monographs / textbook / tool book the weight of the smallest.In second level indicators and for academic papers,the weights of the influence and the level higher than the number;for academic monographs and textbooks and reference books,whether the editor / one of the maximum weight,higher than the number of books,and the work quantity is higher than that of type of work;for technical standards / specifications,standards / specifications grade weight higher than the standard / specification type,while the type was higher than the number;for patent,patent transformation of weight was significantly higher than that of the level of the patents and the patent number;for research to fund,subject grade weight was the highest,followed by number of research funds,weight minimum is topic quantity.Patent transformation,fund research level,the number of funds and the influence of the paper two 4 level indicators of the total weight of more than 0.1,indicating that these indicators in the evaluation of scientific research should has a large weight.Grade of papers,technical standards / specifications,technical standards / specifications type,the level of the number of patents and fund projects two 5 level indicators of the total weight of more than 0.05,but also has a large weight.Conclusion(1)In addition to academic papers,will be more practical patents,academic monographs / materials / books,technical standards,patents,and other academic achievements in scientific research fund project evaluation system,to better reflect the practical value of clinical research;(2)the patent transformation,fund project level,the number of funds,the the influence,grade,technical grade,technical standards / specifications standards / specifications type,grade and patent number index fund holds a large proportion of the clinical research assessment system,fully embodies the evaluation criteria to the quality of scientific research priorities;(3)the quantitative evaluation system of scientific research in a variety of academic achievements based to provide scientific evaluation a simple tool for the clinical management of scientific research personnel.