Evaluating "payback" on biomedical research from papers cited in clinical guidelines: applied bibliometric study
Top Cited Papers
- 22 April 2000
- Vol. 320 (7242) , 1107-1111
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7242.1107
Abstract
Objectives: To develop a methodology for evaluating the impact of research on health care, and to characterise the papers cited on clinical guidelines. Design: The bibliographic details of the papers cited in 15 clinical guidelines, developed in and for the United Kingdom, were collated and analysed with applied bibliometric techniques. Results: The median age of papers cited in clinical guidelines was eight years; most papers were published by authors living in either the United States (36%) or the United Kingdom (25%)—this is two and a half times more than expected as about 10% of all biomedical outputs are published in the United Kingdom; and clinical guidelines do not cite basic research papers. Conclusion: Analysis of the evidence base of clinical guidelines may be one way of tracking the flow of knowledge from the laboratory to the clinic. Moreover, such analysis provides a useful, clinically relevant method for evaluating research outcomes and different strategies in research and development.Keywords
This publication has 7 references indexed in Scilit:
- Appraising Clinical Practice Guidelines in England and Wales: The Development of a Methodologic Framework and Its Application to PolicyThe Joint Commission Journal on Quality Improvement, 1999
- Development and application of a generic methodology to assess the quality of clinical guidelinesInternational Journal for Quality in Health Care, 1999
- Government Funding of Research and DevelopmentScience, 1997
- How Can Payback from Health Services Research Be Assessed?Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 1996
- Comroe and Dripps revisited.BMJ, 1987
- Scientific Basis for the Support of Biomedical ScienceScience, 1976
- Structure of the Biomedical LiteratureJournal of the American Society for Information Science, 1976