Engaging with research impact assessment for an environmental science case study

Fryirs, Kirstie; Brierley, Gary; Dixon, Thom

doi:10.1038/s41467-019-12020-z

Cited by 24 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This might include interpreting citizen-science collected data or via the provision of a service. Moreover, community engagement in scientific endeavors is an increasingly important aspect for researchers (e.g., Fryirs et al, 2019). Researchers are frequently required to demonstrate the societal benefit of their research, without which it is becoming increasingly difficult to gain access to the ever more competitive resources for research.…”

Section: Democratizing the Science Of Pollution Identification And Ermentioning

confidence: 99%

New Approaches to Identifying and Reducing the Global Burden of Disease From Pollution

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pollution from multiple sources causes significant disease and death worldwide. Some sources are legacy, such as heavy metals accumulated in soils, and some are current, such as particulate matter. Because the global burden of disease from pollution is so high, it is important to identify legacy and current sources and to develop and implement effective techniques to reduce human exposure. But many limitations exist in our understanding of the distribution and transport processes of pollutants themselves, as well as the complicated overprint of human behavior and susceptibility. New approaches are being developed to identify and eliminate pollution in multiple environments. Community-scale detection of geogenic arsenic and fluoride in Bangladesh is helping to map the distribution of these harmful elements in drinking water. Biosensors such as bees and their honey are being used to measure heavy metal contamination in cities such as Vancouver and Sydney. Drone-based remote sensors are being used to map metal hot spots in soils from former mining regions in Zambia and Mozambique. The explosion of low-cost air monitors has allowed researchers to build dense air quality sensing networks to capture ephemeral and local releases of harmful materials, building on other developments in personal exposure sensing. And citizen science is helping communities without adequate resources measure their own environments and in this way gain agency in controlling local pollution exposure sources and/or alerting authorities to environmental hazards. The future of GeoHealth will depend on building on these developments and others to protect a growing population from multiple pollution exposure risks. Plain Language SummaryThe health burdens of legacy contaminants, and the continuing global health burdens of current pollution, are crippling both global health and well-being. Much of the exposure science on these relatively well-studied pollutants is known, as is the general toxicity of past pollutants. But there is a great distance between understanding the toxicity and exposure sources of environmental pollutants and applying that knowledge in practical and just ways. This contribution summarizes several major repositories and ongoing sources of soil, dust, and air pollution and addresses the harmful effects from exposure to these. We also highlight some examples of the future of GeoHealth research in this area by providing case studies of current novel approaches that focus on bridging the science of pollution sources and distribution with real applications at the community level to reduce pollution's role in the global burden of disease.

show abstract

Section: Democratizing the Science Of Pollution Identification And Ermentioning

confidence: 99%

New Approaches to Identifying and Reducing the Global Burden of Disease From Pollution

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There were a wide range of both direct and indirect impacts, and uncoupling the centre’s activities from those of its component members or determining the counterfactual of impact that would have occurred without the existence of the centre presented unique challenges. To address these challenges, we attempted to articulate what we considered both “direct” and “indirect” impacts, which were aligned to the notion of “soft” and “hard” impacts used in the River Styles Framework, which is another research impact framework used in the environment sciences [ 12 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This leaves the rigidity of many frameworks for measuring research impact as potentially unfit for this purpose, if they misrepresent the complex research—practice ecosystem. The focus of research policy has also shifted over the years from research utilization to knowledge mobilization [ 12 ]. Early tools for the assessment of impact almost solely captured academic productivity, rather than broader impacts to society [ 13 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Applying a framework to assess the impact of cardiovascular outcomes improvement research

Sarkies

Robinson

Briffa

et al. 2021

Health Res Policy Sys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Health and medical research funding agencies are increasingly interested in measuring the impact of funded research. We present a research impact case study for the first four years of an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council funded Centre of Research Excellence in Cardiovascular Outcomes Improvement (2016–2020). The primary aim of this paper was to explore the application of a research impact matrix to assess the impact of cardiovascular outcomes improvement research. Methods We applied a research impact matrix developed from a systematic review of existing methodological frameworks used to measure research impact. This impact matrix was used as a bespoke tool to identify and understand various research impacts over different time frames. Data sources included a review of existing internal documentation from the research centre and publicly available information sources, informal iterative discussions with 10 centre investigators, and confirmation of information from centre grant and scholarship recipients. Results By July 2019, the impact on the short-term research domain category included over 41 direct publications, which were cited over 87 times (median journal impact factor of 2.84). There were over 61 conference presentations, seven PhD candidacies, five new academic collaborations, and six new database linkages conducted. The impact on the mid-term research domain category involved contributions towards the development of a national cardiac registry, cardiovascular guidelines, application for a Medicare Benefits Schedule reimbursement item number, introduction of patient-reported outcome measures into several databases, and the establishment of nine new industry collaborations. Evidence of long-term impacts were described as the development and use of contemporary management for aortic stenosis, a cardiovascular risk prediction model and prevention targets in several data registries, and the establishment of cost-effectiveness for stenting compared to surgery. Conclusions We considered the research impact matrix a feasible tool to identify evidence of academic and policy impact in the short- to midterm; however, we experienced challenges in capturing long-term impacts. Cost containment and broader economic impacts represented another difficult area of impact to measure.

show abstract

“…It appears that most impact assessments are guided by this model or framework; however, there are limited examples of use in the real world. 11 Suggested approaches to measuring research impact include quantitative and qualitative indicators. 12 Quantitative collection methods are often metrics that aim to provide an objective oversight of research outcomes and may comprise data collected via surveys, or through bibliometrics, profits, number of jobs provided, number of trained personnel recruited, number of visitors or people reached, number of items purchased and patents and new technology tracking.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring health promotion research impact – What researchers think?

Jancey

Burns

Hendriks

et al. 2020

Health Prom J of Aust

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Issues addressed: The significant investment in health research has resulted in an increased focus to determine suitable approaches to measure health promotion research impact. This research was undertaken at the request of a nationally competitive research organisation that funds health promotion research, to explore how Chief Investigators (CIs) on their funded projects understood research impact, its measurement and associated challenges.Methods: Participants were required to be or have been a CI on an Australian competitive research (exploratory or intervention) grant focussed on health promotion.The qualitative study used thematic analysis from one-on-one interviews. Themes were created and descriptive quotes were selected to illustrate the main findings. Results:The majority of participants were female (n = 13) working at a university (n = 13). Three themes emerged: a) defining health research impact; b) complexity and simplicity of measuring health research impact; c) challenges of measuring health research impact: i) differing language; ii) differing assessment; iii) attribution and timing; and iv) resourcing and skills. Conclusion:Researchers recognised that there are significant challenges in measuring the impact of health promotion research. The most significant factors identified by participants were the disciplinary background of the researchers undertaking the measurement, their skills and experience and the resources (including time) available to assess impact.So what? Research impact assessment is complex, time consuming and requires specific skills to facilitate measurement of impact provision of funding for this activity in research grants and research impact training is required.

show abstract

Engaging with research impact assessment for an environmental science case study

Cited by 24 publications

References 39 publications

New Approaches to Identifying and Reducing the Global Burden of Disease From Pollution

New Approaches to Identifying and Reducing the Global Burden of Disease From Pollution

Applying a framework to assess the impact of cardiovascular outcomes improvement research

Measuring health promotion research impact – What researchers think?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About