Related Experiment Videos
Evaluating "payback" on biomedical research from papers cited in clinical guidelines: applied bibliometric study
J Grant1, R Cottrell, F Cluzeau
1Policy Unit, Wellcome Trust, London NW1 2BE. jgrant@wellcome.ac.uk
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.)
|April 25, 2000
Summary
Clinical guidelines cite research papers eight years after publication, primarily from the US and UK. This analysis helps track knowledge flow from lab to clinic, evaluating research impact.
Area of Science:
- Health Services Research
- Bibliometrics
- Research Impact Assessment
Background:
- Clinical guidelines are crucial for evidence-based healthcare.
- Evaluating the research underpinning these guidelines is essential for understanding knowledge translation.
- Current methods for assessing research impact on clinical practice require refinement.
Purpose of the Study:
- To establish a methodology for assessing research impact on healthcare.
- To characterize the academic literature cited in clinical guidelines.
- To analyze the origins and age of research informing clinical practice.
Main Methods:
- Bibliometric analysis of papers cited in 15 UK-developed clinical guidelines.
- Collating and analyzing bibliographic details using established bibliometric techniques.
- Comparing publication origins and publication dates of cited research.
Main Results:
- The median age of cited research in clinical guidelines was eight years.
- The majority of cited papers originated from authors in the United States (36%) and the United Kingdom (25%).
- Clinical guidelines demonstrated a low citation rate of basic research.
Conclusions:
- Analyzing the evidence base of clinical guidelines offers a method to trace knowledge transfer from research to clinical application.
- This bibliometric approach provides a clinically relevant tool for evaluating research outcomes and R&D strategies.
- Understanding the citation patterns in guidelines can inform future research prioritization and funding.