Advertisement

Research impact: Where does the rubber hit the road?

      For over two decades research impact has been a topic of discussion in Australia and overseas.
      • Williams K.
      • Grant J.
      A comparative review of how the policy and procedures to assess research impact evolved in Australia and the UK.
      Research impact is defined by the Australian Research Council as “the contribution that research makes to the economy, society and environment, beyond the contribution to academic research”.

      Australian Research Council. Research Impact Principles and Framework. Available at: https://www.arc.gov.au/about-arc/strategies/research-impact-principles-and-framework. Accessed 5 August 2022.

      This extends the assessment of academic work where journals, publications and individuals are assessed in relation to the ‘impact’ of published works usually by virtue of the number of citations received. Journal impact factors are an important metric – and I will be honest that I was excited to see Australian Critical Care's impact factor continue to increase despite an increase in the number of articles we continue to publish. We are excited to have got the impact factor to above 3 but in comparison to Lancet Respiratory Medicine, the top ranked journal in the Clarivate's Critical Care category with an impact factor of 102.6 (no, that isn't a typo!) the ‘3’ suddenly doesn't look so impressive. In the Nursing category Australian Critical Care is a Q1 journal but in the Critical Care Medicine category we drop to Q3. So, where you sit ‘depends’ on what you are compared against. In comes the field-weighted citation impact, a field-normalised metric that accounts for differences in research across disciplines. This helps us to ‘compare apples with apples’.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Australian Critical Care
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Williams K.
        • Grant J.
        A comparative review of how the policy and procedures to assess research impact evolved in Australia and the UK.
        Res Eval. 2018; 27: 93-105
      1. Australian Research Council. Research Impact Principles and Framework. Available at: https://www.arc.gov.au/about-arc/strategies/research-impact-principles-and-framework. Accessed 5 August 2022.

        • Tronstad O.
        • Flaws D.
        • Lye I.
        • Fraser J.F.
        • Patterson S.
        Doing time in an Australian ICU: the experience and environment from the perspective of patients and family members.
        Aust Crit Care. 2021; 34: 254-262
        • Tronstad O.
        • Flaws D.
        • Lye I.
        • Fraser J.F.
        • Patterson S.
        The intensive care unit environment from the perspective of medical, allied health and nursing clinicians: a qualitative study to inform design of the ‘ideal’ bedspace.
        Aust Crit Care. 2021; 34: 15-22
        • Marshall A.P.
        • Austin D.
        • Chamberlain D.
        • Chapple L.S.
        • Cree M.
        • Fetterplace K.
        • et al.
        A critical care pandemic staffing framework in Australia.
        Aust Crit Care. 2021; 34: 123-131
        • Pate Y.
        • Jacobs K.
        • Shewdin S.
        • Murray A.
        • Tung L.
        • Ramanan M.
        • et al.
        Prone positioning in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome, translating research and implementing practice change from bench to bedside in the era of coronavirus disease 2019.
        Aust Crit Care. 2021; 34: 176-181
        • Collett L.W.
        • Gluck S.
        • Strickland R.M.
        • Reddi B.J.
        Evaluation of coagulation status using viscoelastic testing in intensive care patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): an observational point prevalence cohort study.
        Aust Crit Care. 2021; 34: 155-159
        • Yarad E.
        • O'Connor A.
        • Meyer J.
        • Tinker M.
        • Knowles S.
        • Li Y.
        • et al.
        Prevalence of pressure injuries and the management of support surfaces (mattresses) in adult intensive care patients: a multicentre point prevalence study in Australia and New Zealand.
        Aust Crit Care. 2021; 34: 60-66
        • Pires M.P.O.
        • Peterlini M.A.S.
        • Ullman A.J.
        • Bulmer A.C.
        • Rickard C.M.
        • Pedreira M.L.G.
        Effect of warming and infusion of red blood cell concentrates on markers of haemolysis: an ex vivo simulation study.
        Aust Crit Care. 2021; 34: 235-240
        • Larsen E.N.
        • Corley A.
        • Mitchell M.
        • Lye I.
        • Powell M.
        • Tom S.
        • et al.
        A pilot randomised controlled trial of dressing and securement methods to prevent arterial catheter failure in intensive care.
        Aust Crit Care. 2021; 34: 38-46
        • Fetterplace K.
        • Corlette L.
        • Abdelhamid Y.A.
        • Presneill J.J.
        • Paris M.T.
        • Stella D.
        • et al.
        Assessment of muscle mass using ultrasound with minimal versus maximal pressure compared with computed tomography in critically ill patients.
        Aust Crit Care. 2021; 34: 303-310