2001年科研评审评估单元10(护理)非护理类论文

D. Anthony
{"title":"2001年科研评审评估单元10(护理)非护理类论文","authors":"D. Anthony","doi":"10.1016/j.cein.2006.06.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Most institutes who entered the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) Unit of Assessment (UoA) 10 put forward several papers that are clearly not nursing in any meaningful way. 6.1% of all papers are neither papers about nursing, relevant to nursing, or in nursing journals. Non-nursing papers are associated with similar RAE scores as nursing papers. Those institutes that enter many non-nursing papers do not focus on one other area, but enter papers from several.</p><p>If the 2007/8 RAE were to be similar to the 2001 RAE then there is scope to place academics from other disciplines to increase funding for nursing, even if the rating is not improved. It would probably be sensible to enter academics from clinical or social science areas that could be construed as relevant to nursing.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":87580,"journal":{"name":"Clinical effectiveness in nursing","volume":"9 ","pages":"Pages e79-e87"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.cein.2006.06.004","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Non-nursing papers in the 2001 RAE unit of assessment 10 (Nursing)\",\"authors\":\"D. Anthony\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cein.2006.06.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Most institutes who entered the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) Unit of Assessment (UoA) 10 put forward several papers that are clearly not nursing in any meaningful way. 6.1% of all papers are neither papers about nursing, relevant to nursing, or in nursing journals. Non-nursing papers are associated with similar RAE scores as nursing papers. Those institutes that enter many non-nursing papers do not focus on one other area, but enter papers from several.</p><p>If the 2007/8 RAE were to be similar to the 2001 RAE then there is scope to place academics from other disciplines to increase funding for nursing, even if the rating is not improved. It would probably be sensible to enter academics from clinical or social science areas that could be construed as relevant to nursing.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87580,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical effectiveness in nursing\",\"volume\":\"9 \",\"pages\":\"Pages e79-e87\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.cein.2006.06.004\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical effectiveness in nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361900406000562\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical effectiveness in nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361900406000562","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

进入研究评估工作(RAE)评估单元(UoA) 10的大多数研究所提出的几篇论文显然没有以任何有意义的方式进行护理。6.1%的论文既不是关于护理的论文,也不是与护理相关的论文,也不是发表在护理期刊上的论文。非护理类论文的RAE得分与护理类论文相似。那些进入许多非护理论文的机构不是专注于另一个领域,而是从几个领域进入论文。如果2007/8年度的研究评审与2001年的研究评审相似,那么即使评级没有改善,其他学科的学者也有机会增加对护理的资助。从临床或社会科学领域进入可能被解释为与护理相关的学者可能是明智的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Non-nursing papers in the 2001 RAE unit of assessment 10 (Nursing)

Most institutes who entered the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) Unit of Assessment (UoA) 10 put forward several papers that are clearly not nursing in any meaningful way. 6.1% of all papers are neither papers about nursing, relevant to nursing, or in nursing journals. Non-nursing papers are associated with similar RAE scores as nursing papers. Those institutes that enter many non-nursing papers do not focus on one other area, but enter papers from several.

If the 2007/8 RAE were to be similar to the 2001 RAE then there is scope to place academics from other disciplines to increase funding for nursing, even if the rating is not improved. It would probably be sensible to enter academics from clinical or social science areas that could be construed as relevant to nursing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信