GloPID-R Roadmap for Data Sharing in PHEs | Page 41

Factors, in funding, appointment, and promo-
tion considerations;
content of a paper is much more important
than publication metrics or the identity of the
journal in which it was published.
•
the need to assess research on its own
merits rather than on the basis of the journal in
which the research is published; and
•
the need to capitalize on the opportunities
provided by online publication (such as relaxing
unnecessary limits on the number of words,
figures, and references in articles, and exploring
new indicators of significance and impact).
3. For the purposes of research assessment,
consider the value and impact of all research
outputs (including datasets and software) in
addition to research publications, and consider
a broad range of impact measures including
qualitative indicators of research impact, such
as influence on policy and practice.
For institutions
We recognize that many funding agencies, insti-
tutions, publishers, and researchers are already
encouraging improved practices in research as-
sessment. Such steps are beginning to increase
the momentum toward more sophisticated and
meaningful approaches to research evaluation
that can now be built upon and adopted by all of
the key constituencies involved.
The signatories of the San Francisco
Declaration on Research Assessment support
the adoption of the following practices in re-
search assessment.
5. For the purposes of research assessment,
consider the value and impact of all research
outputs (including datasets and software) in
addition to research publications, and consider
a broad range of impact measures including
qualitative indicators of research impact, such
as influence on policy and practice.
General Recommendation
1. Do not use journal-based metrics, such as
Journal Impact Factors, as a surrogate measure
of the quality of individual research articles, to
assess an individual scientist’s contributions, or
in hiring, promotion, or funding decisions.
For Funding Agencies
2. Be explicit about the criteria used in
evaluating the scientific productivity of grant
applicants and clearly highlight, especially for
early-stage investigators, that the scientific
4. Be explicit about the criteria used to
reach hiring, tenure, and promotion decisions,
clearly highlighting, especially for early-stage
investigators, that the scientific content of a
paper is much more important than publica-
tion metrics or the identity of the journal in
which it was published.
For Publishers
6. Greatly reduce emphasis on the journal
impact factor as a promotional tool, ideally by
ceasing to promote the impact factor or by pre-
senting the metric in the context of a variety
of journal-based metrics (e.g., 5-year impact
factor, EigenFactor [8], SCImago [9], h-index,
editorial and publication times, etc.) that provide
a richer view of journal performance.
41