ArticleMedical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran2013
Collaboration in research and the influential factors in Golestan University of Medical Sciences research projects (2005-2007): an academic sample from Iran.
Article in Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evolution of Iran's health research system over the past 50 years: a narrative review.Journal of global health · 2018Review
- An assessment of health research impact in Iran.Health research policy and systems · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNumber of Iranian articles published in ISI journals has increased significantly in recent years.Despite the quantitative progress, studies performed in Iran represent low collaboration in research; therefore,we decided to evaluate collaboration in Golestan University of Medical Sciences (GOUMS) research projects.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, all GOUMS research projects that had got grants from the universitybetween 2005-2007 were studied. Among 107 research projects included in our study, 102 projects were evaluatedand checklists were completed. The researcher's questionnaire was sent to the principle investigators (n=46) of the projects and eventually 40 questionnaires were collected.
resultsThe review of 102 research proposals shows that 10 projects (9.8%) have been performed in collaborationwith other organizations. Scientific outputs in these projects have been more than projects which wereconfined to the university (98% compare to 68%; p= 0.04). The total cost of the projects under study was a littlemore than 300,000 US$. In just 12 projects (11.8%) a part of the cost had been provided by organizations outsidethe university. About 50% of researchers declared that they had chosen their research topic based on their"personal interest". Only 1 project was performed by the demand of nongovernmental organizations and 12 researchersreported no collaboration in their activities.
conclusionThis study shows that collaboration in GOUMS research projects is low. Moreover, collaborationswith governmental and nongovernmental organizations are trivial. The scientific outputs in collaborativeresearch projects are much more than other projects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24791118PMC3917486What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.