Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27610359›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2016

Evaluating Research Impact: The Development of a Research for Impact Tool.

Komla Tsey, Kenny Lawson, Irina Kinchin, Roxanne Bainbridge, Janya McCalman, Felecia Watkin, Yvonne Cadet-James, Allison Rossetto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Reflections on the Application of Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations' Research Principles in a Photovoice Food Security Study.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Remote Food Security Research Project: Applying an Indigenist Research Lens.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Building a Narrative of Equity: Weaving Indigenous Approaches into Community-Engaged Research.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Komla TseyThe Cairns Institute and College of Arts, Society and Education, James Cook University , Cairns, QLD , Australia.
Kenny LawsonCentre for Health Research, School of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Centre for Chronic Disease, Australian Institute of Health and Tropical Medicine, James Cook University, Cairns, QLD, Australia.
Irina KinchinSchool of Health and Human Services, Central Queensland University , Cairns, QLD , Australia.
Roxanne BainbridgeSchool of Health and Human Services, Central Queensland University , Cairns, QLD , Australia.
Janya McCalmanSchool of Health and Human Services, Central Queensland University , Cairns, QLD , Australia.
Felecia WatkinAustralian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Centre, James Cook University , Cairns, QLD , Australia.
Yvonne Cadet-JamesAustralian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Centre, James Cook University , Cairns, QLD , Australia.
Allison RossettoCollege of Business, Law and Governance, James Cook University , Townsville, QLD , Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThis paper examines the process of developing a Research for Impact Tool in the contexts of general fiscal constraint, increased competition for funding, perennial concerns about the over-researching of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander issues without demonstrable benefits as well as conceptual and methodological difficulties of evaluating research impact. The aim is to highlight the challenges and opportunities involved in evaluating research impact to serve as resource for potential users of the research for impact tool and others interested in assessing the impact of research. MATERIALS AND

methodsA combination of literature reviews, workshops with researchers, and reflections by project team members and partners using participatory snowball techniques.

resultsAssessing research impact is perceived to be difficult, akin to the so-called "wicked problem," but not impossible. Heuristic and collaborative approach to research that takes the expectations of research users, research participants and the funders of research offers a pragmatic solution to evaluating research impact. The logic of the proposed Research for Impact Tool is based on the understanding that the value of research is to create evidence and/or products to support smarter decisions so as to improve the human condition. Research is, therefore, of limited value unless the evidence created is used to make smarter decisions for the betterment of society. A practical way of approaching research impact is, therefore, to start with the decisions confronting decision makers whether they are government policymakers, industry, professional practitioners, or households and the extent to which the research supports them to make smarter policy and practice decisions and the knock-on consequences of doing so. Embedded at each step in the impact planning and tracking process is the need for appropriate mix of expertise, capacity enhancement, and collaborative participatory learning-by-doing approaches. DISCUSSION: The tool was developed in the context of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research but the basic idea that the way to assess research impact is to start upfront with the information needs of decisions makers is equally applicable to research in other settings, both applied (horizontal) and basic (vertical) research. The tool will be further tested and evaluated with researchers over the next 2 years (2016/17). The decision by the Australian Government to include 'industry engagement' and 'impact' as additions to the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) quality measures from 2018 makes the Research for Impact Tool a timely development. The wider challenge is to engage with major Australian research funding agencies to ensure consistent alignment and approaches across research users, communities, and funders in evaluating impact.

Indexed as

“a wicked problem”Indigenous healthknowledge translationLowitja Instituteparticipatory learning-by-doing approachesresearch users and information needsvaluing research

Identifiers

PMID27610359
PMCPMC4996827

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.