ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2016
An evaluation study of research efficiency of the Guangzhou institute of respiratory diseases based on malmquist index.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Input-output efficiency of 20 independent research teams at State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease 2009-2016: managerial implications for elsewhere in China.Journal of thoracic disease · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to analyze the dynamic changes of the scientific research innovation efficiency of Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Diseases (GIRD) during the year 2009-2013 to explore the reason for these changes and give some suggestions on how to improve the overall efficiency of the Institute.
methodsThe panel data used in this study were taken from 19 research teams of GIRD during 2009 to 2013. Data envelopment analysis (DEA) based on Malmquist index (MI) was used to analyze the performance of each research team in terms of productivity changes over time. Data were analyzed using DEAP 2.1 software.
resultsThe annual average increase rate of total factor productivity (TFP), technological progress, technical efficiency, pure technical efficiency, and scale efficiency was 30.4%, 22.5%, 6.4%, 0.9%, and 5.4%, respectively from 2009 to 2013. The scientific research innovation efficiency of the GIRD was generally high and kept on growing. The increase of TFP was mainly caused by the progress of tech, the descending of TFP in some teams should be mainly attributable to the declining pure technical efficiency, and scale efficiency on the whole, maintaining a stable growth at a low speed.
conclusionsTo achieve higher scientific research innovation, GIRD not only needs to further improve the management level and introduce advanced management mode, but also needs to focus on optimization of resource allocation, as well as to strengthen the talent introduction, and continue to maintain the absorption of new technologies and innovation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.