ArticleMinerva2022
China's Research Evaluation Reform: What are the Consequences for Global Science?
Article in Minerva, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global Research Trends and Insights on AI Usage in Tuberculosis: Bibliometric Analysis.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular research in China: pathways, incentives and editorial implications.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2026Article
- A multicenter cross-sectional study on perceptions and peer-reported prevalence of research misconduct among Chinese medical postgraduates.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Invisible conflicts: the impact of covert academic bullying among "Double First-Class" young medical teachers on academic output-a qualitative study.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Responsible research evaluation: integrating quality, leadership, and integrity in national systems. The case of Peru.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2026Article
- Open science readiness index: Theory and simulations.Fundamental research · 2025Article
- Assessing biomedical research capacities in selected countries of Latin America: challenges, opportunities, and recommendations.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2025Article
- Exploring the Relationship between Academic Challenge Stress and Self-Rated Creativity of Graduate Students: Mediating Effects and Heterogeneity Analysis of Academic Self-Efficacy and Resilience.Journal of Intelligence · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the 1990s, China created a research evaluation system based on publications indexed in the Science Citation Index (SCI) and on the Journal Impact Factor. Such system helped the country become the largest contributor to the scientific literature and increased the position of Chinese universities in international rankings. Although the system had been criticized by many because of its adverse effects, the policy reform for research evaluation crawled until the breakout of the COVID-19 pandemic, which accidently accelerates the process of policy reform. This paper highlights the background and principles of this reform, provides evidence of its effects, and discusses the implications for global science.
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.