ArticleNature2025
Regional and institutional trends in assessment for academic promotion.
Article in Nature, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Individual Research Behaviors and Research Funding Acquisition Across Fields and Career Periods: Regression Analysis.Interactive journal of medical research · 2026Article
- Beyond genuine collaboration: the rise of strategic co-authorship in contemporary academic publishing.Research integrity and peer review · 2026Article
- Creating a responsible authorship culture in science: Anchoring authorship practices in principles of transparency, credit, and accountability.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Evaluating multiple candidates simultaneously reduces racial disparities in promotion and tenure.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Fake publications in biomedical science: red-flagging method indicates mass production.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Academic Career Pathways in German Medicine: Current Structures and International Comparisons.International journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Mind the Gap: From Policy to Practice at CNR An Analysis of Career Advancement Criteria in Light of the Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment.Open research Europe · 2026Article
- Participatory approach, dissemination, and implementation of research on aging: the Age-It experience.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2025Article
- Article
- Geopolitical impacts on the description of new terrestrial mollusc species.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Article
- Prestige Fetishism in the Academy: Comte's Mirror, the Magic Mirror or an Illusion of Reality?The British journal of sociology · 2025Article
- Evaluating and supporting leadership, management, and mentoring: a framework for catalyzing responsible research and healthy research environments.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
29 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The assessment of research performance is widely seen as a vital tool in upholding the highest standards of quality, with selection and competition believed to drive progress. Academic institutions need to take critical decisions on hiring and promotion, while facing external pressure by also being subject to research assessment
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.