Peer Reviewer Resource: Broadening your assessment of research contributions
and impacts
July 2023
There is more than meets the eye when it comes to a researcher’s track record. It is therefore crucial that peer reviewers look broadly, beyond the traditional indicators of productivity, when assessing contributions and impacts.
Historically valued
- Publications and citations
- Reports and books
- Prestigious awards
- Number/size of grants
- Knowledge mobilization outputs & activities
Other valuable research outputs
- Influence on policy and practice
- Public engagement (including public, patients, providers, policymakers/government, researchers, industry, mainstream and social media)
- Community-based participatory research
- Training & mentorship
- Volunteerism
- Guidelines, standards, software and tools
- Networks, collaborations and partnerships
- Datasets, code and infrastructure development
- Commercialized and open-access products
Do
- Consider a broad range of research contributions and impacts in research assessment
- Assess quality (e.g., distinctions-based, meaningful and culturally safe health research) and impact (e.g., influence on policy and practice, health and societal outcomes) directly, where possible
- Consider the context of the applicant (e.g., leave history, career stage, area(s) of research, experiential knowledge and lived and living experience, diverse career paths, family responsibilities, pandemic impact, barriers to entry facing individuals from underrepresented, rights-holding and/or equity-deserving groups)
Don’t
- Use metrics in isolation to assess productivity, such as number of publications and citations, and size/number of research grants
- Use journal-based metrics (e.g. Journal Impact Factors) as surrogate measures of quality and impact of individual research publications
Want to Learn More
- Date modified: