<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE ArticleSet PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD PubMed 2.7//EN" "https://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/ncbi/pubmed/in/PubMed.dtd">
<ArticleSet>
<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>Isfahan University of Medical Sciences</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Health Information Management</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>1735-7853</Issn>
				<Volume>9</Volume>
				<Issue>5</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2012</Year>
					<Month>11</Month>
					<Day>21</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Comparison of Models and Frameworks of Medical Research
Impact Assessment*</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle>Comparison of Models and Frameworks of Medical Research
Impact Assessment*</VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>757</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>767</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">12144</ELocationID>
			
			
			<Language>FA</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Hamid R.</FirstName>
					<LastName>Jamali</LastName>
<Affiliation>Assistant Professor, Library and Information Studies, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran</Affiliation>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2022</Year>
					<Month>03</Month>
					<Day>28</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>The present review article aimed to identify, introduce and compare models and frameworks used&lt;br /&gt;for the impact assessment of medical research. Comprehensive searches were conducted in&lt;br /&gt;various databases in order to identify models and frameworks. Those works that proposed a&lt;br /&gt;model or framework were chosen for the review and comparison. Thirteen different models and&lt;br /&gt;frameworks were identified. The level of assessment, items that models evaluate, and the type of&lt;br /&gt;impact they assess showed some differences. In terms of the type of impact, Research Excellence&lt;br /&gt;Framework was the only framework to cover all social, economic, cultural, and scientific aspects.&lt;br /&gt;There is still not a single standard model to assess the impact of medical research. However,&lt;br /&gt;among the proposed models, the payback model appears to be more widely used and accepted.&lt;br /&gt;There is also ambiguity in the utilizations of the terms “impact” and “outcome” and in some&lt;br /&gt;works they have been used interchangeably.</Abstract>
			<OtherAbstract Language="FA">The present review article aimed to identify, introduce and compare models and frameworks used&lt;br /&gt;for the impact assessment of medical research. Comprehensive searches were conducted in&lt;br /&gt;various databases in order to identify models and frameworks. Those works that proposed a&lt;br /&gt;model or framework were chosen for the review and comparison. Thirteen different models and&lt;br /&gt;frameworks were identified. The level of assessment, items that models evaluate, and the type of&lt;br /&gt;impact they assess showed some differences. In terms of the type of impact, Research Excellence&lt;br /&gt;Framework was the only framework to cover all social, economic, cultural, and scientific aspects.&lt;br /&gt;There is still not a single standard model to assess the impact of medical research. However,&lt;br /&gt;among the proposed models, the payback model appears to be more widely used and accepted.&lt;br /&gt;There is also ambiguity in the utilizations of the terms “impact” and “outcome” and in some&lt;br /&gt;works they have been used interchangeably.</OtherAbstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Evaluation Studies</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Scientometrics</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Iran</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Medical Research</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://him.mui.ac.ir/article_12144_5f3dafd630cc5868d035f85198214167.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>
</ArticleSet>
