Using bibliometrics to evaluate translational science training: evidence for early career success of KL2 scholars
Abstract Introduction: Evaluating clinical and translational research (CTR) mentored training programs is challenging because no two programs are alike. Careful selection of appropriate metrics is required to make valid comparisons between individuals and between programs. The KL2 program provides...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Cambridge University Press
2021-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Clinical and Translational Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2059866120005166/type/journal_article |
| _version_ | 1811156547674308608 |
|---|---|
| author | Kelli Qua Clara M. Pelfrey |
| author_facet | Kelli Qua Clara M. Pelfrey |
| author_sort | Kelli Qua |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
Abstract
Introduction:
Evaluating clinical and translational research (CTR) mentored training programs is challenging because no two programs are alike. Careful selection of appropriate metrics is required to make valid comparisons between individuals and between programs. The KL2 program provides mentored-training for early-stage CTR investigators. Clinical and Translational Awards across the country have unique KL2 programs. The evaluation of KL2 programs has begun to incorporate bibliometrics to measure KL2 scholar and program impact.
Methods:
This study investigated demographic differences in bibliometric performance and post-K award funding of KL2 scholars and compared the bibliometric performance and post-K award federal funding of KL2 scholars and other mentored-K awardees at the same institution. Data for this study included SciVal and iCite bibliometrics and National Institutions of Health RePORTER grant information for mentored-K awardees (K08, K23, and KL2) at Case Western Reserve University between 2005 and 2013.
Results:
Results showed no demographics differences within the KL2 program scholars. Bibliometric differences between KL2 and other mentored-K awardee indicated an initial KL2 advantage for the number of publications at 5 years’ post-matriculation (i.e., the start of the K award). Regression analyses indicated the number of initial publications was a significant predictor of federal grant funding at the same time point. Analysis beyond the 5-year post-matriculation point did not result in a sustained, significant KL2 advantage.
Conclusions:
Factors that contributed to the grant funding advantage need to be determined. Additionally, differences between translational and clinical bibliometrics must be interpreted with caution, and appropriate metrics for translational science must be established.
|
| first_indexed | 2024-04-10T04:53:28Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-33f3635ff4c24f778c24361d26691025 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2059-8661 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-10T04:53:28Z |
| publishDate | 2021-01-01 |
| publisher | Cambridge University Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Clinical and Translational Science |
| spelling | doaj.art-33f3635ff4c24f778c24361d266910252023-03-09T12:31:02ZengCambridge University PressJournal of Clinical and Translational Science2059-86612021-01-01510.1017/cts.2020.516Using bibliometrics to evaluate translational science training: evidence for early career success of KL2 scholarsKelli Qua0Clara M. Pelfrey1https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6108-7555School of Medicine, Clinical and Translational Science Collaborative, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USASchool of Medicine, Clinical and Translational Science Collaborative, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA Abstract Introduction: Evaluating clinical and translational research (CTR) mentored training programs is challenging because no two programs are alike. Careful selection of appropriate metrics is required to make valid comparisons between individuals and between programs. The KL2 program provides mentored-training for early-stage CTR investigators. Clinical and Translational Awards across the country have unique KL2 programs. The evaluation of KL2 programs has begun to incorporate bibliometrics to measure KL2 scholar and program impact. Methods: This study investigated demographic differences in bibliometric performance and post-K award funding of KL2 scholars and compared the bibliometric performance and post-K award federal funding of KL2 scholars and other mentored-K awardees at the same institution. Data for this study included SciVal and iCite bibliometrics and National Institutions of Health RePORTER grant information for mentored-K awardees (K08, K23, and KL2) at Case Western Reserve University between 2005 and 2013. Results: Results showed no demographics differences within the KL2 program scholars. Bibliometric differences between KL2 and other mentored-K awardee indicated an initial KL2 advantage for the number of publications at 5 years’ post-matriculation (i.e., the start of the K award). Regression analyses indicated the number of initial publications was a significant predictor of federal grant funding at the same time point. Analysis beyond the 5-year post-matriculation point did not result in a sustained, significant KL2 advantage. Conclusions: Factors that contributed to the grant funding advantage need to be determined. Additionally, differences between translational and clinical bibliometrics must be interpreted with caution, and appropriate metrics for translational science must be established. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2059866120005166/type/journal_articleBibliometricsClinical and Translational Science Awardtranslational researchKL2career development |
| spellingShingle | Kelli Qua Clara M. Pelfrey Using bibliometrics to evaluate translational science training: evidence for early career success of KL2 scholars Journal of Clinical and Translational Science Bibliometrics Clinical and Translational Science Award translational research KL2 career development |
| title | Using bibliometrics to evaluate translational science training: evidence for early career success of KL2 scholars |
| title_full | Using bibliometrics to evaluate translational science training: evidence for early career success of KL2 scholars |
| title_fullStr | Using bibliometrics to evaluate translational science training: evidence for early career success of KL2 scholars |
| title_full_unstemmed | Using bibliometrics to evaluate translational science training: evidence for early career success of KL2 scholars |
| title_short | Using bibliometrics to evaluate translational science training: evidence for early career success of KL2 scholars |
| title_sort | using bibliometrics to evaluate translational science training evidence for early career success of kl2 scholars |
| topic | Bibliometrics Clinical and Translational Science Award translational research KL2 career development |
| url | https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2059866120005166/type/journal_article |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT kelliqua usingbibliometricstoevaluatetranslationalsciencetrainingevidenceforearlycareersuccessofkl2scholars AT clarampelfrey usingbibliometricstoevaluatetranslationalsciencetrainingevidenceforearlycareersuccessofkl2scholars |