Groneberg-Kloft, B; Scutaru, C; Fischer, A; Welte, T;Kreiter, C; Quarcoo, D "Analysis of research output parameters: Density equalizing mapping and citation trend analysis" BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH 9. JAN 27 2009. p.NIL_1-NIL_8 Biomed Central, London

[Eugene Garfield]

------------------------------------
E-Mail Address: Beatrix.groneberg-kloft at charite.de 

FULL TEXT AVAILABLE AT : 
http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1472-6963-9-16.pdf

BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH is an open access journal available at:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/
 ------------------------------------

TITLE: Analysis of research output parameters: Density equalizing mapping 
and citation trend analysis (Article, English)

AUTHOR: Groneberg-Kloft, B; Scutaru, C; Fischer, A; Welte, T;Kreiter, C; 
Quarcoo, D

SOURCE: BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH 9. JAN 27 2009. p.NIL_1-NIL_8 BIOMED 
CENTRAL LTD, LONDON

ABSTRACT:  Background: Burden of disease studies indicate major
socio-economic burdens since many years. They should be used for the 
allocation of funding. However, imbalances are present in funding policies 
and therefore benchmarking becomes increasingly important in health 
services research.  

Methods: The present study assessed benchmarking approaches. Using large 
data base analyses, research was analyzed for different health research 
output parameters. The fields of cardiovascular and respiratory medicine 
served as models to assess irregular patterns of health research. For 
visualization, density equalizing mapping procedures were used.  

Results: Specific areas of major research activity were identified for 
European countries and large differences were found. Spatial distribution 
of published items for cardiac and cardiovascular systems differed in 
comparison to the distribution for the respiratory system. In general, 
large countries dominated the overall number of published items. When 
qualitative measures such as citation analysis were assessed, differing 
results were achieved. In this category, mostly Scandinavian countries 
dominated.  

Conclusion: The present approach of comparative output benchmarking can be 
used to assess institutional operating figures at the national and 
international level and to analyze imbalances in health and research 
funding.

AUTHOR ADDRESS: B Groneberg-Kloft, Free Univ Berlin, Charite Univ Med 
Berlin, Otto Heubner Ctr, D-1000 Berlin, Germany
E-mail:  Beatrix.groneberg-kloft at charite.de 

REFERENCES:


1. Chung F, Barnes N, Allen M, Angus R, Corris P, Knox A, Miles J,
Morice A, O'Reilly J and Richardson M: Assessing the burden of
respiratory disease in the UK. Respir Med 2002, 96:963–975.

2. Lopez AD, Mathers CD, Ezzati M, Jamison DT and Murray CJ:
Global and regional burden of disease and risk factors, 2001:
systematic analysis of population health data. Lancet 2006,
367:1747–1757.

3. Murray CJ, Kreuser J and Whang W: Cost-effectiveness analysis
and policy choices: investing in health systems. Bull World
Health Organ 1994, 72:663–674.

4. Nord E: The significance of contextual factors in valuing
health states. Health Policy 1989, 13:189–198.

5. Donaldson C, Atkinson A, Bond J and Wright K: QALYS and longterm
care for elderly people in the UK: scales for assessment
of quality of life. Age Ageing 1988, 17:379–387.

6. Fuster V: Dilemmas of NIH funding for cardiovascular
research. Circulation 1998, 98:1253–1254.

7. Time to reform European science funding. Nat Neurosci 2004,
7:895.

8. Lewison G, Grant J and Jansen P: International gastroenterology
research: subject areas, impact, and funding. Gut 2001,
49:295–302.

9. Schiermeier Q: Berlin places genomics among top funding
priorities. Nature 1999, 402:568.

10. Campbell A: Ethos and economics: examining the rationale
underlying stem cell and cloning research policies in the
United States, Germany, and Japan. Am J Law Med 2005, 31:47–
86.

11. Stevens D: Embryonic stem cell research: will President
Bush's limitation on federal funding put the United States at
a disadvantage? A comparison between U.S. and international
law. Houst J Int Law 2003, 25:623–653.

12. Taylor PL: The gap between law and ethics in human
embryonic stem cell research: overcoming the effect of U.
S. federal policy on research advances and public benefit. Sci
Eng Ethics 2005, 11:589–616.

13. Zwingmann C, Buschmann-Steinhage R, Gerwinn H and
Klosterhuis H: [The "rehabilitation sciences" research funding
programme: research findings – implementation – impact
and perspectives]. Rehabilitation (Stuttg) 2004, 43:260–270.
BMC Health Services Research 2009, 9:16

 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/9/16