IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v13y2004i3p155-166.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Some international benchmarks for evaluating Australian health and medical research

Author

Listed:
  • Sam Garrett-Jones
  • Brian Wixted
  • Tim Turpin

Abstract

Recent experience in Australia has seen the requirement by the federal Department of Finance and Administration to conduct output pricing reviews of government agencies including research organisations. Health and medical research, while generally regarded as an important ‘public good’, is now pressed by the same demands as other research fields to account for public investments in terms of value of outcomes and value for investment. This paper reports on current trends towards international benchmarking of health and medical research performance. Comparative data from overseas show unique aspects of the Australian health and medical research funding system. The paper suggests possible future routes for carrying out health research evaluation in Australia. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Sam Garrett-Jones & Brian Wixted & Tim Turpin, 2004. "Some international benchmarks for evaluating Australian health and medical research," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 155-166, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:13:y:2004:i:3:p:155-166
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154404781776428
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:13:y:2004:i:3:p:155-166. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.