IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v30y2021i4p443-457..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring research impact models: A systematic scoping review
[AsseCssment of the Impact of a Clinical and Health Services Research Call in Catalonia]

Author

Listed:
  • Maryam Razmgir
  • Sirous Panahi
  • Leila Ghalichi
  • Seyed Ali Javad Mousavi
  • Shahram Sedghi

Abstract

This article explores the models and frameworks developed on “research impact’. We aim to provide a comprehensive overview of related literature through scoping study method. The present research investigates the nature, objectives, approaches, and other main attributes of the research impact models. It examines to analyze and classify models based on their characteristics. Forty-seven studies and 10 reviews published between 1996 and 2020 were included in the analysis. The majority of models were developed for the impact assessment and evaluation purposes. We identified three approaches in the models, namely outcome-based, process-based, and those utilized both of them, among which the outcome-based approach was the most frequently used by impact models and evaluation was considered as the main objective of this group. The process-based ones were mainly adapted from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation logic model and were potentially eligible for impact improvement. We highlighted the scope of processes and other specific features for the recent models. Given the benefits of the process-based approach in enhancing and accelerating the research impact, it is important to consider such approach in the development of impact models. Effective interaction between researchers and stakeholders, knowledge translation, and evidence synthesis are the other possible driving forces contributing to achieve and improve impact.

Suggested Citation

  • Maryam Razmgir & Sirous Panahi & Leila Ghalichi & Seyed Ali Javad Mousavi & Shahram Sedghi, 2021. "Exploring research impact models: A systematic scoping review [AsseCssment of the Impact of a Clinical and Health Services Research Call in Catalonia]," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 443-457.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:30:y:2021:i:4:p:443-457.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvab009
    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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2024:i:2:p:273-285. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2024:i:3:p:603-621. is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Melinda Craike & Bojana Klepac & Amy Mowle & Therese Riley, 2023. "Theory of systems change: An initial, middle-range theory of public health research impact," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(3), pages 603-621.
    4. Ohid Yaqub & Dmitry Malkov & Josh Siepel, 2023. "How unpredictable is research impact? Evidence from the UK’s Research Excellence Framework," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 273-285.

    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:30:y:2021:i:4:p:443-457.. 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.