vetenskapsrådets kartläggning, utvärdering och rekommendationer ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2 KARTLÄGGNING OCH UTVÄRDERING AV SVENSK VÅRDFORSKNING – HUVUDRAPPORT OCH UNDERLAG FÖR VETENSKAPSRÅDETS REKOMMENDATIONER dertaking similar research. The larger universities (hubs) can benefit by getting access to clinical data in other parts of Sweden and the smaller university colleges can benefit from getting access to research expertise in the form of statistical, methodological and economic assistance and advice. It is the panel’s view that it is not necessary for all departments of Care Sciences to have the same methodological expertise. This can be housed in a small number of centres and shared with researchers in other institutions. • The panel viewed interprofessional and interdisciplinary research positively. This was not just with other care scientists but with inter alia architects, engineers, sports scientists, computer scientists and arts and humanities staff. The panel members were also pleased to note that in some cases patients and family carers were involved in projects from design to dissemination. More should be done to encourage such practises. • A small number of university departments had very good links with external companies, business innovators and entrepreneurs. This helped them identify, protect and exploit the intellectual property of their research and to have an innovation pipeline. This meant that their research could contribute to enhancing the local economy or contribute to social and cultural growth. It was disappointing not to see more evidence of this across the sector. • A number of university colleges cannot award doctorates. To do so, they have to collaborate with other degree awarding universities. This provides opportunities for joint mentoring and for better research partnerships. However, in several cases the collaboration only focused upon the degree awarding powers. Research Funding • Funding tended to be gained both from internal and external sources. In most cases, these funds were obtained competitively through a robust peer reviewed process. While this is laudable, there were many instances of research being supported by non competitive grants and endowments. It is recommended that more funding with full economic costs is obtained from high profile national and international competitive sources such as the research council and the EU. Research Group/Areas • In several instances the panel felt that universities had too many research groupings and topics for the number of research staff employed. For instance, in some institutions, there were 6–7 research groups for around 20 research active staff. To be internationally excellent and world leading, 26 VETENSKAPSRÅDETS KARTLÄGGNING, UTVÄRDERING OCH REKOMMENDATIONER ANGÅENDE SVENSK VÅRDFORSKNING
2 KARTLÄGGNING OCH UTVÄRDERING AV SVENSK VÅRDFORSKNING – HUVUDRAPPORT OCH UNDERLAG FÖR VETENSKAPSRÅDETS REKOMMENDATIONER a critical mass of researchers was required with concentration on fewer strategic research topics. • The panel used the full range of ratings from regional and national to international and world leading. As expected some universities were more mature in their research activities and outputs than others. However, regional and national research quality for newer universities (D Rating) should not be denigrated as it is often the findings from such studies that lead to good regional and national impact. • The panel noted some excellent research across the life span from maternity care to child care to care of older persons. Welfare issues were also well explored. Many of these studies were truly multidisciplinary. Furthermore, there were many excellent examples of research instrument development and their psychometric testing. In most cases these were highly regarded and used internationally. In addition, the panel noted that most of the research was focused on issues of international relevance in the 21st century. These included research on chronic disease management, community and primary care, the use of technology for more efficient and effective care, oral health, health promotion and disease prevention and visionary projects on educating families and patients in home care. The panel were surprised not to see more research on issues such as immigrant health and diversity, suicide, sexual health, and clinical skill mix. The panel were also disappointed not to see more evidence of theorising about Care Sciences including theory development and testing. • The panel members were very impressed with the number of publications in high impact factored journals. We also noted that Sweden is home to some good quality journals. The level of support for PhD students was also of a high quality in many of the submissions. Nonetheless, a worrying number of PhD students were over fifty years of age. While reasons for this could previous clinical careers or family circumstances, it does raise questions around future research leadership and sustainability. • While there are many good research projects (1–3 years duration) the panel would have liked to see more externally funded research programmes (3–10+ years duration). Such programmes tend to be a mark of academic maturity. Future Plans and Potential • In many instances, the self-evaluation reports simply listed a series of research activities, collaborations and processes. The panel was disappointed not to see a more strategic approach to research plans. Often, the future plans were simply statements about doing more of the same or enhancing the same research topics. The panel were surprised not to note more strate- VETENSKAPSRÅDETS KARTLÄGGNING, UTVÄRDERING OCH REKOMMENDATIONER ANGÅENDE SVENSK VÅRDFORSKNING 27
Page 1: VETENSKAPSRÅDETS KARTLÄGGNING, UT
Page 4: VETENSKAPSRÅDETS KARTLÄGGNING, UT
Page 8 and 9: 2.5 Intervjuer om svensk vårdforsk
Page 10 and 11: SAMMANFATTNING • En utvärdering
Page 12 and 13: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following fou
Page 14 and 15: 1 VETENSKAPSRÅDETS REKOMMENDATIONE
Page 16 and 17: 1 VETENSKAPSRÅDETS REKOMMENDATIONE
Page 18 and 19: 2 KARTLÄGGNING OCH UTVÄRDERING AV
Page 78 and 79:
2 KARTLÄGGNING OCH UTVÄRDERING AV
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Summa heltidsekvivalenter 250 200 1
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
3 BILAGOR Bilaga 3.1 204 VETENSKAPS
Page 208 and 209:
3 BILAGOR 206 VETENSKAPSRÅDETS KAR
Page 210 and 211:
3 BILAGOR Bilaga 3.3 Vetenskapsråd
Page 212 and 213:
3 BILAGOR Bilaga 3.5 Sammanställni
Page 214 and 215:
3 BILAGOR Bilaga 3.6 212 VETENSKAPS
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220:
Hösten 2010 gav regeringen Vetensk
show all

vetenskapsrådets kartläggning, utvärdering och rekommendationer ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?