Evaluation of the Productivity of Research Leading to Publications at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Vice Chancellery for Research Affairs, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.

2 Health Human Resources Research Center, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

3 Vice Chancellery for Research Affairs, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

10.30476/jhmi.2025.106764.1279

Abstract

Introduction: Measuring research productivity is essential for improving the efficiency of
academic output. This study evaluated the productivity of research projects, resulting in
published articles by Shiraz University of Medical Sciences.
Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted in 2023 using a census
sampling method. A total of 487 research projects completed by the end of 2022, each
resulting in at least one published article in a reputable journal, were included. Data were
collected using a structured Excel-based form. Descriptive statistics, including frequencies,
percentages, mean article score per project, average cost per score, and average cost per
project, were calculated using Microsoft Excel 2019.
Results: The university earned 699.42 research scores from the projects. The highest scores
were attributed to articles from non-thesis projects (233.6) and medical school projects
(196.35). A total of 674,802.40 USD was spent to support these projects. The highest average
cost per research score was observed in projects from the School of Paramedical Sciences
(9,976.03 USD) and postdoctoral projects (3,736.56 USD). In contrast, the lowest average
costs per score were found in projects from the Student Research Committee (501.7 USD)
and grant-based projects (510.3 USD).
Conclusion: According to this study, paramedical school and postdoctoral projects incurred
the highest costs per research score, indicating a need for improved resource management.
In contrast, the Student Research Committee and grant-based projects demonstrated higher
productivity. These results underscore the importance of prioritizing funding mechanisms
that maximize research output per dollar spent.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

 
1. Beglari Beglar E, Khadem-Rezaiyan M, Moeini Nodeh M, Jarahi L. Comparing the Scientific Production in the Field of Biomedicine in Iran and Other Countries. Journal of Modern Medical Information Sciences. 2024;10(2):164-83.  
2. Meo SA, Almasri AA, Usmani AM. Research productivity of Pakistan in medical sciences during the period 1996-2012. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2013;17(21):2839-46.  
3. Mammadov R, Aypay A. Efficiency analysis of research universities in Turkey. *International Journal of Educational Development*. 2020;75:102176.  
4. Sharifzadeh S, Ghasempour M, Hajebrahimi M, Rezaianzadeh A, Dehghan S. Evaluation of the scientific output in one of the major medical universities of Iran. 2014.  
5. Lozada-Martinez ID, Neira-Rodado D, Martinez-Guevara D, Cruz-Soto HS, Sanchez-Echeverry MP, Liscano Y. Why is it important to implement meta-research in universities and institutes with medical research activities? *Front Res Metr Anal*. 2025;10:1497280. doi: 10.3389/frma.2025.1497280.  
6. Rasolabadi M, Khaledi S, Khayati F, Kalhor MM, Penjvini S, Gharib A. Scientific Production of Medical Universities in the West of Iran: a Scientometric Analysis. *Acta Inform Med*. 2015;23(4):206-9. doi: 10.5455/aim.2015.23.206-209.  
7. Abramo G, D’Angelo CA. How do you define and measure research productivity? *Scientometrics*. 2014;101(2):1129-44.  
8. Maral M. Research performance of higher education in OECD countries: A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making approach. *Sage Open*. 2024;14(2):21582440241257753.  
9. Knauff M, Nejasmic J. An efficiency comparison of document preparation systems used in academic research and development. *PLoS One*. 2014;9(12):e115069. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0115069.  
10. Bi HH. Four problems of the h-index for assessing the research productivity and impact of individual authors. *Scientometrics*. 2023;128(5):2677-91.  
11. Khanali J, Malekpour MR, Kolahi AA. Assessing the Research Performance of the Iranian Medical Academics and Universities: A Bibliometric Analysis. *Med J Islam Repub Iran*. 2023;37:31. doi: 10.47176/mijiri.37.31.  
12. Kern S. Analytic model for academic research productivity having factors, interactions and implications. *Cancer Biol Ther*. 2011;12(11):949-56. doi: 10.4161/cbt.12.11.18368.  
13. Oyeyemi AY, Ejakpovi DR, Oyeyemi AL, Adeniji T. Research productivity of academic staff in a medical school. *Sahel Medical Journal*. 2019;22(4):219-25.  
14. Ranjbar-Pirmousa Z, Borji-Zemeldani N, Attarchi M, Nemati S, Aminpour F. Comparative analysis of research performance of medical universities based on qualitative and quantitative scientometric indicators. *Acta Medica Iranica*. 2019:448-54.  
15. Aziz NM, Salleh H, Mustafa NKF. People critical success factors (CSFs) in information technology/information system (IT/IS) implementation. *Journal of Design+ Built*. 2012;5(1).  
16. Vice President of Research and Technology of the Ministry of Health TaME [Internet]. Guide for comprehensive evaluation of research and technology activities of Iranian universities and medical sciences and health care services faculties. c2021. Access from https://research.umsu.ac.ir/uploads/22/2023/DeC/05/EVAL-University-1400_1.pdf. [Persian].  
17. Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran [Internet]. Exchange Rates. Tehran: CBI; 2022. [cited 02 June 2025]. Available from: https://www.cbi.ir. [Persian].  
18. Mohammadi M, Mesgarpour B. Systemic approach to health research in Iran and the world. *Bull World Health Organ*. 2001;79(9):834-41.  
19. GHAHRAMANI M, Abolghasmi M, Arefi M, Atashak M. Improving effectiveness of research Grants at Shahid Beheshti university. 2012;5(1):28-43.  
20. Tamblyn R, Girard N, Qian CJ, Hanley J. Assessment of potential bias in research grant peer review in Canada. *CMAJ*. 2018;190(16):E489-E99. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.170901.  
21. Pagel PS, Hudetz JA. Scholarly productivity and national institutes of health funding of foundation for anesthesia education and research grant recipients: insights from a bibliometric analysis. *Anesthesiology*. 2015;123(3):683-91. doi: 10.1097/ALN.00000000000000737.  
22. Shided O, Al-Gasseer N. Appraisal of the research grant schemes of the World Health Organization Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean: the way forward. *East Mediterr Health J*. 2012;18(5):515-21. doi: 10.26719/2012.18.5.515.  
23. Ul Haq I, Ur Rehman S, Al-Kadri HM, Farooq RK. Research Productivity in the Health Sciences in Saudi Arabia: 2008-2017. *Ann Saudi Med*. 2020;40(2):147-54. doi: 10.5144/0256-4947.2020.147.  
24. Jamali J, Manavifar L, Jamali M. Evaluation of the scientific output of the faculty members of the paramedical school, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences based on Scopus database up to the end of 2012. *Sadra Medical Journal*. 2014;2(2):213-22.  
25. Azimi N. Investigating the general and research University budgets of selected universities in Iran and the world. *Rahyafi*. 2020;30(2):83-96.  
26. Liefner I. Funding, resource allocation, and performance in higher education systems. *Higher education*. 2003;46(4):469-89.  
27. Spathis C, Ananiadis J. The accounting system and resource allocation reform in a public university. *International Journal of Educational Management*. 2004;18(3):196-204.  
28. Buttel FH, Kenney M, Kloppenburg J, Jr, Smith D. Industry-university relationships and the land-grant system. 1986.
Health Management & Information Science
Volume 12, Issue 2
April 2025
Pages 95-103

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics