1. Personal Strategies for Improving
your REF Publications
Andrew Booth, Director of
Information, ScHARR

2. Outline
• ScHARR REF Audit
• Personal Publication Strategies
–Ian De Pendent
–Matt O'Dologhy
–Ann Hahnze
–Di Kotomos
–Enid Chiate
• Profiles and Practical Suggestions
• REF Impact Case Studies and Individual
Researchers

3. ScHARR REF Audit
• REF Census – Publications (2008-2009)
and Potential Impact Stories (2009-
backwards)
• 116 staff returned forms
• 18 staff (maternity leave, sick leave, non-
compliant) estimated returns (Mendeley
database of 1201 ScHARR publications)
at
• 24 queries regarding eligibility/status
Total = 158 individuals

4. How Are We Doing?
• 67/158 [42%] had 4+ publications
• 9/158 [6%] had 3 publications
• 13/158 [8%] on track for 4 publications
Total 89/158
• Caveat: No consideration of Eligibility↓, no
consideration of Quality of Journals↓, no
consideration of Congruence↓ but also no
concession for WTE↑

5. That’s Good Isn’t It?
• Yes, but……
……ScHARR research typically conducted
as multidisciplinary teams
……Individual papers can only be submitted
once
……Therefore we are most interested in
First Authored Papers and ScHARR-
First Authored Papers

6. Because….?
• First Authored Papers – Not affected by
collaborators from other institutions or by
staff joining ScHARR (11 staff have 4 first
authored papers; 41 have 2+)
• ScHARR-First Authored Papers – Not
affected by ScHARR staff higher up “pecking
order” (35 staff have 4 papers as first or only
ScHARR author)
• Also interested in congruence between
papers and any Unit of Assessment, but
particularly HSR.

7. And What About Citations?
• Average number of citations was just
under 2
/3 of a citation (Mean = 0.63;
median = 0; mode = 0)
• Highest total was 59 citations from 6
papers (including 33 for one pre-ScHARR
paper)
• Most higher impact papers had clinical
leadership/involvement and published in
clinical journals

8. Current Verdict
• We work hard, we are prolific, we have a
good environment and perform well for
esteem (as for RAE)
• However we appear to privilege quantity
over quality and have very few high impact
papers (hence Power Rating for RAE)
• Is our work good enough? 
• Do we aim high enough? ?
• Are we in our comfort zone? ?

9. To Illustrate
4/6 articles
?
+1 in 31st
Journal; 1 with No Impact Factor

10. What Can We Do Collectively?
• Target “better” journals
• More strategic discussion re: Authorship
• More partnerships with Clinicians
• More synthesis of Methodology across
similar projects
• More follow up work/secondary data
analysis looking at Impact of Primary Work
(c.p. DEC evaluation)

12. ISI Health Care Sciences and
Services [1-10]
Only 7 of these
would get into Top
20 for Medicine

13. ISI Health Care Sciences and
Services [11-20]

14. MEDICINE, GENERAL &
INTERNAL (Top 20)
Health Technology
Assessment would
appear here

15. ScHARR’s Top 20 Papers during
REF Period so far
• BMJ (2)
• Lancet (2)
• Quality & Safety in Health
Care
---------------------------
• Medical Decision Making
• Pharmacoeconomics (2)
• Value in Health
---------------------------
• 8 with ScHARR 1st
Author
• 3 RCTs, 2 SRs, 3
Outcomes, 4 Cost Effect.
• Acad Emerg Med
• Age and Ageing
• Am J Kidney Diseases
• Arthritis & Rheumatism
• Breast Cancer Research &
Treatment
• Diabetic Medicine
• Eye
• European Journal of Cancer
• J Clin Endocr & Metabol
• Nephrology Dialysis
Transplantation

18. Any Questions/Comments?

19. Profile – Ian De Pendent
• Typically PI
• Typically 2 or More
Projects over period
• 4 or More ScHARR
First Authored
Publications

20. Personal Publication Strategy?
No!

21. Personal Publication Strategy?
• Aim to Improve One or More of Your
Journals (from Citation List) or Papers
• Write with Clinician
• Counts Double!: Better Paper for You,
Releases One to ScHARR Colleague
• Look at Co-Authoring as Second Author
with ScHARR Colleague
• Mentoring

22. Profile – Matt O’Dologhy
• Typically Health
Economist, Modeller,
Statistician or Info
Scientist
• Involved in Many
Projects, some
Clinician-led
• 3-4 Publications,
none as First Author

23. Personal Publication Strategy?
• Second-Authored Papers with Non-
ScHARR Clinician
• First-Authored Papers (Perhaps as
PI/Project Manager)
• 1-2 Methodology Papers Synthesising
Findings from Multiple Projects
• Aim to get Methodology Papers Open
Access (BMC/White Rose)

24. Profile – Ann Hahnze
• Two or Three Papers
in Peer Reviewed
journals
• May be PI on One or
More Projects
• Spending More Time
“Doing” than Writing?

25. Personal Publication Strategy?
• Aim to Produce More Papers [1 or 1.5
per Writing Week)
• Try to “Trump” Existing Papers by
Publishing in Higher Impact Journals
• Protected Time
• Team Writing
• Peer Support

26. Profile – Di Kotomos
• Quite new to HSR
• Mixed portfolio –
disciplinary (e.g.
Psychology, IS, or Social
Science) and topical
publications
• E.g. Reviewer with
previous early stage
research or Info
Specialist also involved in
reviews
• Potentially split across
Units of Assessment

27. Personal Publication Strategy?
• Need to Prioritise One Half of Portfolio
• Discuss with Line Manager and Unit of
Assessment Leads
• Then Focus on Replacing Current Papers
as First ScHARR Author with those that fit
Target UoA
• May Release Papers to Other Co-Authors
• Also Contribute to Team Writing for
General Career Progression

28. Profile – Enid Chiate
• Recent entrant to
HSR
• Mainly working on
one project at a time
• One or two papers as
member of research
team

29. Personal Publication Strategy?
• Identify Sub-Project or Re-analysis as
Potential First Author Paper
• Target a Mid-to-Higher Range Journal
• Take advantage of Mentoring, Writing
Club and Publications Training Courses
• Continue to Participate in Team Writing
• Discuss Timescale for REF Eligibility with
Line Manager

30. Any Questions/Comments?

31. Practical
Suggestions/Reminders
Targeting Journals and Monitoring
Impact

32. The Journal Finder
• Research Gate's The Journal Finder.
Research Gate - scientific network to connect
researchers, find research partners, collaborate with
scientists and explore journal articles.
• With more than 20,000 print Journals, Journal Finder
helps discover which journals are most relevant to your
research.
• Copy and Paste your article's abstract into
their semantic search algorithm, and it will identify
relevant journals.
• Includes information on publication restrictions as well as
more information (e.g. impact factor) about journal.

36. Demonstration

37. Tip - Look through your
list of references
Journal titles that appear several times are
candidates for your article.

38. http://mulford.meduohio.edu/instr/
http://mulford.meduohio.edu/instr/

40. Web of Science analysis
http://wok.mimas.ac.uk/

41. Analyze Results

44. Demonstration

45. If at first you don’t succeed…planning
for contingencies
Use the “stable” approach
E.g. BMJ -Annals of Rheumatic Diseases
Sexually Transmitted Infections Archives of
Disease in Childhood Thorax British Journal
of Ophthalmology British Journal of Sports
Medicine Injury Prevention Journal of
Epidemiology & Community Health
Emergency Medicine Journal Occupational
and Environmental Medicine Gut Tobacco
Control Heart Journal of Clinical Pathology
Journal of Medical Ethics Journal of Medical
Genetics Journal of Neurology,
Neurosurgery and Psychiatry Medical
Humanities Postgraduate Medical Journal
Quality & Safety in Health Care

46. Recycle, recycle, recycle
• Three strikes and
you’re out! – try up to
three times
• Take on comments
and suggestions
(especially suggested
target journals)
• Consider slicing or
repackaging.

47. Researcher ID
• Accessed through University Library -> Web of
Science -> Additional Resources
• Creates Unique Identifier for you
• You can link yourself to your own Web of
Science Publications
• You then have permanent profile for your
outputs
• Updated for all stored publications
• Add each year’s publications as you go

53. Increasing your Impact
through White Rose
Research Online

54. WRRO: go for it
• Increase visibility & citation impact
• URLs for long term links
• Supports Open Access
– Required by funders
– Free to all
• WRRO FAQs at
http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/docs/faq.html

55. Contacts
• Marion Tattersall
Research Development Librarian
Generic research support issues
m.tattersall@sheffield.ac.uk phone: 27281 Mon-Thurs
• Anthea Tucker
Science Engineering and Medicine Liaison Team
assistant
WRRO practicalities
a.l.tucker@sheffield.ac.uk phone:27318
• Rachel Proudfoot
White Rose Repository Officer
WRRO policy and development issues
r.e.proudfoot@leeds.ac.uk tel: 0113 343 7067

56. Final Reminders
• Target Appropriate Journals
• Aim to Trump Existing Journal Portfolio
• Plan Strategically – Your “liberated”
publications may swell someone else’s
portfolio!
• Peer Support/Mentoring etcetera
• Remember: It is not Authorship (or even
necessarily First Authorship) But It Is First
ScHARR Authorship that is Critical

57. Brief Word About Impact

58. Overall excellence
Outputs Impact Environment
60%?? 25%??
↓
15%??
NB. Impact replaces Esteem; Some Esteem subsumed
within Environment

59. Assessing impact
• “Significant additional
recognition where
institutions and
researchers have built
on excellent research
to deliver
demonstrable benefits
to the economy,
society, public policy,
culture or quality of
life”.

60. Principles of Impact
• Impact of submitting unit as whole, not
impact of individual researchers.
• Submissions to provide examples of
research-driven impact from unit’s broad
portfolio of work.
• Impacts to be underpinned by high-quality
research. (Focus of REF on research
excellence, with additional recognition for
strong impact built on that excellence).
• Because of time-lags, impact must be
evident during REF assessment period,
but research may have been undertaken
earlier (up to 10-15 years earlier).

61. Assessment of Impact
• Qualitative information informed by appropriate
indicators.
• Submissions to include:
– Impact statement, generic template for submitted
unit as a whole. Breadth of interactions with research
users and overview of positive impacts that became
evident during assessment period.
– Case studies, generic template to illustrate specific
examples of impact and how unit contributed to them.
• One case study/5-10 members of staff.
• Case studies and impact statement to include
appropriate indicators of impact, to support
narrative evidence.

62. Draft template for
impact case studies
1. Title of case study.
2. Describe/provide evidence of specific benefit or impact
(maximum 500 words), including:
– nature of impact; how far-reaching and significant benefits are
– appropriate indicators of impact (from “common menu”)
3. Explain how unit’s research activity contributed or led to
impact (maximum 500 words), including:
– outline of underpinning research, when undertaken and by
whom
– efforts made by staff to exploit or apply findings or secure impact
through research expertise
– any other significant factors or contributions to impact.
4. Provide references to:
– key research outputs that underpin the impact
– external reports or documents, or contact details of a user, to
corroborate impact or unit’s contribution

63. How Impact
Assessed
• Assessed by REF expert sub-panels, comprising
people who understand research in discipline and
its wider use and benefits supplemented with
research users to assess impacts.
• Sub-panels to assess impact against criteria of:
– reach (how widely impacts have been felt);
– significance (how transformative impacts have
been).
• Subprofile - proportion of impacts meeting each
level on five-point scale. Four-star (‘exceptional’)
rating - ‘ground-breaking, transformative or of
major value, relevant to a range of situations’.

64. Sample Indicators: Improved
patient care or health outcomes
• Research income from NHS and medical research
charities
• Measures of improved health outcomes (for example, lives
saved, reduced infection rates)
• Measures of improved health services (for example,
reduced treatment times or costs, equal access to
services)
• Changes to clinical or healthcare training, practice or
guidelines (including refs in relevant docs such as National
Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines)
• Devt of new/improved drugs, treatments or other medical
interventions; nos. of advanced phase clinical trials
• Participation on health policy/advisory committees
• Changes to public behaviour (for example, reductions in
smoking)

65. Impact in the Context of the REF
• King’s College, Friday 25th
June 2010
• Report of Impact Pilots
• All Powerpoints Available from:
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/iss/support/ref/june2010
HEADLINES:
• Measuring Impact is feasible but time-
consuming
• Final weighting not decided yet
• Requires skills in marketing, media, journalism
• Can’t really handle “negative impact”

68. The Way Forward
• We have asked Staff to Nominate Impact Stories
• Combined List shared with Research Committee
• At RC Meeting tomorrow initial list of 8 Case
Studies will be compiled
• Approximately 3 Case Studies will be worked up
over Summer (Pending fuller guidance)
• We will be working with PIs and Team Members
• We will probably need to develop 2:1 but
valuable for other purposes e.g. Marketing

69. Any Last Questions or
Comments?