Metric-based vs peer-reviewed evaluation of a research output: Lesson learnt from UK's national research assessment exercise.

Koya K, Chowdhury G.

Open source

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0179722
Published: 2017-07-11
Container: PLoS One
Publisher: Not recorded
Open access: yes

Credibility signals

uncertain Score 53/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.

Show all credibility signals

cautionDOI registered: No matching Crossref record was present in this response. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
cautionDOI resolves: No matching Crossref record was present in this response. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
supportingDirectory of Open Access Journals: A matching record was returned by DOAJ. Source: DOAJ; license: CC0
not scoredMEDLINE indexed: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredOpenAlex core source: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredKnown publisher allow-list: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredROR affiliation: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredRetraction Watch retraction: No retraction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch expression of concern: No expression of concern notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch correction: No correction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch reinstatement: No reinstatement notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
supportingOpen access status: Normalized open-access status: open. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
not scoredPublication license: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredPublication version: A publication version was supplied but is not scored. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
cautionMetadata completeness: 5 of 6 scored descriptive metadata groups are present; missing fields increase uncertainty. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer

Cite this work

BibTeX

@article{allodium:10.1371/journal.pone.0179722,
  title = {Metric-based vs peer-reviewed evaluation of a research output: Lesson learnt from UK's national research assessment exercise.},
  author = {Koya K and  Chowdhury G.},
  year = {2017},
  journal = {PLoS One},
  doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0179722},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179722}
}

RIS

TY  - JOUR
TI  - Metric-based vs peer-reviewed evaluation of a research output: Lesson learnt from UK's national research assessment exercise.
AU  - Koya K
AU  -  Chowdhury G.
PY  - 2017
JO  - PLoS One
DO  - 10.1371/journal.pone.0179722
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179722
ER  -

APA

K, K., & G., C. (2017). Metric-based vs peer-reviewed evaluation of a research output: Lesson learnt from UK's national research assessment exercise.. PLoS One. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179722

Source records

europe-pmc · retrieved 2026-11-10T10:25:04.363Z
doaj · retrieved 2026-11-10T10:25:04.362Z