Evaluation of biology, medicine and health research in Norway 2011

The purpose of the evaluation was to undertake a critical review of the strengths and weaknesses of research in biology, medicine and health sciences, including psychology, from an international perspective. The evaluation has focused mainly on scientific quality. Topics such as strategy and research management, recruitment and cooperation are also identified and evaluated. The evaluation was also aimed to identify research areas that need to be strengthened to ensure that Norway in the future has the skills necessary in areas of great national importance

Broad-based evaluation

An important objective of the evaluation has been to see the full range of disciplines, across institutional boundaries. Research groups from eight universities, six university hospitals, three hospitals, one academic and three state colleges, 13 research institutes, three scientific museums and five other units associated with universities have participated in this evaluation. Nearly 400 research groups have been evaluated and approximately 4400 scientists have sent in their CV to the evaluation committee.

Due to the large span in disciplines and the number of scientific groups involved in the evaluation, seven international panels of experts were established; each of them reviewed one of the following subfields:

Panel 1 Botany, Zoology and Ecology-related disciplines
Panel 2 Physiology-related disciplines
Panel 3 Molecular Biology
Panel 4a Clinical research – selected disciplines
Panel 4b Clinical research – selected disciplines
Panel 5 Public Health and Health-related research
Panel 6 Psychology and Psychiatry

The assessments and recommendations from the seven panels are compiled in seven separate reports.

In addition a Principal Evaluation Committee compiled a report based on the assessments and recommendations from the seven independent panel reports.

The principal committee has made a number of recommendations, covering funding, career tracks, institutional freedom to operate, the lack of multi-disciplinarity, infrastructures in research, and needs within knowledge management. The committee recommends that:

• a larger fraction of the funding of biomedical research should be available for researcher-driven proposals, with a corresponding decrease of the restricted, thematic research programmes. At the same time, RCN should reserve dedicated funding streams for young scientists. Researchers should be encouraged more to apply for EU, US National Institutes of Health and other international funding, as it also contributes to the internationalization of Norwegian research;
• in order to create better opportunities for the coming generations of scientists, more postdoc positions, as well as a tenured track for postdocs and mid-career positions should be established. The existing MD/PhD and DDS/PhD programs introduced at several universities should be expanded;
• institutional core funding to a much higher degree should be used strategically;
• critical mass within research teams more often is achieved through collaboration across institutions. This will at the same time secure the level of multi-disciplinarity needed in modern research. A strengthening of research infrastructures is also a way forward to secure critical mass;
• new knowledge management methodology, such as joint data-discovery portals and data integration techniques transcending the molecular and clinical levels, should be considered in future initiatives;
• the research institute organization is reviewed with the possibility to better integrate the institute research with the universities.