IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

La valutazione della didattica e della ricerca medica: esperienze a confronto
[Evaluation of medical teaching and research: a comparative analysis]

Listed author(s):
  • Cavalieri, Marina
  • Mangano, Alfia
Registered author(s):

    In medical faculties, teaching and research are carried out together with patient health care. A large body of literature has empirically studied the effects of these joint academic activities, especially in terms of higher hospital costs and better quality of care. An appropriate definition and evaluation of the outputs provided by these institutions and their interactions is crucial to design an efficient and equitable financing scheme. This paper aims at analyzing different methodological approaches which can be used to evaluate medical teaching and research. Some evaluation experiences of both Italian and international institutions are described and critically apprised. The comparative analysis reveals that none of the systems is immune to criticism. Hence, the importance of adopting multiple evaluation methods involving subjective and objective measures as well as qualitative and quantitative approaches.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 16095.

    in new window

    Date of creation: May 2009
    Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:16095
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Ludwigstra├če 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany

    Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2459
    Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-992459
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Th N van Leeuwen & H F Moed & R J W Tijssen & M S Visser & A F J van Raan, 2000. "First evidence of serious language-bias in the use of citation analysis for the evaluation of national science systems," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 155-156, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:16095. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Joachim Winter)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.