Our commitment to DORA

What is DORA?

The Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) is a worldwide initiative to improve the ways in which researchers and the outputs of scholarly research are evaluated. It was established in 2012 to stop the practice of judging scientific output by its journal impact factor. In 2021, the BHF became a signatory of DORA, committing to its principles to ensure the quality and impact of scientific outputs is measured accurately and evaluated wisely.

The DORA principles

The DORA agreement has three main recommendations of good research assessment in funding agencies:

1. Transparency in how funding applications and grants are assessed

   When researchers make an application, they should know how their proposed research will be assessed. Similarly, during the course of the grant, the evaluation criteria for scientific productivity should be clear and transparent. 

2. Responsible use of bibliometrics

   Journal impact factor should not be used as a surrogate measure of the scientific quality of a research article. A research article should be judged by its own scientific merit, not that of the journal that it is published in.

3. An appreciation of the value of all research outputs

   The value of all research outputs, not just publications, should be recognised in the assessment of scientific productivity. In the evaluation of past research productivity, the consideration of wider research outputs such as the generation of intellectual property, influence on policy, or public engagement activities, gives a more complete indication of achievement.

What the BHF is doing

These principles of good practice in research assessment have been in the background of our funding processes for years; however, by committing to DORA, we have brought them front and centre. Since becoming a DORA signatory we have reviewed our grant application and evaluation practices and have implemented the following changes.

Transparency in how funding applications and grants are assessed

We have been working to ensure that applicants understand the journey their proposals take from submission to outcome and help remove the opacity of peer review. To help applicants, we have published application pathways for BHF funding schemes and details of BHF funding Committee members. We have also consolidated and published BHF independent expert review guidelines, making sure the standards expected in peer review are understood by both applicants and expert reviewers. We have also sought to provide clarity on how progress and final reports are assessed once an award has been made.

Responsible use of bibliometrics

Guarding against the inappropriate use of journal impact factor is the founding principle of DORA. We have strengthened the role of BHF funding committee Chairs and Vice-Chairs and adding responsibilities to ensure that committee discussions maintain the DORA principles. Chairs and Vice-Chairs will be supported in this role by BHF staff. We have also reminded applicants and expert reviewers not to use impact factors in the writing or assessment of applications.

Appreciation of all research outputs

The DORA principles are further embedded in funding committee procedures with a statement read by the committee Chair and Vice Chair at the beginning of committee discussions. Awareness of the need for a greater appreciation of all research outputs has also been promoted through amendments in how an applicant evidences their track record and the BHF independent expert review guidelines.

What’s next?

Our plans to promote a fair and open research ecosystem do not stop there. We are currently reevaluating our expert review forms. This will include an assessment of the confidential comments section, which is currently excluded from applicant feedback. We expect that amendments to BHF review forms will be introduced in 2025.

If you would like to find out more about our plans for DORA, please contact [email protected] .