Meta-research: justifying career disruption in funding applications, a survey of Australian researchers
- School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Australia
- Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, Queensland University of Technology, Australia
- Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, Australia
Figures
Figure 1
Percentages for the three demographic questions split by the random and non-random sample.
The black dots are the percentages from the latest available NHMRC data on applicants which are compared with the random sample.
Figure 2
Percentages for the questions on awareness and understanding of current career disruption policies and two questions on the respondents’ use of career disruption sections split by the random and non-random sample.
Figure 3
Percentages for the reasons given for not including career disruptions sections split by the random and non-random sample.
The reasons are ordered by the overall numbers agreeing across the two samples.
Figure 4
Estimated mean time away from research that applicants would write for four hypothetical career disruptions of 6 months duration.
The dots are the means and horizontal lines are 95% credible intervals. The numbers above and below the mean are the probability that the scenario had the lowest mean. The results are shown without imputing missing data and imputing 6 months for missing slider data.
Figure 5
Percentages for the three questions concerning the respondents’ perspective as a peer reviewer.
The histogram shows the difference in time that respondents gave to an applicant who detailed their medical issue and one who did not.
Figure 6
Odds ratios to examine if women were more or less likely to agree to selected questions.
The odds ratio is on a log-10 scale. An odds ratio of 1 indicates no difference for women relative to men. The horizontal lines are 95% confidence intervals.
Additional files
-
Transparent reporting form
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/76123/elife-76123-transrepform1-v2.docx
-
Supplementary file 1
Participant information sheet and survey questions.
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/76123/elife-76123-supp1-v2.docx
-
Supplementary file 2
Summary results and plots, and examination of missing data.
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/76123/elife-76123-supp2-v2.docx
Download links
A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
Meta-research: justifying career disruption in funding applications, a survey of Australian researchers
eLife 11:e76123.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.76123
