Skip to main content

What papers do we review?

What we do review

REF 2014 defined research generally as a process of investigation leading to new insights, effectively shared. Within the School of Health Sciences it is assumed that such research will generally be evidenced by publications in peer-review journals.

The focus of the ROME panel is on monitoring and evaluating all articles

  • published in a scientific journal 
  • after a full-peer review process
  • with at least one of the listed authors a current or previous member of the School of Health Sciences acknowledged on the paper as affiliated to the University of Salford.

All papers fulfilling these criteria should be submitted to the panel by the most senior author who is a member of the School of Health Sciences following the guidance on the How does the process work? tab below.
We do not make a distinction between short communications, technical notes etc. and “full” papers as far as inclusion or exclusion is concerned but, in our fields, it is the “full” papers that are likely to be graded more highly.

  • Systematic reviews are considered research and should be reviewed.
  • Narrative reviews will generally be regarded as summarising knowledge rather than leading to new insights and thus as not meeting the REF definition of research. They should be lodged on USIR but will not be reviewed by the Panel. 

There may be a small number of narrative reviews in which the synthesis of evidence or opinion is sufficiently strong to be regarded as leading to new insights. An example might be a review synthesising the opinions of a number of senior figures in a field, perhaps nominated by a professional or academic body, and generating a strong consensus view or guidelines or proposal for future directions. Such papers may be reviewed.

What we don’t review

In most subject areas the requirement for full-peer review will exclude:

  • Abstracts or brief papers submitted to accompany a conference presentation even if these are published in a scientific journal.
  • Editorials, commentaries or guest editorials
  • Letters to the editor or responses to such letters
  • Tributes or obituaries
  • Book reviews

There is no need to submit such outputs to the panel (but they must still be lodged on USIR).

What we monitor
  • Three categories of article were not submitted to the last REF but may become more important for the next one.
  • Pedagogical research
  • Trial protocols
  • Case studies

At present we are monitoring such articles but not grading them. Please unload these to USIR using the normal process (assuming they have been accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal).