Jhony A. De La Cruz-Vargas ORCID 1, Dante M. Quiñones-Laveriano ORCID 1

1Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias Biomédicas, Universidad Ricardo Palma. Lima, Peru.
2Rectorado, Universidad Ricardo Palma. Lima, Peru.

Given the importance of the research component to respond to phenomena and problems demanded by society (1), at Universidad Ricardo Palma, research has been fostered and promoted as an institutional policy. The Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias Biomédicas, which reports to the Rectorate and is integrated into the Facultad de Medicina Humana, has been working to contribute substantially to this growth in research.

Research is directly related to the quality processes of higher education, innovation, extension, linking, licensing, accreditation, and finally, the ranking of universities. As is evident, research is linked to the present and the future of universities. Therefore, measuring the impact of research is essential because educational institutions are and must be permanent generators of intellectual property, knowledge and human resources, which impact the educational, scientific, economic and social sectors.(1)

Indicators have become key instruments to improve decision-making in the management of institutions and for a better definition, development, and evaluation of policies, reforms and programs. To support the evaluation and decision-making relevant to the definition and implementation of policies that promote research, it is essential to generate updated and reliable information for use and analysis by those responsible for these processes. (2)

In this editorial, we present thirteen of the research management indicators of the Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias Biomédicas of Universidad Ricardo Palma, grouped into 5 categories: A) Human resources and research lines, B) Infrastructure, technology and budget, C) Projects and publications, D) Research-Teaching Articulation. Events and Training Courses, and E) Student participation and sustained theses (Table 1).

Table 1. Management indicators in research 2022 - INICIB-URP






Category A: Human Resources and Lines of Research

Indicator 1: Human Resources

a) Increase in the number of RENACYT-CONCYTEC research teachers

5% of medical teachers

>5% of medical teachers

As of December 2022: 47 teaching researchers.

b) Participation of students in research projects

4 students

20 students

Student participation in various research projects.

c) Participation of computer science student interns

2 per semester

2 per semester

Incorporation of two Computer Engineering interns.

Indicator 2: Priority research areas

a) Approved and current in 2021-2026

16 lines

16 lines

Clear and approved lines.

Indicator 3: Research Ethics Committee

a) Research Ethics Committee of the School of Human Medicine.



260 research projects evaluated to date.

Category B: Infrastructure, technology and research budget.

Indicator 4: Infrastructure and technology

a) Development of research laboratories.

3 units

3 units

Laboratory of Biotechnology, Molecular Epidemiology and cell cultivation

b) Latest generation technological equipment.

25 devices

26 devices

Provision of state-of-the-art equipment.

c) Office and computer equipment

5 devices

5 devices

Computer equipment, printers, internet access.

d) Platforms and databases

3 platforms/databases

3 platforms/databases

Access to Digital Commons, Embase, Uptodate.

Indicator 5: Research budget 2022

a) Budget growth.



Growth of more than 100%.

Growth of more than 100%.

Indicator 6: Research projects developed.

a) Projects financed by the URP 13 13 Projects financed by the URP
b)Self-financed projects 15 15 Self-financed projects completed.
c) External competitive funds 1 1 Attracting competitive funds.

Indicator 7: SCOPUS scientific production.

a) Growth relative to 2021 20% 30% As of December 31, 2022 in SCOPUS, goal was surpassed.
b) Substantial increase of articles in Q1-Q2 5 articles >5 articles Presence in Q1-Q2 journals.

Indicator 8: Indexed scientific journal.

a) Revista de la Facultad de Medicina Humana 4 issues per year 4 issues per year Indexed and updated in more than 10 international databases

Category D: Research-Teaching Articulation. Events and training courses.

Indicator 9: Participation of research professors in teaching courses.

a) Subjects of the medical career that has research teachers. 20 25 Presence in more than 50% of medical courses.
b) Formative research 7 15 Formative research products

Indicator 10: Organization of scientific events.

a) International Events. 1 3 Three events were held
b) National Events. 1 2 Two events were held
c) Participation in international events 2 5 Outstanding participation in international events.

Indicator 11: Research training.

a) Training courses for teachers 2 4 Four courses were held.
b) Course for students and teachers 1 1 One course was held.
c) Course for hospitals 1 2 Two courses were held.

Category E: Student participation.

Indicator 12: Students participating in the Thesis Degree Workshop Course.

a) Students of the class of 2022 who took the workshop course 80% 99% The number of medical students was exceeded

Indicator 13: Thesis submitted 2022.

a) Number of theses submitted 150 160 Theses submitted and approved.
b) Award for the best theses 10 10 Financial award event and diploma.

The management indicators shown by the INICIB(3), their purpose is to evaluate the performance technically and objectively of the different dimensions of the work of the Institute that is in charge of the research function, providing the information that allows detecting areas of performance and taking advantage of opportunities to optimize said functions.

Gathering the critical mass of researchers and exceeding 5% of research professors in the Facultad de Medicina Humana, with various specialties, including experts from other disciplines, has been possible in the context of the 100 x 100 URP Special Program(5). The University and the Institute have clearly defined 2021-2026 research priorities in accordance with national priorities. Based on this definition, it is essential to finance or sponsor research that addresses these priorities. The validity and continuity of the work of the Research Ethics Committee plays a fundamental role in the research process.

The University generated the conditions and approved the special 100 x 100 URP Program to promote scientific production, which allowed for the incorporation of research professors, assigning bonuses, and providing support for translations of articles and publications in high-impact journals. The year 2022 began the development of research laboratories, with significant infrastructure and technology investments. Other programs, such as the incentive program for professors who publish, the support program for participation in national and international events, the annual program for financing research projects, among others, reflect the vision and political will of the University.

If we consider scientific production as the highest indicator of the results of scientific activity, this should be the fundamental criterion for measuring research activity. Moreover, the indicators are helpful in the information and decision-making process, as statistical and management information, as system productivity information and for political use.(5)

A significant step is transferring research to future generations of doctors through teaching various academic subjects. As a result, diverse research training activities have been developed. Each year an average of 160 theses are supported and approved. Research must be considered as a means of professional, technological, and economic development of society and not an end to graduate(6). Another strategy to promote and motivate quality theses has been the “Contest and award for the best theses each year”. In addition, participation in scientific events has been achieved to disseminate the work of researchers and the results obtained.

In universities, research centers, institutes, and laboratories, it is inherent to focus on evaluating scientific work. This evaluation should be an institutionalized activity, playing a significant role for the development and proper management. We can consider that research is a complex activity that requires a series of indicators that allow us to evaluate each of the aspects in order to obtain a global vision of scientific efficacy or performance.(6)

Research evaluation can play an essential role in the development of science and its interactions with society. In addition, research indicators can provide crucial information that would be difficult to aggregate or understand from individual experiences. Both quantitative and qualitative evidence are necessary in universities to support decisions related to science, since these have to be made based on high-quality processes and data(7)

With the research management indicators mentioned above, we have built the foundations to project sustained and progressive growth in scientific production, teamwork, respect, ethics, and academic integrity. The most significant current and future challenge of those to come will be how to ensure the sustainability and identity of researchers, the necessary allocation of budgets, as well as the effective coordination of the various levels of decision-making within the institution.

Correspondence: Jhony A. De La Cruz-Vargas.
Address: INICIB, Facultad de Medicina Humana, Edificio I-208. 2do piso. Avenida Benavides 5440, Surco, Lima-Perú.
Telephone number: 708-0000 / Anexo: 6016

Article published by the Journal of the faculty of Human Medicine of the Ricardo Palma University. It is an open access article, distributed under the terms of the Creatvie Commons license: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International, CC BY 4.0(, that allows non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is duly cited. For commercial use, please contact


    1. Lugo Rodríguez, E.A. Los indicadores en al gestion de la investigación: una propuesta para la educación universitaria. Revista Educare. vol. 23, núm. 3,2021. Available at:
    2. Díaz Corrales AV, Pedroza Pacheco ME. Indicadores de impacto en la investigación científica. Rev Cient FAREM-Estelí. (25):60-66. doi:10.5377/farem.v0i25.5683
    3. Universidad Ricardo Palma. Instituto de Investigaciones de Ciencias Biomédicas [Internet]. 2023 [cited 1 Feb 2023]. Available at:
    4. De La Cruz-Vargas JA, Rodríguez Chávez EI. Lanzamiento del programa especial 100 x 100 URP para contribuir a la producción científica: Launching of the special 100 x 100 URP program for contributing to scientific production. Revista de la Facultad de Medicina Humana. 2021;21(3):472–4. doi:10.25176/RFMH.v21i3.4022
    5. Muñoz Cantero JM, Rios de Deus MP. Indicadores de la evaluación de la investigación en educación superior. Rev Gallego Port Psicol Educ. 2003;10(8):93-110. Available at:
    6. Vílchez-Moreira M, Meneses-Guillén P, Alpizar-Alfaro H, Argüello-Vargas S, Segura-Castillo A, Sánchez-Espinoza S. Indicadores de la investigación universitaria 2006-2013 [Internet]. Consejo Nacional de Rectores; 2015 [cited 1 Feb 2023]. Available at:
    7. Hicks D, Wouters P, Waltman L, de Rijcke S, Rafols I. Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature. 2015;520(7548):429–31. doi:10.1038/520429a.

¿Quieres dejar tu comentario o sugerencia sobre este artículo?

---> CLICK AQUI <---