Comments accepted through August 19, 2026
Overview
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is asking the research community to weigh in on a fundamental question: How should scientific impact be measured in modern biomedical research?
Through Notice NOT-OD-26-087, NIH has issued a Request for Information (RFI) seeking feedback on how scientific contributions should be recognized and rewarded. The agency is particularly interested in whether traditional measures of success, such as publication counts and citation metrics, fully reflect the ways researchers contribute to scientific progress today.
The questions raised in the RFI reflect the changing nature of biomedical research. In addition to publishing findings, researchers increasingly contribute through activities such as data sharing, software development, mentorship, collaborative research, replication studies, and the translation of discoveries into practical applications. NIH is seeking input on how these activities can be measured alongside more traditional indicators of scientific achievement.
Who May Be Interested in This RFI?
The request may be particularly relevant to researchers, research administrators, institutional leaders, research integrity professionals, compliance personnel, scientific societies, and organizations involved in biomedical research. Stakeholders engaged in data sharing, mentorship, team science, translational research, research assessment, and scientific rigor may also be interested in the topics addressed by the notice.
Why NIH Issued This Request
According to the notice, commonly used indicators of scientific success often emphasize individual productivity. While publications and citations remain important measures of research output, NIH is examining whether those indicators capture the full range of activities that advance biomedical science and contribute to public health.
The RFI supports NIH’s broader efforts to strengthen rigor and reliability across the research enterprise. It also aligns with the agency’s recently launched Replication and Reproducibility Initiative, which focuses on encouraging research practices that improve confidence in scientific findings and help identify areas where additional validation may be beneficial.
The agency is seeking practical recommendations to help align measures of scientific impact with its mission to generate knowledge that enhances health, lengthens life, and reduces illness and disability.
Expanding How Scientific Contributions Are Recognized
A central theme throughout the notice is the idea that important contributions to scientific progress are not limited to published research articles.
The RFI highlights activities that support research beyond traditional publication outputs, including the sharing of datasets, software, and research models. NIH notes that these resources can help other investigators validate findings, build upon previous work, and accelerate future discoveries.
The document also points to the growing importance of collaboration. Large interdisciplinary teams have become common across many areas of biomedical research, bringing together investigators with diverse expertise to address increasingly complex scientific questions. The RFI asks stakeholders to consider how contributions made within collaborative research environments can be assessed and recognized.
Training and mentorship are also included in the discussion. NIH acknowledges the importance of developing and sustaining the biomedical research workforce and is seeking feedback on ways to assess the impact of training and mentoring activities across different disciplines, institution types, and career stages.
Taken together, these topics reflect NIH’s interest in recognizing a broader range of activities that support scientific advancement, even when those contributions may not be reflected by publication-based metrics alone.
Measuring Research Quality and Rigor
Another major area of focus is scientific rigor and reproducibility. The notice identifies reproducibility and replication as foundational elements of rigorous biomedical research. NIH is seeking feedback on approaches to identify findings and research areas that would benefit from additional replication efforts, as well as strategies to encourage activities that support reproducibility.
The RFI also invites comments related to rigor more broadly, including considerations for defining and evaluating causal research.
These questions are connected to NIH’s ongoing efforts to strengthen the reliability of scientific findings and support practices that contribute to transparent and reproducible research.
Looking Beyond Publications to Broader Impact
In addition to research quality and scientific contributions, NIH is exploring how impact might be assessed outside traditional academic measures.
One area of interest involves entrepreneurship, innovation, and translation. The notice seeks feedback on how to evaluate activities that help translate discoveries from research settings into real-world applications. This includes efforts that contribute to the development of products, services, technologies, and other practical outcomes.
The RFI also highlights the importance of foundational scientific exploration. Basic research and high-risk, high-reward studies may carry significant uncertainty, but they can also lead to transformative discoveries and new directions for future investigation. NIH is interested in identifying ways to recognize the value of these efforts within the broader research landscape.
Beyond the scientific community itself, the agency is seeking input on methods for evaluating public impact. Examples identified in the notice include effects on health outcomes, clinical practice, economic growth, accessibility, public trust, and societal benefit.
Taken together, these topics reflect NIH’s interest in understanding impact through a wider lens that considers not only research outputs, but also the processes, resources, collaborations, and outcomes that contribute to scientific progress.
What NIH Wants to Learn
NIH encourages respondents to provide practical feedback that can inform future approaches to evaluating scientific impact.
The agency is particularly interested in comments that include:
- Specific measurable indicators
- Potential implementation approaches
- Expected benefits
- Possible unintended consequences
- Feasibility considerations
- Perspectives from different disciplines, institution types, and career stages
The notice emphasizes the importance of identifying approaches applicable across the diverse biomedical research enterprise while recognizing the many ways researchers contribute to advancing science.
How to Submit Comments
According to the notice, responses are voluntary and may be submitted anonymously. Individuals may choose to provide their names and contact information, but NIH advises respondents not to include proprietary, confidential, classified, sensitive, or other information they do not wish to become public. Following review by the Office of Science Policy, responses may be posted publicly without redaction.
Looking Ahead
At its core, NOT-OD-26-087 asks whether longstanding measures of scientific success adequately reflect how biomedical research is conducted today. As research becomes increasingly collaborative, data-driven, interdisciplinary, and focused on transparency and reproducibility, NIH is seeking feedback on how contributions across the research enterprise can be recognized and evaluated.
Stakeholders across the biomedical research community have until August 19, 2026, to provide input that may help inform future approaches to measuring and rewarding scientific impact.
