Purpose The “Breaking the Five Onlys” (BFO) policy was proposed to reform the academic evaluation system and rectify the persistent issues associated with the “Five Onlys” in academia. This study aims to evaluate the impact of the policy on the paper output of double first-class (DFC) universities. Design/methodology/approach Using an interrupted time series model, this study quantitatively analyzed the paper output and paper impact of DFC universities from 2014 to 2022. Findings Following the policy’s implementation, preliminary analyses reveal that DFC universities have experienced a modest improvement in paper impact on both domestic and international fronts. Notably, while international paper output has exhibited an upward trend, domestic paper output has not shown statistically significant changes. Disciplinary analysis indicates that both paper output and impact in science and engineering have increased, whereas the humanities remain largely static. Furthermore, evaluations across institutional tiers show that both “first-class universities” and “first-class discipline universities” have attained gains in paper output and impact, with improvements being more pronounced among “first-class universities.” Originality/value This study furnishes a robust empirical foundation for refining the BFO policy and reforming global research evaluation, thereby bridging a critical gap in existing policy analyses. The findings provide essential data to education management departments, facilitating the development of a more scientifically informed and equitable evaluation system that renders the policy recommendations both practical and precisely targeted.
Zhang et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: