Academic patents as an indicator of useful research? A new approach to measure academic inventiveness

143 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

30 Years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing Academic Entrepreneurship (2011, unknown): “2004), Finland (Meyer 2003), and Belgium (Saragossi and van Pottelsberghe 2003) many inventions that have input from university professors are patented by other institutions, even if the universities are legally allowed to retain IPRs on such inventions.”
Academic patenting in Europe: new evidence from the KEINS database (2008, methodology): “Following this clue, Meyer (2003) for Finland, Balconi et al (2004) for Italy, and Iversen et al (2007) for Norway have reclassified patents by inventor, and matched the inventors’ names with available datasets on university faculties.”
Bibliometrics to webometrics (2008, background): “Patent indicators can also be indirect by using patent references to identify the cited academic work which is thereby endorsed as having applicable value [45].”
University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence (2006, background): “Meyer (2003) reports that Finnish universities own 36 USPTO patents, but that there were 530 Finnish university inventor patents in the period 1986-2000.”
Reconsidering the Bayh-Dole Act and the Current University Invention Ownership Model (2009, background): “Intensive qualitative studies, such asMody’s (2006), of university invention-based firms have shown that new firms often have their roots outside the university’s institutional arrangements for transfer.”