Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22525233›Full record

ArticleJournal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research2012

Collaboration and team science: from theory to practice.

L Michelle Bennett, Howard Gadlin

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 147 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
147citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

147 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

87 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

L Michelle BennettNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, MD, USA. LMBennett@nih.gov
Howard Gadlin

Funding

AFMR-Translational Medical Research Symposia SeriesR13RR023236 · NCRR · AMERICAN FEDERATION FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH · PI ZUCKER, DEBORAH R · 2006 to 2010
$263k
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 HL999999NCRR NIH HHS R13 RR023236
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interdisciplinary efforts are becoming more critical for scientific discovery and translational research efforts. Highly integrated and interactive research teams share a number of features that contribute to their success in developing and sustaining their efforts over time. Through analysis of in-depth interviews with members of highly successful research teams and others who did not meet their goals or ended because of conflicts, we identified key elements that are critical for team success and effectiveness. There is no debate that the scientific goal sits at the center of the collaborative effort. However, supporting features need to be in place to avoid the derailment of the team. Among the most important of these is trust: without trust, the team dynamic runs the risk of deteriorating over time. Other critical factors of which both leaders and participants need to be aware include developing a shared vision, strategically identifying team members and purposefully building the team, promoting disagreement while containing conflict, and setting clear expectations for sharing credit and authorship. Self-awareness and strong communication skills contribute greatly to effective leadership and management strategies of scientific teams. While all successful teams share the characteristic of effectively carrying out these activities, there is no single formula for execution with every leader exemplifying different strengths and weaknesses. Successful scientific collaborations have strong leaders who are self-aware and are mindful of the many elements critical for supporting the science at the center of the effort.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorHumansLeadershipPractice Guidelines as TopicTranslational Research, BiomedicalTrust

Identifiers

PMID22525233
PMCPMC3652225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.