ReviewSeminars in nephrology2015
Research Infrastructure for Collaborative Team Science: Challenges in Technology-Supported Workflows in and Across Laboratories, Institutions, and Geographies.
Review in Seminars in nephrology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Interdisciplinary Collaboration in Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Criteria: Does It Matter?Higher education policy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Collaborative research has many challenges. One under-researched challenge is how to align collaborators' research practices and evolving analytical reasoning with technologies and configurations of technologies that best support them. The goal of such alignment is to enhance collaborative problem solving capabilities in research. Toward this end, we draw on our own research and a synthesis of the literature to characterize the workflow of collaborating scientists in systems-level renal disease research. We describe the various phases of a hypothetical workflow among diverse collaborators within and across laboratories, extending from their primary analysis through secondary analysis. For each phase, we highlight required technology supports, and. At time, complementary organizational supports. This survey of supports matching collaborators' analysis practices and needs in research projects to technological support is preliminary, aimed ultimately at developing a research capability framework that can help scientists and technologists mutually understand workflows and technologies that can help enable and enhance them.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.