ArticleInternal medicine review (Washington, D.C. : Online)2017
Illustrating and analyzing the processes of multi-institutional collaboration: Lessons learnt at Howard University Hospital.
Article in Internal medicine review (Washington, D.C. : Online), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Multi-institutional collaboration offers a promising approach to the dissemination of resources for capacity building and the improvement of the training of new investigators and residents, especially in areas of novel curricular content. Physicians should keep pace with the rapid growth of curricular content in an era of restricted resources. Such collaborations, in which educational entities work together and share resources and infrastructure, have been employed in health care to improve quality of care, capacity building, disparity reduction, and resident training. This paper examines a federally funded multi-institutional collaboration for the project STRIDE (Seek, Treat, Reach to Identify Pretrial Defendants Enhancement) between Yale University, George Mason University (GMU), and Howard University, a Historically Black University. The STRIDE study collaboration focused on mental health, opioid addiction, and infectious disease/HIV among Africans Americans involved in CJS (Criminal Justice System). We discuss some of the challenges and benefits of collaborative research projects conducted at Historically Black Colleges and University (HBCUs) and highlight the educational opportunities created by such collaborations for residents and other trainees, leading to the development of independent investigators through multi-institutional, structured collaborative research. We identify some unique challenges such as substance use, race, stigma, incarceration among participants, and the cultural and power difference between participating institutions, and thereby address these issues and how it impacted the course of the multi-institutional collaborative effort.
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.