Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31327888›Full record

ArticleAdoption & fostering2017

The emergence of team science: Understanding the state of adoption research through social network analysis.

Catherine A Hamilton, Raffaele Vacca, Jeanne-Marie R Stacciarini

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Adoption & fostering, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

3 authors.

Catherine A Hamilton(College of Nursing,) University of Florida USA.
Raffaele Vacca(Department of Sociology and Criminology and Law, Clinical and Translational Science Institute,) University of Florida USA.
Jeanne-Marie R Stacciarini(College of Nursing,) University of Florida USA.

Funding

Using social networks to map and evaluate team science across CTSA hubsUL1TR001427 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI MITCHELL, DUANE A. · 2015 to 2024
$37.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001427
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The notion of team science has recently gained popularity in European and American health sciences considering increasing evidence that scientific collaboration produces higher-impact research and that complex scientific problems are better investigated by interdisciplinary teams. While publication metrics indicate adoption research is expanding, the comprehensive structure of adoption studies as a scientific field has not been formally evaluated for collaborative and cross-disciplinary activity. This article aims to elucidate the structure, composition, and dynamics of scientific relationships within adoption research that may inform research and practice strategies, competencies, and cohesion within the field. Using social network analysis, we extracted bibliographic data on 2767 peer-reviewed adoption-related articles from 1930s to 2014 and evaluated the resulting co-authorship and co-citation networks. We found that adoption research has grown substantially over the last 25 years, and is conducted in varied disciplines, with increasing collaboration across geography and disciplinary areas. The co-authorship and co-citation networks are approaching numeric thresholds and structural configurations distinctive of well-established and more institutionalized fields of study. These findings reveal the maturation of adoption studies as a team science and argue for the development of institutional mechanisms that support such evolution. Implications for professional and research planning are discussed.

Indexed as

Adoptionadoption researchco-authorshipco-citationinterdisciplinary teamsorganizationresearch planningsocial network analysisteam science

Identifiers

PMID31327888
PMCPMC6641573

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.