Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34849259›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2021

Mobilizing cross-disciplinary teams to advance translational research using design thinking methods.

Elizabeth LaPensee, Aalap Doshi, Barbara Salem, Dianne Jazdzyk, Kaylee Steen, Mark Cantrell, Emily Somers

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 45% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elizabeth LaPenseeMichigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Aalap DoshiMichigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Barbara SalemMichigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Dianne JazdzykMichigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Kaylee SteenMedical School Office of Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Mark CantrellMichigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Emily SomersMichigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor · US

Funding

Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research (MICHR)UL1TR002240 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI LUMENG, JULIE C, MASHOUR, GEORGE ALEXANDER · 2017 to 2022
$54.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002240
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Funding agencies are increasingly seeking team-based approaches to tackling complex research questions, but there is a need to mobilize translational teams and create shared visions and strategic action plans long before specific funding opportunities are considered or even released. This is particularly evident for teams who want to pursue large-scale grants, where cross-disciplinary synergy is often required. In response, we created Research Jams, which are engaging yet structured brainstorming sessions that bring together groups for the first time to collectively generate novel research ideas, critically map the future of initiatives, prioritize opportunities and next steps, and build community. Research Jams leveraged various aspects of design thinking, including divergence and convergence, visual thinking, and amplifying diversity. We piloted seven Research Jams for a collective 129 researchers, staff, and partners across 50 University of Michigan units and external organizations. Feedback was overwhelmingly positive, with the vast majority of survey respondents indicating that the sessions were helpful for surfacing shared ideas or visions and that opportunities emerged they would like to pursue. Research Jams were ideal for cross-disciplinary groups who wanted to collaboratively ideate and strategize around complex problems in translational research. Importantly, these models have the potential for implementation with groups in any disciplinary domain who want to spur collaborations to address challenging problems. Our ultimate goal is for Research Jams to be the first intervention within a comprehensive support pathway that extends from early brainstorming all the way to grant submission.

Indexed as

brainstormingcross-disciplinarydesign thinkingTeam sciencetranslational research

Identifiers

PMID34849259
PMCPMC8596062
OpenAlexW3211735335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.