ReviewCurrent epidemiology reports2022
Coordinating Centers as a Strategy for Accelerating Cancer Epidemiology Consortia: Best Practices.
Review in Current epidemiology reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Research Support Networks for Substance Use Translational Research: A Qualitative Evaluation of the HEAL Data to Action (HD2A) Program.Research square · 2026Article
- Building bridges, breaking silos: a social network analysis of collaboration in an implementation science center for addiction health services.Translational behavioral medicine · 2026Article
- Considerations and recommendations for collaborative research networks in epidemiology: Lessons learned from the diabetes LEAD Network.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Designing and implementing solution-oriented team science initiatives-a chronic pain example.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Facilitating multidisciplinary working groups in translational research: Strategies to promote cross-center collaboration and sustain the Cancer Center Cessation Initiative Consortium.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purposeof Review: This review highlights six "best practices" for cancer epidemiology coordinating centers to facilitate the success of a research consortium. Recent Findings: Evidence from emerging literature regarding the Science of Team Science suggests that coordinating centers can more effectively foster collaborative cancer epidemiology research in consortia by (1) establishing collaboration as a shared goal at the start, (2) providing scientific expertise complementary to the research sites that adapts over the course of the project, (3) enacting anti-racist and inclusive approaches in all consortium decisions and activities, (4) fostering early-stage investigator career development, (5) engaging stakeholders including cancer survivors as peers, and (6) delivering reliable logistical support and technology tools with planned process evaluation so that researchers can collaboratively focus on the science. Summary: By drawing on the Science of Team Science, coordinating centers can accelerate research progress and increase the impact of cancer epidemiology consortia.
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.