Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36910824›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2023

Multiple teams, multiple projects, multiple groups at the intersection of (multiple) research fields: A bibliometric study.

Nicoleta Meslec, Petru Lucian Curseu, Oana C Fodor, Saša Batistič, Renata Kenda

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Nicoleta MeslecDepartment of Organisation Studies, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands.
Petru Lucian CurseuDepartment of Psychology, Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Oana C FodorDepartment of Psychology, Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Saša BatističDepartment of Human Resources Studies, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands.
Renata KendaDepartment of Organisation Studies, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multi-teaming is a concept studied across a variety of disciplines. While using a bibliometric approach on 255 research papers extracted from Web of Science, we aimed to depict the architecture of the multi-teaming concept across academic disciplines and time. Results of citation, co-citation and bibliographic coupling analyses identified four major fields looking at the concept of multi-teaming. The fields emerged over time from fragmentation to integration and acknowledging similarities. We identify gaps and propose (multi)-disciplinary research ideas that can benefit the field of multi-teaming.

Indexed as

bibliometric studymultiple groupsmultiple projectsmultiple teamsmulti-teaming

Identifiers

PMID36910824
PMCPMC9996629

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.