ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2023
Collaborative team dynamics and scholarly outcomes of multidisciplinary research teams: A mixed-methods approach.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Application of the integrated rehabilitation-clinical-nutrition management model in geriatric rehabilitation patients: a narrative review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- From case-control averages to validated subgroups: Interpreting inflammatory and neuroaxonal-injury biomarkers in schizophrenia and major depression.Brain, behavior, & immunity - health · 2026Review
- Multi-institutional perspectives on team science evaluation in clinical and translational science programs: Practices, challenges, facilitators, and future directions.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Cardiomyopathies of endocrine origin: A state-of-the-art review.World journal of cardiology · 2025Review
- Interprofessional Collaboration: Creating Effective Teams within and across Organizations.The Medical clinics of North America · 2025Review
- "How would you handle this?" The impact of embedding early patient and public involvement in a biomechanical computational engineering doctoral research project.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Measuring the aggregated impact of research: Establishing criteria for coding Translational Science Benefits Model data.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- LEADING A TRANSDISCIPLINARY TEAM MODEL ACROSS A COMPREHENSIVE CAMPUS.Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association · 2025Article
- Evolving Referral Patterns and Management Following Implementation of a Multidisciplinary Fibroid Center: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Assessments of working group effectiveness in the planning of the New Jersey Kids Study: An applied mixed-methods study on the science of team science.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- Optimizing team science in an academic medical center: A qualitative examination of investigator perspectives.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Impactful, transdisciplinary scientific discoveries are created by teams of researchers spanning multiple disciplines, but collaboration across disciplines can be challenging. We examined how team dynamics and collaboration are related to successes and barriers faced by teams of researchers from multiple disciplines. Methods: A mixed-methods approach was used to examine 12 research teams granted multidisciplinary pilot awards. Team members were surveyed to assess their team dynamics and individual views about transdisciplinary research. Forty-seven researchers (59.5%) responded, including two to eight members from each funded team. Associations were examined between collaborative dynamics and scholarly product outcomes, including manuscripts, grant proposals, and awarded grants. One member from each team was selected for an in-depth interview to contextualize and extend information about collaborative processes, successes, and barriers to performing transdisciplinary research. Results: Quality of team interactions was positively associated with achievement of scholarly products ( Conclusions: Both the quantitative and qualitative study results indicate that effective collaboration is critical to multidisciplinary research team success. Development and/or promotion of team science-based trainings for researchers would promote these collaborative skills.
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.