ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2025
Team science training for clinical and translational Scientists: An assessment of effectiveness.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Building capacity for translational team science: digital badging as a pathway to professionalization.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Effective interdisciplinary collaboration is essential for addressing complex clinical and translational research challenges. This paper presents and evaluates a structured team science training program developed by the Colorado Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute (CCTSI), while also introducing and validating a novel assessment tool used to measure changes in key teaming competencies. Methods: We evaluated the effectiveness of this program between 2020 and 2022 using pre- and post-program surveys ( Results: PCA revealed three distinct components of team science competencies: Team Planning, Managing a Team, and Interpersonal Relations, all demonstrating strong internal reliability. Participants showed statistically significant improvements ( Conclusions: These findings highlight the self-reported value of Team Science Training programs in CTR settings. The TEAMS instrument described in this manuscript offers a novel approach for CTSAs to evaluate their Team Science training programs. Future applications could include longitudinal tracking and integration metrics to support future program planning, particularly fostering interdisciplinary collaboration and team integration.
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.