ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2025
Team training in the real world: A cluster-randomized hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial of TeamTRACS in rural Children's Advocacy Centers.
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.
- Interpretive ethnographic studies and in-depth qualitative research should be treated as high-quality evidence in the science of team science.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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Children's Advocacy Centers (CACs) use multidisciplinary teams to respond to child abuse allegations. These fluid teams can benefit from team training to enhance team functioning and performance and strengthen the workforce, but they need guidance and resources to support the implementation of team training. Methods: We conducted a cluster-randomized hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial to test the effectiveness of team training and evaluate a self-guided implementation process. Six rural CACs ( Results: Reactions to TeamTRACS were positive (mean ratings > 4.5 on 1-5 scale), and TeamTRACS significantly increased teamwork knowledge (estimated marginal means = 80% vs. 75% [intent-to-treat]; 85% vs. 76% [training attendance]). There were no effects on skill use or work-related outcomes. Changes in team-level outcomes were small and inconsistent; one TeamTRACS team made substantial improvements. Reactions to self-guided implementation were positive (mean ratings > 4 on 1-5 scale). However, only one team completed the implementation process. Challenges included difficulty forming and maintaining a change team, turnover and understaffing, and competing priorities and a short timeframe. Conclusions: Overall, TeamTRACS and its self-guided implementation process were positively received. Incomplete implementation may have limited TeamTRACS' effectiveness. Longer timeframes and external support may improve the implementation of team training in low-resource settings.
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.