Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41867956›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2026

Organizational change readiness for team science: a pathway framework for team science success.

Gaetano Romano Lotrecchiano, Deborah DiazGranados, Alfred Vitale, Margaret Browne-Huntt

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. 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

4 authors.

Gaetano Romano LotrecchianoDepartment of Clinical Research and Leadership and of Pediatrics, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC, United States.
Deborah DiazGranadosDepartment of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States.
Alfred VitaleProgram Evaluation & Continuous Improvement, Center for Clinical and Translational Science at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Margaret Browne-HunttDepartment of Education Policy, Organization & Leadership, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the early 21st century, team science has significantly influenced emerging perspectives, processes, and expectations across various industries, human development, and scholarly activities. Research over the past 25 years-drawing on psychology, management, social psychology, anthropology, organizational sciences, and sociology-has shaped best practices and redefined how academics and practitioners approach collaborative work. Despite substantial progress in understanding team dynamics, a critical gap remains: the absence of a clearly defined professional pathway for team scientists and science workers. Specifically, there is a lack of a secure, structured pipeline that supports training, recognition, and career advancement in team science roles. This paper addresses the limited presence of systematic organizational strategies that help science workers from the early stages of their careers through long-term professional growth. As higher education confronts a shifting paradigm, institutions must now prepare students not only as disciplinary experts but also as collaborators equipped to thrive in a cross-disciplinary, problem-solving environment that embraces the workforce competencies employers seek. We examine the organizational requirements and challenges necessary to ensure success in science careers, emphasizing developmental training, robust mentorship, the professionalization and institutionalization of team structures, and sustaining collaboration. These elements are essential for preparing a workforce that is capable, resilient, and ready for the demands of future collaborative scientific endeavors.

Indexed as

mentoringorganizationsreadinesssustainabilityteamstraining

Identifiers

PMID41867956
PMCPMC13002360

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.