ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
The Team Science Readiness Framework for scientific research collaboration.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Introduction: Multidisciplinary research teams need a practical structure for assessing and improving their readiness to collaborate effectively. We developed the Team Science Readiness Framework (TSRF) to address this need. Methods: Team science considerations were initially identified by team science and healthcare experts, including the authors and affiliated collaborators, and were supplemented through a literature review. The framework was iteratively refined, prioritizing practical relevance, robust empirical support, and actionable factors that could be targeted through feasible interventions for improvement or sustainment. Results: The resulting TSRF comprises tangible, evaluable, and actionable considerations for science teams and provides a structure for organizing existing tools and resources. It addresses the research process across three stages: building teams during the early phases of a research project; managing teams while executing the research plan; and sustaining, growing, or gracefully closing teams as individual projects conclude. Discussion: By emphasizing actionable and empirically supported constructs, the TSRF offers a practical approach to evaluating multidisciplinary research-team readiness and guiding interventions throughout the team lifecycle.
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.