Suppr超能文献

评估团队科学的价值:一项比较中心发起和研究者发起的资助的研究。

Assessing the value of team science: a study comparing center- and investigator-initiated grants.

机构信息

Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.

出版信息

Am J Prev Med. 2012 Feb;42(2):157-63. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2011.10.011.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Large cross-disciplinary scientific teams are becoming increasingly prominent in the conduct of research.

PURPOSE

This paper reports on a quasi-experimental longitudinal study conducted to compare bibliometric indicators of scientific collaboration, productivity, and impact of center-based transdisciplinary team science initiatives and traditional investigator-initiated grants in the same field.

METHODS

All grants began between 1994 and 2004 and up to 10 years of publication data were collected for each grant. Publication information was compiled and analyzed during the spring and summer of 2010.

RESULTS

Following an initial lag period, the transdisciplinary research center grants had higher overall publication rates than the investigator-initiated R01 (NIH Research Project Grant Program) grants. There were relatively uniform publication rates across the research center grants compared to dramatically dispersed publication rates among the R01 grants. On average, publications produced by the research center grants had greater numbers of coauthors but similar journal impact factors compared with publications produced by the R01 grants.

CONCLUSIONS

The lag in productivity among the transdisciplinary center grants was offset by their overall higher publication rates and average number of coauthors per publication, relative to investigator-initiated grants, over the 10-year comparison period. The findings suggest that transdisciplinary center grants create benefits for both scientific productivity and collaboration.

摘要

背景

跨学科的大型科研团队在科研工作中的作用日益凸显。

目的

本研究报告了一项准实验性的纵向研究,旨在比较中心型跨学科团队科学倡议与同领域传统研究员发起的资助计划的科研合作、生产力和影响力的文献计量指标。

方法

所有资助计划均始于 1994 年至 2004 年,每个资助计划最长收集了 10 年的出版物数据。2010 年春季和夏季,对出版信息进行了编译和分析。

结果

在经历了初始的滞后期后,跨学科研究中心资助计划的总体出版率高于研究员发起的 R01(美国国立卫生研究院研究项目资助计划)资助计划。与 R01 资助计划的出版物分布极为分散相比,研究中心资助计划的出版物具有相对均匀的出版率。平均而言,研究中心资助计划产生的出版物的合著者数量较多,但期刊影响因子与 R01 资助计划的出版物相似。

结论

在 10 年的比较期内,跨学科中心资助计划的生产力滞后被其总体较高的出版率和平均每篇出版物的合著者数量所抵消,与研究员发起的资助计划相比,跨学科中心资助计划为科研生产力和合作创造了效益。

相似文献

1
Assessing the value of team science: a study comparing center- and investigator-initiated grants.
Am J Prev Med. 2012 Feb;42(2):157-63. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2011.10.011.
4
Publication rates from biomedical and behavioral and social science R01s funded by the National Institutes of Health.
PLoS One. 2020 Nov 13;15(11):e0242271. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242271. eCollection 2020.
5
NIH Funding, Research Productivity, and Scientific Impact: a 20-Year Study.
J Gen Intern Med. 2022 Jan;37(1):104-109. doi: 10.1007/s11606-021-06659-y. Epub 2021 Mar 2.
6
A ten-year analysis of the research funding program of the orthopaedic trauma association.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Oct 2;95(19):e1421-6. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.01627.
7
Breaking down silos: mapping growth of cross-disciplinary collaboration in a translational science initiative.
Clin Transl Sci. 2015 Apr;8(2):143-9. doi: 10.1111/cts.12248. Epub 2014 Dec 4.
8
Networks of Collaboration among Scientists in a Center for Diabetes Translation Research.
PLoS One. 2015 Aug 24;10(8):e0136457. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136457. eCollection 2015.
9
Tracking publication outcomes of National Institutes of Health grants.
Am J Med. 2005 Jun;118(6):658-63. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.02.015.

引用本文的文献

1
Implementing team science in undergraduate medical physics research.
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2025 Jul;26(7):e70169. doi: 10.1002/acm2.70169.
2
Science Speed Dating to Spur Inter-Institutional Collaborative Research.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2025 Jun 10;22(6):919. doi: 10.3390/ijerph22060919.
3
Membership in team science institute enhances diversity of researchers' collaboration networks.
PLoS One. 2025 May 23;20(5):e0322943. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0322943. eCollection 2025.
4
Ten Simple Rules for Making a Career Transition from Basic Science to Public Health Research.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2025 Feb 5;22(2):223. doi: 10.3390/ijerph22020223.
8
Assessing collaboration among team scientists within a triadic research center partnership.
Qual Res Med Healthc. 2021 Oct 5;5(2):9724. doi: 10.4081/qrmh.2021.9724.
9
Interdisciplinary collaboration from diverse science teams can produce significant outcomes.
PLoS One. 2022 Nov 29;17(11):e0278043. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278043. eCollection 2022.
10
Novel approach for tracking interdisciplinary research productivity using institutional databases.
J Clin Transl Sci. 2022 Aug 30;6(1):e119. doi: 10.1017/cts.2022.455. eCollection 2022.

本文引用的文献

2
A multi-level systems perspective for the science of team science.
Sci Transl Med. 2010 Sep 15;2(49):49cm24. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3001399.
3
Using team science to address health disparities: MacArthur network as case example.
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2010 Feb;1186:252-60. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.05335.x.
5
The science of team science: commentary on measurements of scientific readiness.
Am J Prev Med. 2008 Aug;35(2 Suppl):S193-5. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2008.05.016.
7
Measuring collaboration and transdisciplinary integration in team science.
Am J Prev Med. 2008 Aug;35(2 Suppl):S151-60. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2008.05.020.
8
The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge.
Science. 2007 May 18;316(5827):1036-9. doi: 10.1126/science.1136099. Epub 2007 Apr 12.
9
The discovery value of "Big Science".
J Exp Med. 2007 Apr 16;204(4):701-4. doi: 10.1084/jem.20070073. Epub 2007 Apr 9.
10
Tracking publication outcomes of National Institutes of Health grants.
Am J Med. 2005 Jun;118(6):658-63. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.02.015.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验