Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.
Am J Prev Med. 2012 Feb;42(2):157-63. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2011.10.011.
Large cross-disciplinary scientific teams are becoming increasingly prominent in the conduct of research.
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.
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.
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.
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.
跨学科的大型科研团队在科研工作中的作用日益凸显。
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。
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。
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。
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。