Cargando…

Structuring successful collaboration: a longitudinal social network analysis of a translational research network

BACKGROUND: In 2012 and 2013, we conducted a social network survey of a new translational research network (TRN) designed to deliver better care to cancer patients. Results of these two surveys showed that silos of researchers and clinicians existed before the TRN was established but that the networ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Long, Janet C., Hibbert, Peter, Braithwaite, Jeffrey
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4750242/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26864452
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0381-y
_version_ 1782415402650828800
author Long, Janet C.
Hibbert, Peter
Braithwaite, Jeffrey
author_facet Long, Janet C.
Hibbert, Peter
Braithwaite, Jeffrey
author_sort Long, Janet C.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In 2012 and 2013, we conducted a social network survey of a new translational research network (TRN) designed to deliver better care to cancer patients. Results of these two surveys showed that silos of researchers and clinicians existed before the TRN was established but that the network had mediated collaborative relationships. This paper reports on a third social network survey of the TRN and focusses on the structure of the collaborative arrangements among members. METHODS: Members of the TRN were invited to complete an on-line, whole network survey in May 2015. The survey asked respondents to identify personal impacts, outputs and wider outcomes attributable to their TRN membership. The final question asked respondents to select the name of TRN members with whom they had collaborated either formally or informally. For each member nominated, they were asked to say whether they had known this person before joining the TRN. RESULTS: Response rate was 70 %. Over 4 years, the TRN has grown in size from 68 to 244 members. Relationships within and across the TRN have become more collaborative and interactive, with 1658 collaborative ties between members and over 40 % of ties with people unknown to participants before they joined the TRN. This points to a well-functioning network which has retained its focus on the original goals of the TRN and has fostered collaboration between researchers, clinicians, managers, consumers and TRN operational staff. This survey shows that the TRN’s impact goes beyond outcomes from formal TRN-funded projects. About one third of respondents could list projects not directly funded by the TRN but which are attributed to TRN membership. Examples of practice change brought about through the TRN were given by 77 % of respondents. A substantial risk factor for the future is the high levels of dependency on key or central TRN participants. CONCLUSIONS: The structure of the TRN with its active central actors and brokers has been able to foster collaboration on implementation initiatives that result in practice change. The role of a social professional network in driving this collaboration is shown. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0381-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4750242
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47502422016-02-12 Structuring successful collaboration: a longitudinal social network analysis of a translational research network Long, Janet C. Hibbert, Peter Braithwaite, Jeffrey Implement Sci Research BACKGROUND: In 2012 and 2013, we conducted a social network survey of a new translational research network (TRN) designed to deliver better care to cancer patients. Results of these two surveys showed that silos of researchers and clinicians existed before the TRN was established but that the network had mediated collaborative relationships. This paper reports on a third social network survey of the TRN and focusses on the structure of the collaborative arrangements among members. METHODS: Members of the TRN were invited to complete an on-line, whole network survey in May 2015. The survey asked respondents to identify personal impacts, outputs and wider outcomes attributable to their TRN membership. The final question asked respondents to select the name of TRN members with whom they had collaborated either formally or informally. For each member nominated, they were asked to say whether they had known this person before joining the TRN. RESULTS: Response rate was 70 %. Over 4 years, the TRN has grown in size from 68 to 244 members. Relationships within and across the TRN have become more collaborative and interactive, with 1658 collaborative ties between members and over 40 % of ties with people unknown to participants before they joined the TRN. This points to a well-functioning network which has retained its focus on the original goals of the TRN and has fostered collaboration between researchers, clinicians, managers, consumers and TRN operational staff. This survey shows that the TRN’s impact goes beyond outcomes from formal TRN-funded projects. About one third of respondents could list projects not directly funded by the TRN but which are attributed to TRN membership. Examples of practice change brought about through the TRN were given by 77 % of respondents. A substantial risk factor for the future is the high levels of dependency on key or central TRN participants. CONCLUSIONS: The structure of the TRN with its active central actors and brokers has been able to foster collaboration on implementation initiatives that result in practice change. The role of a social professional network in driving this collaboration is shown. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0381-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-02-11 /pmc/articles/PMC4750242/ /pubmed/26864452 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0381-y Text en © Long et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Long, Janet C.
Hibbert, Peter
Braithwaite, Jeffrey
Structuring successful collaboration: a longitudinal social network analysis of a translational research network
title Structuring successful collaboration: a longitudinal social network analysis of a translational research network
title_full Structuring successful collaboration: a longitudinal social network analysis of a translational research network
title_fullStr Structuring successful collaboration: a longitudinal social network analysis of a translational research network
title_full_unstemmed Structuring successful collaboration: a longitudinal social network analysis of a translational research network
title_short Structuring successful collaboration: a longitudinal social network analysis of a translational research network
title_sort structuring successful collaboration: a longitudinal social network analysis of a translational research network
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4750242/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26864452
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0381-y
work_keys_str_mv AT longjanetc structuringsuccessfulcollaborationalongitudinalsocialnetworkanalysisofatranslationalresearchnetwork
AT hibbertpeter structuringsuccessfulcollaborationalongitudinalsocialnetworkanalysisofatranslationalresearchnetwork
AT braithwaitejeffrey structuringsuccessfulcollaborationalongitudinalsocialnetworkanalysisofatranslationalresearchnetwork