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...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
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 |