Cargando…
Collaboration networks of the implementation science centers for cancer control: a social network analysis
BACKGROUND: Multi-center research initiatives offer opportunities to develop and strengthen connections among researchers. These initiatives often have goals of increased scientific collaboration which can be examined using social network analysis. METHODS: The National Cancer Institute (NCI)-funded...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9009020/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35418309 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43058-022-00290-6 |
_version_ | 1784687185350361088 |
---|---|
author | Jacob, Rebekah R. Korn, Ariella R. Huang, Grace C. Easterling, Douglas Gundersen, Daniel A. Ramanadhan, Shoba Vu, Thuy Angier, Heather Brownson, Ross C. Haire-Joshu, Debra Oh, April Y. Schnoll, Robert |
author_facet | Jacob, Rebekah R. Korn, Ariella R. Huang, Grace C. Easterling, Douglas Gundersen, Daniel A. Ramanadhan, Shoba Vu, Thuy Angier, Heather Brownson, Ross C. Haire-Joshu, Debra Oh, April Y. Schnoll, Robert |
author_sort | Jacob, Rebekah R. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Multi-center research initiatives offer opportunities to develop and strengthen connections among researchers. These initiatives often have goals of increased scientific collaboration which can be examined using social network analysis. METHODS: The National Cancer Institute (NCI)-funded Implementation Science Centers in Cancer Control (ISC(3)) initiative conducted an online social network survey in its first year of funding (2020) to (1) establish baseline network measures including the extent of cross-center collaboration and (2) assess factors associated with a network member’s access to the network such as one’s implementation science (IS) expertise. Members of the seven funded centers and NCI program staff identified collaborations in planning/conducting research, capacity building, product development, scientific dissemination, and practice/policy dissemination. RESULTS: Of the 192 invitees, 182 network members completed the survey (95%). The most prevalent roles were faculty (60%) and research staff (24%). Almost one-quarter (23%) of members reported advanced expertise in IS, 42% intermediate, and 35% beginner. Most members were female (69%) and white (79%). One-third (33%) of collaboration ties were among members from different centers. Across all collaboration activities, the network had a density of 14%, suggesting moderate cohesion. Degree centralization (0.33) and betweenness centralization (0.07) measures suggest a fairly dispersed network (no single or few central member(s) holding all connections). The most prevalent and densely connected collaboration was in planning/conducting research (1470 ties; 8% density). Practice/policy dissemination had the fewest collaboration, lowest density (284 ties’ 3% density), and the largest number of non-connected members (n=43). Access to the ISC(3) network varied significantly depending on members’ level of IS expertise, role within the network, and racial/ethnic background. Across all collaboration activities, most connected members included those with advanced IS expertise, faculty and NCI staff, and Hispanic or Latino and white members. CONCLUSIONS: Results establish a baseline for assessing the growth of cross-center collaborations, highlighting specific areas in need of particular growth in network collaborations such as increasing engagement of racial and ethnic minorities and trainees or those with less expertise in IS. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43058-022-00290-6. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9009020 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90090202022-04-15 Collaboration networks of the implementation science centers for cancer control: a social network analysis Jacob, Rebekah R. Korn, Ariella R. Huang, Grace C. Easterling, Douglas Gundersen, Daniel A. Ramanadhan, Shoba Vu, Thuy Angier, Heather Brownson, Ross C. Haire-Joshu, Debra Oh, April Y. Schnoll, Robert Implement Sci Commun Short Report BACKGROUND: Multi-center research initiatives offer opportunities to develop and strengthen connections among researchers. These initiatives often have goals of increased scientific collaboration which can be examined using social network analysis. METHODS: The National Cancer Institute (NCI)-funded Implementation Science Centers in Cancer Control (ISC(3)) initiative conducted an online social network survey in its first year of funding (2020) to (1) establish baseline network measures including the extent of cross-center collaboration and (2) assess factors associated with a network member’s access to the network such as one’s implementation science (IS) expertise. Members of the seven funded centers and NCI program staff identified collaborations in planning/conducting research, capacity building, product development, scientific dissemination, and practice/policy dissemination. RESULTS: Of the 192 invitees, 182 network members completed the survey (95%). The most prevalent roles were faculty (60%) and research staff (24%). Almost one-quarter (23%) of members reported advanced expertise in IS, 42% intermediate, and 35% beginner. Most members were female (69%) and white (79%). One-third (33%) of collaboration ties were among members from different centers. Across all collaboration activities, the network had a density of 14%, suggesting moderate cohesion. Degree centralization (0.33) and betweenness centralization (0.07) measures suggest a fairly dispersed network (no single or few central member(s) holding all connections). The most prevalent and densely connected collaboration was in planning/conducting research (1470 ties; 8% density). Practice/policy dissemination had the fewest collaboration, lowest density (284 ties’ 3% density), and the largest number of non-connected members (n=43). Access to the ISC(3) network varied significantly depending on members’ level of IS expertise, role within the network, and racial/ethnic background. Across all collaboration activities, most connected members included those with advanced IS expertise, faculty and NCI staff, and Hispanic or Latino and white members. CONCLUSIONS: Results establish a baseline for assessing the growth of cross-center collaborations, highlighting specific areas in need of particular growth in network collaborations such as increasing engagement of racial and ethnic minorities and trainees or those with less expertise in IS. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43058-022-00290-6. BioMed Central 2022-04-13 /pmc/articles/PMC9009020/ /pubmed/35418309 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43058-022-00290-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Short Report Jacob, Rebekah R. Korn, Ariella R. Huang, Grace C. Easterling, Douglas Gundersen, Daniel A. Ramanadhan, Shoba Vu, Thuy Angier, Heather Brownson, Ross C. Haire-Joshu, Debra Oh, April Y. Schnoll, Robert Collaboration networks of the implementation science centers for cancer control: a social network analysis |
title | Collaboration networks of the implementation science centers for cancer control: a social network analysis |
title_full | Collaboration networks of the implementation science centers for cancer control: a social network analysis |
title_fullStr | Collaboration networks of the implementation science centers for cancer control: a social network analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Collaboration networks of the implementation science centers for cancer control: a social network analysis |
title_short | Collaboration networks of the implementation science centers for cancer control: a social network analysis |
title_sort | collaboration networks of the implementation science centers for cancer control: a social network analysis |
topic | Short Report |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9009020/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35418309 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43058-022-00290-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jacobrebekahr collaborationnetworksoftheimplementationsciencecentersforcancercontrolasocialnetworkanalysis AT kornariellar collaborationnetworksoftheimplementationsciencecentersforcancercontrolasocialnetworkanalysis AT huanggracec collaborationnetworksoftheimplementationsciencecentersforcancercontrolasocialnetworkanalysis AT easterlingdouglas collaborationnetworksoftheimplementationsciencecentersforcancercontrolasocialnetworkanalysis AT gundersendaniela collaborationnetworksoftheimplementationsciencecentersforcancercontrolasocialnetworkanalysis AT ramanadhanshoba collaborationnetworksoftheimplementationsciencecentersforcancercontrolasocialnetworkanalysis AT vuthuy collaborationnetworksoftheimplementationsciencecentersforcancercontrolasocialnetworkanalysis AT angierheather collaborationnetworksoftheimplementationsciencecentersforcancercontrolasocialnetworkanalysis AT brownsonrossc collaborationnetworksoftheimplementationsciencecentersforcancercontrolasocialnetworkanalysis AT hairejoshudebra collaborationnetworksoftheimplementationsciencecentersforcancercontrolasocialnetworkanalysis AT ohaprily collaborationnetworksoftheimplementationsciencecentersforcancercontrolasocialnetworkanalysis AT schnollrobert collaborationnetworksoftheimplementationsciencecentersforcancercontrolasocialnetworkanalysis |