Network Analysis for Formative Evaluation of Collaborative, Team Science Research Partnerships.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Evaluation & the Health Professions Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-18 DOI:10.1177/01632787231195642
Grace M Liu, Meredith L Meadows, Katherine T Wiley, Jordan Jurinsky, Andrew A Anglemyer, Lucy L Wang, Joseph T Schneider, Sarah V Suiter
{"title":"Network Analysis for Formative Evaluation of Collaborative, Team Science Research Partnerships.","authors":"Grace M Liu, Meredith L Meadows, Katherine T Wiley, Jordan Jurinsky, Andrew A Anglemyer, Lucy L Wang, Joseph T Schneider, Sarah V Suiter","doi":"10.1177/01632787231195642","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cancer health disparities persist across the cancer care continuum despite decades of effort to eliminate them. Among the strategies currently used to address these disparities are multi-institution research initiatives that engage multiple stakeholders and change efforts. Endemic to the theory of change of such programs is the idea that collaboration-across institutions, research disciplines, and academic ranks-is necessary to improve outcomes. Despite this emphasis on collaboration, however, it is not often a focus of evaluation for these programs and others like them. In this paper we describe a method for evaluating collaboration within the Meharry-Vanderbilt-Tennessee State University Cancer Partnership using network analysis. Specifically, we used network analysis of co-authorship on academic publications to visualize the growth and patterns of scientific collaboration across partnership institutions, research disciplines, and academic ranks over time. We presented the results of the network analysis to internal and external advisory groups, creating the opportunity to discuss partnership collaboration, celebrate successes, and identify opportunities for improvement. We propose that basic network analysis of existing data along with network visualizations can foster conversation and feedback and are simple and effective ways to evaluate collaboration initiatives.</p>","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":" ","pages":"334-343"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10637077/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01632787231195642","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cancer health disparities persist across the cancer care continuum despite decades of effort to eliminate them. Among the strategies currently used to address these disparities are multi-institution research initiatives that engage multiple stakeholders and change efforts. Endemic to the theory of change of such programs is the idea that collaboration-across institutions, research disciplines, and academic ranks-is necessary to improve outcomes. Despite this emphasis on collaboration, however, it is not often a focus of evaluation for these programs and others like them. In this paper we describe a method for evaluating collaboration within the Meharry-Vanderbilt-Tennessee State University Cancer Partnership using network analysis. Specifically, we used network analysis of co-authorship on academic publications to visualize the growth and patterns of scientific collaboration across partnership institutions, research disciplines, and academic ranks over time. We presented the results of the network analysis to internal and external advisory groups, creating the opportunity to discuss partnership collaboration, celebrate successes, and identify opportunities for improvement. We propose that basic network analysis of existing data along with network visualizations can foster conversation and feedback and are simple and effective ways to evaluate collaboration initiatives.

协作、团队科学研究伙伴关系形成性评价的网络分析。
尽管经过几十年的努力消除了癌症健康差异,但在整个癌症护理体系中,这种差异仍然存在。目前用于解决这些差异的战略包括多机构研究举措,这些举措涉及多个利益攸关方和变革努力。这类项目变革理论的普遍观点是,为了提高成果,跨机构、研究学科和学术队伍的合作是必要的。然而,尽管强调合作,但这通常不是这些项目和其他类似项目的评估重点。在本文中,我们描述了一种使用网络分析评估Meharry-Vanderbilt-Tennessee州立大学癌症合作伙伴关系内合作的方法。具体而言,我们使用了对学术出版物合著者的网络分析,以可视化合作机构、研究学科和学术队伍在一段时间内的科学合作增长和模式。我们向内部和外部咨询小组介绍了网络分析的结果,为讨论合作伙伴关系、庆祝成功和确定改进机会创造了机会。我们提出,对现有数据的基本网络分析以及网络可视化可以促进对话和反馈,是评估合作计划的简单有效的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Evaluation & the Health Professions is a peer-reviewed, quarterly journal that provides health-related professionals with state-of-the-art methodological, measurement, and statistical tools for conceptualizing the etiology of health promotion and problems, and developing, implementing, and evaluating health programs, teaching and training services, and products that pertain to a myriad of health dimensions. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Average time from submission to first decision: 31 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信