Anne Mook, Verena Knerich, Goldie Komaie, Lisa Cicutto, Jennifer Cross
{"title":"Team science training for clinical and translational Scientists: An assessment of effectiveness.","authors":"Anne Mook, Verena Knerich, Goldie Komaie, Lisa Cicutto, Jennifer Cross","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Effective interdisciplinary collaboration is essential for addressing complex clinical and translational research challenges. This paper presents and evaluates a structured team science training program developed by the Colorado Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute (CCTSI), while also introducing and validating a novel assessment tool used to measure changes in key teaming competencies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We evaluated the effectiveness of this program between 2020 and 2022 using pre- and post-program surveys (<i>N</i> = 221). Our evaluation tool was designed to capture familiarity with teaming concepts and the frequency of applying collaborative practices. Principal component analysis (PCA) was applied to validate the grouping of these competencies, and paired <i>t</i>-tests were used to measure changes over time.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PCA revealed three distinct components of team science competencies: Team Planning, Managing a Team, and Interpersonal Relations, all demonstrating strong internal reliability. Participants showed statistically significant improvements (<i>p</i> < 0.05) in all three domains. Gains were robust in Team Planning and Managing a Team, emphasizing structured tools and practices. Although improvement was also observed in Interpersonal Relations, the overall gains were smaller.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings highlight the self-reported value of Team Science Training programs in CTR settings. The TEAMS instrument described in this manuscript offers a novel approach for CTSAs to evaluate their Team Science training programs. Future applications could include longitudinal tracking and integration metrics to support future program planning, particularly fostering interdisciplinary collaboration and team integration.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e158"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392353/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.10088","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Effective interdisciplinary collaboration is essential for addressing complex clinical and translational research challenges. This paper presents and evaluates a structured team science training program developed by the Colorado Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute (CCTSI), while also introducing and validating a novel assessment tool used to measure changes in key teaming competencies.
Methods: We evaluated the effectiveness of this program between 2020 and 2022 using pre- and post-program surveys (N = 221). Our evaluation tool was designed to capture familiarity with teaming concepts and the frequency of applying collaborative practices. Principal component analysis (PCA) was applied to validate the grouping of these competencies, and paired t-tests were used to measure changes over time.
Results: PCA revealed three distinct components of team science competencies: Team Planning, Managing a Team, and Interpersonal Relations, all demonstrating strong internal reliability. Participants showed statistically significant improvements (p < 0.05) in all three domains. Gains were robust in Team Planning and Managing a Team, emphasizing structured tools and practices. Although improvement was also observed in Interpersonal Relations, the overall gains were smaller.
Conclusions: These findings highlight the self-reported value of Team Science Training programs in CTR settings. The TEAMS instrument described in this manuscript offers a novel approach for CTSAs to evaluate their Team Science training programs. Future applications could include longitudinal tracking and integration metrics to support future program planning, particularly fostering interdisciplinary collaboration and team integration.