Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37594293›Full record

ArticleEvaluation & the health professions2023

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

Grace M Liu, Meredith L Meadows, Katherine T Wiley, Jordan Jurinsky, Andrew A Anglemyer, Lucy L Wang, Joseph T Schneider, Sarah V Suiter

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evaluation & the health professions, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Science Speed Dating to Spur Inter-Institutional Collaborative Research.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Grace M LiuDepartment of Human and Organizational Development, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Meredith L MeadowsDepartment of Human and Organizational Development, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0969-5764
Katherine T WileyDepartment of Human and Organizational Development, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Jordan JurinskyDepartment of Human and Organizational Development, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Andrew A AnglemyerVanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Lucy L WangVanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Joseph T SchneiderHealth Information Technology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Sarah V SuiterDepartment of Human and Organizational Development, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Vanderbilt University · USVanderbilt University Medical Center · US

Funding

TrainingU54CA163072 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI Karen Marie Winkfield · 2011 to 2026
$20.1M
Translational Pathology CoreU54CA163069 · NCI · MEHARRY MEDICAL COLLEGE · PI ADUNYAH, SAMUEL EVANS, STEWART, LAMONICA VANETTE · 2011 to 2025
$18.8M
TRAININGU54CA163066 · NCI · TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY · PI MARGARET M WHALEN · 2011 to 2026
$12.8M
NCI NIH HHS U54 CA163066NCI NIH HHS U54 CA163069NCI NIH HHS U54 CA163072
6 · The paper itself

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.

Indexed as

AuthorshipInterdisciplinary ResearchCommunicationCooperative BehaviorHumansUniversitiescancer researchcollaborationCPACHEhealth disparitiesnetwork analysispartnershipprogram evaluation

Identifiers

PMID37594293
PMCPMC10637077
OpenAlexW4385968647

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.