ReviewExperimental neurology2025
A guide to developing harmonized research workflows in a team science context.
Review in Experimental neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Designing and implementing solution-oriented team science initiatives-a chronic pain example.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Large, interdisciplinary team science initiatives are increasingly leveraged to uncover novel insights into complex scientific problems. Such projects typically aim to produce large, harmonized datasets that can be analyzed to yield breakthrough discoveries using cutting-edge scientific methods. Successfully harmonizing and integrating datasets generated by different technologies and research groups is a considerable task, which requires an extensive supportive framework that is built by all members involved. Such a data harmonization framework includes a shared language to communicate across teams and disciplines, harmonized methods and protocols, (meta)data standards and common data elements, and the appropriate infrastructure to support the framework's development and implementation. In addition, a supportive data harmonization framework also entails adopting processes to decide on which elements to harmonize and to help individual team members implement agreed-upon data workflows in their own laboratories/centers. Building an effective data harmonization framework requires buy-in, team building, and significant effort from all members involved. While the nature and individual elements of these frameworks are project-specific, some common challenges typically arise that are independent of the research questions, scientific techniques, or model systems involved. In this perspective, we build on our collective experiences as part of the REstoring JOINt health and function to reduce pain (RE-JOIN) Consortium to provide guidance for developing research-centered data collection and analysis pipelines that enable downstream integrated analyses within and across diverse teams.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.