the added value of transdisciplinary team science ... · and use a shared conceptual framework that...

Kara L. Hall, PhD Director, Science of Team Science (SciTS) Team National Cancer Institute (NCI) In collaboration with : Brooke Stipelman, PhD (Contractor, NCI) Janet Okamoto, PhD (Postdoctoral Fellow, NCI) Amanda Vogel, PhD (SAIC-Frederick, NCI)

The Added Value of Transdisciplinary Team Science: Findings from Multi-Methods

NORDP May 22, 2012

Overview

• Define Transdisciplinarity

• Impetus for Transdisciplinary Team Science • Share findings from a variety of different ways to consider

impact or “value” of a Transdisciplinary (TD) initiative

A Continuum of Disciplinary Integration

Unidisciplinary

Multidisciplinary

Interdisciplinary

Transdisciplinary

Researchers from a single discipline work together to address a common problem

Researchers from different disciplines work sequentially, each from their own discipline-specific perspective, with a goal of eventually combining results to address a common problem

Researchers from different disciplines work jointly to address a common problem. Some integration of perspectives occurs, but contributions remain anchored in their own disciplines.

Researchers from different disciplines work jointly to develop and use a shared conceptual framework that synthesizes and extends discipline-specific theories, concepts, and methods, to create new approaches to address a common problem

Within

Across

Disciplines

Adapted from Rosenfield, 1992

Advancing the Tobacco Field through Integration

•Candidate genes•GWAS•Functional studies

Phase II-III Trials•Existing meds•Novel compounds

•fMRI•PET•Neuropsych assessment

•Quit success•Therapeutic response•Withdrawal signs

Merging Biology with Behavior (Tobacco field)

Lerman, 2012

Goal: Development of targeted therapies for nicotine addiction

DCCPS Funded TD Initiatives

Examples of Strategies / Approaches for Examining Processes and Outcomes of Team Science

• Study Designs

– Case study – Quasi-experimental designs

• Data types

– Publications – Administrative – Participant surveys – Interview transcripts

• Methods/Approaches – Peer Review / Expert Judgment – Financial Analysis – Bibliometric methods – Visualization techniques – Network analysis – Integration of qualitative and

quantitative approaches – Interviews

Qualitative Evaluation of Transdisciplinary Research Centers

• TREC: 5 year initiative (2005-2010), $54 million total finding, 4 research centers and 1 coordination center

• One-on-one qualitative semi-structured interviews with 33 TREC I grantees (summer, 2010)

• Documented lessons learned, challenges, facilitating factors, strategies for success, impacts

• Thematic analysis, NVIVO QDM software

Vogel, Stipelman, Hall et al, 2011

Impact of Participating in a TD Research Initiative

Adoption of TD Ethic,

Approaches

New Boundary-Crossing

Collaborations

Scientific Progress

Institutional Culture Change,

Resource Development

Career Development, Advancement


Adoption of TD Ethic and Approaches

New Boundary Crossing Collaborations

Scientific Progress

• Developed a TD Ethic – Believe in the value of TD approach, team work – Greater appreciation for other disciplines – Willingness to continue learning in other areas of science – Willingness to use approaches from other disciplines, including concepts,

theories, and methods

• Reported using a TD approach in their current and planned research, introduced or reinforced by TD initiative – Reported applying the above principles – Said their current research is more sophisticated, complex, and “holistic”

than their pre-TD initiative research (more variables and measures, from a variety of disciplines)

– Many used the word “transformed” to describe the impact of TD initiative on their attitudes about TD research, and the ways they conduct their research




Scientific Progress

0

1

2

3

4

5

Uni Inter/Trans

Time 1

Time 2

Leve

l of

Agr

eem

ent

Changes in Research Orientation Over Time in TD Initiative

Key finding: Decrease in unidiscplinary orientation from year 1 to year 3 Method: Research orientation factor scores from investigator survey in year 1 and 3

Hall, Stokols, et al., 2008



Scientific Progress

Change in Cross-Disciplinary Integration Over Time for Developmental Proposal Ratings

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

UD MD ID

Percent 2006

2007

Key finding: Increase in cross-disciplinary integration of proposals from year 2 to 3 Method: Content analysis of pilot grant proposals developed during initiative

Hall, Stipelman, et al., 2009



Scientific Progress

CPHHD Network Survey

Nodes sized on brokerage scores

Inter/Transdisciplinary Orientation

Okamoto, Vogel, Hall, et al., 2011

Key finding: Investigators with a primarily TD orientation (vs. MD or UD) were more likely to serve as brokers, both between centers and within their own centers Method: Web-based social network and collaboration readiness survey delivered to CPHHD investigators Dec 2010-Jan 2011

1 5



Scientific Progress

•Established new research collaborations

-Across disciplines, both within and across institutions -Across departments, schools, and institutions – breaking down barriers -With community organizations, for translational work




Scientific Progress

TTURC R01 Comparison Group

Co-Authorship Networks of TD Center Grants and R01 Investigator-Initiated Grants

nodes sized on times cited

•The TTURC co-authorship network has 1027 unique authors (almost double the R01 comparison group). •The many red links show that there is a high degree of coauthorship across the TTURC centers while the many gray links indicate a great deal of collaboration within the TTURC centers.


New Boundary Crossing

Collaborations

Scientific Progress

• TD approaches accelerated advancements in research design and methods – Development of new conceptual frameworks and research questions

and applications of research methods in new areas – Development of new measures, instruments, and software

• Important findings in previously unexplored areas of science, e.g., – Intersection of sleep, obesity, and cancer – Intersection of residential neighborhood GIS indicators, young adult

food purchasing, young adult eating patterns

• Cross-fertilization of research areas via publications in journals and presentations at conferences in other, fields, e.g. obesity researchers presenting at cancer conferences can advance the science in multiple fields


Annual Publications

TD center publications have longer start up period compared to R01s but become more productive over time

0102030405060708090

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Publ

icatio

ns -A

ll

Project Year

Hall, Stokols, Stipelman, et al., 2012

Centers initial lag in number of publications is eliminated around Project Year 4.

Productivity of Transdisciplinary (TD) Center Grants and R01 Investigator-Initiated Grants

Cumulative Publications

050

100150200250300350400450500

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Cum

ulat

ive P

ublic

atio

ns -

All

Project Year

TTURCR01_stackedR01_long

Method: Quasi-experimental design comparing number of publications of TD initiative with matched R01 projects from the tobacco field over 10-year period



Scientific Progress

Aver

age

Num

ber o

f C

itatio

ns

Average Number of Adjusted Citations in TTURC and Comparison Group Publications Over Time

Key finding: During TTURC years – TTURC investigators produce more highly cited publication than CG (Journal impact factors were similar across the two groups – subsequent analysis showed both groups publishing in the similar journals) Method: Comparison of TTURC and R01 investigators’ citations rates from entire corpus of publications 1996-2010.

Long R01 Comparison Group: Map of Science - Publication Counts



Scientific Progress

TTURC Group: Map of Science - Publication Counts



Scientific Progress

In Sum

• This brief snap shot highlights examples of impacts and added value to engaging in TD science initiatives, such as: – Conduct of more sophisticated and complex research – Development of novel areas of science – Greater publication productivity and impact – Greater breadth and faster spread of research across domains of

science • Broadly we see advances in science, individual careers, and

institutional culture

Acknowledgements

Current SciTS Team Members Kara Hall, PhD Janet Okamoto, PhD MPH Brooke Stipelman, PhD Amanda Vogel, PhD MPH

Past SciTS Members Annie Feng, Ed.D Stephen Marcus, PhD Louise Mâsse, Ph.D Richard Moser, PhD Daniel Stokols, PhD Brandie Taylor, MA William Trochim, PhD Patrick Weld, MSW MPA

Key Contributors Katy Borner, PhD Barbara Gray, PhD Glen Morgan, PhD Linda Nebeling, PhD, MPH, RD, FADA Angela Zoss, MA Discovery Logic Inc./Thompson Reuters TTURC Evaluation Working Group TREC Evaluation Working Group CPHHD Evaluation Working Group

the added value of transdisciplinary team science ... · and use a shared conceptual framework that...

Documents