Sung, NS, Crowley, WF, Genel, M, et al. Central challenges facing the national clinical research enterprise. Journal of the American Medical Association 2003; 289(10): 1278–1287.
Westfall, JM, Mold, J, Fagnan, L. Practice-based research – “blue highways” on the NIH roadmap. Journal of the American Medical Association 2007; 297(4): 403–406.
Woolf, SH. The meaning of translational research and why it matters. Journal of the American Medical Association 2008; 299(2): 211–213.
National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS). Strategic Goal 2: advance translational team science by fostering innovative partnerships and collaborations with a strategic array of stakeholders [Internet], 2017. https://ncats.nih.gov/strategicplan/goal2. Accessed April 25, 2019.
Disis, ML, Slattery, JT. The road we must take: multidisciplinary team science. Science Translational Medicine 2010; 2: 22cm9.
Fortunato, S, Bergstrom, CT, Börner, K, et al. Science of science. Science 2018; 359: eaao0185.
Jones, BF, Wuchty, S, Uzzi, B. Multi-university research teams: shifting impact, geography, and stratification in science. Science 2008; 322: 1259–1262.
Wuchty, S, Jones, BF, Uzzi, B. The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science 2007; 316: 1036–1039.
Uzzi, B, Mukherjee, S, Stringer, M, et al. Atypical combinations and scientific impact. Science 2013; 342: 468–472.
Larivière, V, Haustein, S, Börner, K. Long-distance interdisciplinarity leads to higher scientific impact. PLoS ONE 2015; 10(3): e0122565.
Basner, JE, Theisz, KI, Jensen, US, et al. Measuring the evolution and output of cross-disciplinary collaborations within the NCI Physical Sciences-Oncology Centers Network. Research Evaluation 2013; 22: 285–297.
Hall, KL, Stokols, D, Moser, RP, et al. The collaboration readiness of transdisciplinary research teams and centers. Findings from the National Cancer Institute’s TREC year-one evaluation study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2008; 35(2S) :S161–S172.
Cummings, JN, Kiesler, S, Zadeh, RB, et al. Group heterogeneity increases the risks of large group size: a longitudinal study of productivity in research groups. Psychological Science 2013; 24(6): 880–890.
Hall, KL, Stokols, D, Stipelman, BA, et al. Assessing the value of team science. A study comparing center- and investigator-initiated grants. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2012; 42(2): 157–163.
Hall, KL, Vogel, AL, Stipelman, BA, et al. A four-phase model of transdisciplinary team-based research: goals, team processes, and strategies. Translational Behavioral Medicine: Practice, Policy, Research 2012; 2: 415–430.
Salazar, MR, Lant, TK, Fiore, SM, et al. Facilitating innovation in diverse science teams through integrative capacity. Small Group Research 2012; 43(5): 527–558.
Trochim, WM, Marcus, SE, Mâsse, LC, et al. The evaluation of large research initiatives: a participatory integrative mixed-methods approach. American Journal of Evaluation 2008; 29(1): 8–28.
Luukkonen, T, Tijssen, RJW, Persson, O, et al. The measurement of international scientific collaboration. Scientometrics 1993; 28(1): 15–36.
Mâsse, LC, Moser, RP, Stokols, D, et al. Measuring collaboration and transdisciplinary integration in team science. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2008; 35(2S): S151–S160.
Milojevic, S. Principles of scientific research team formation and evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2014; 111(11): 3984–3989.
Cooke, NJ and Hilton, ML, eds.; Committee on the Science of Team Science; Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences; Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education; National Research Council. Enhancing the effectiveness of team science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2015.
Nichols, LG. A topic model approach to measuring interdisciplinarity at the National Science Foundation. Scientometrics 2014; 100: 741–754.
Oetzel, JG, Zhou, C, Duran, B, et al. Establishing the psychometric properties of constructs in a community-based participatory research conceptual model. American Journal of Health Promotion 2015; 29(5): e188–e202.
Salas, E, Grossman, R, Hughes, AM, et al. Measuring team cohesion: observations from the science. Human Factors 2015; 57(3): 365–374.
Stokols, D, Harvey, R, Gress, J, et al. In vivo studies of transdisciplinary scientific collaboration. Lessons learned and implications for active living research. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2005; 28(2S2): 202–213.
Wageman, R, Hackman, JR, Lehman, E. Team diagnostic survey: development of an instrument. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 2005; 41(4): 373–398.
Wooten, KC, Rose, RM, Ostir, GV, et al. Assessing and evaluating multidisciplinary translational teams: a mixed methods approach. Evaluation and the Health Professions 2014; 37(1): 33–49.
Misra, S, Stokols, D, Cheng, L. The transdisciplinary orientation scale: factor structure and relation to the integrative quality and scope of scientific publications. Journal of Translational Medicine and Epidemiology 2015; 3(2): 1042.
Souza, MT, Silva, MD, Carvalho, RD. Integrative review: what is it? How to do it? Einstein 2010; 8(1): 102–106.
Whitehead, D, LoBiondo-Wood, G, Haber, J. Nursing and Midwifery Research: Methods and Appraisal for Evidence Based Practice. 5th ed. Chatswood NSW, Australia: Elsevier, 2016.
Bian, J, Xie, M, Topaloglu, U, Hudson, T, et al. Social network analysis of biomedical research collaboration networks in a CTSA institution. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 2014; 52: 130–140.
Franco, ZE, Ahmed, SM, Maurana, CA, et al. A social network analysis of 140 community-academic partnerships for health: examining the healthier Wisconsin partnership program. Clinical and Translational Science 2015; 8(4): 311–319.
Hughes, ME, Peeler, J, Hogenesch, JB. Network dynamics to evaluate performance of an academic institution. Science Translational Medicine 2010; 2(53): 53ps49.
Huang, C. Knowledge sharing and group cohesiveness on performance: an empirical study of technology R&D teams in Taiwan. Technovation 2009; 29: 786–797.
Philbin, S. Measuring the performance of research collaborations. Measuring Business Excellence 2008; 12(3): 16–23.
Bietz, MJ, Abrams, S, Cooper, DM, et al. Improving the odds through the Collaboration Success Wizard. Translational Behavioral Medicine: Practice, Policy, Research 2012; 2: 480–486.
Greene, SM, Hart, G, Wagner, EH. Measuring and improving performance in multicenter research consortia. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs 2005; 35: 26–32.
Lee, S, Bozeman, B. The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science 2005; 35(5): 673–702.
Mallinson, T, Lotrecchiano, GR, Schwartz, LS, et al. Pilot analysis of the Motivation Assessment for Team Readiness, Integration, and Collaboration (MATRiCx) using Rasch analysis. Journal of Investigative Medicine 2016;0:1–8.
Mazumdar, M, Messinger, S, Finkelstein, DM, et al. Evaluating academic scientists collaborating in team-based research: a proposed framework. Academic Medicine 2015; 90(10): 1302–1308.
Okamoto, J, The Centers for Population Health and Health Disparities Evaluation Working Group. Scientific collaboration and team science: a social network analysis of the centers for population health and health disparities. Translational Behavioral Medicine: Practice, Policy, Research 2015; 5: 12–23.
Ameredes, BT, Hellmich, MR, Cestone, CM, et al. The Multidisciplinary Translational Team (MTT) Model for training and development of translational research investigators. Clinical and Translational Science 2015; 8(5): 533–541.
Lee, YS. The sustainability of university-industry research collaboration: an empirical assessment. Journal of Technology Transfer 2000; 25: 111–133.
Lööf, H, Broström, A. Does knowledge diffusion between university and industry increase innovativeness? Journal of Technology Transfer 2008; 33: 73–90.
Luke, DA, Carothers, BJ, Dhand, A, et al. Breaking down silos: mapping growth of cross-disciplinary collaboration in a translational science initiative. Clinical and Translational Science 2015; 8(2): 143–149.
Petersen, AM. Quantifying the impact of weak, strong, and super ties in scientific careers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2015; 112(34): E4671–E4680.
Stvilia, B, Hinnant, C, Schindler, K, et al. Team diversity and publication patterns in a scientific laboratory. Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology 2011; 62(2): 270–283.
Wang, J, Hicks, D. Scientific teams: self-assembly, fluidness, and interdependence. Journal of Informetrics 2014; 9(1): 197–207.
Lee, Y, Walsh, JP, Wang, J. Creativity in scientific teams: unpacking novelty and impact. Research Policy 2014; 44: 684–697.
Hager, K, St Hill, C, et al. Development of an interprofessional and interdisciplinary collaborative research practice for clinical faculty. Journal of Interprofessional Care 2016; 30(2): 265–267.
Bieschke, K, Bishop, R, Garcia, V. The utility of the research self-efficacy scale. Journal of Career Assessment 1996; 4: 59–75.
Hanel, P, St-Pierre, M. Industry-university collaboration by Canadian manufacturing firms. Journal of Technology Transfer 2006; 31: 485–499.
Armstrong, A, Jackson-Smith, D. Forms and levels of integration: evaluation of an interdisciplinary team-building project. Journal of Research Practice 2013; 9(1): Article M1.
Vogel, AL, Stipelman, BA, Hall, KL, et al. Pioneering the transdisciplinary team science approach: lessons learned from the National Cancer Institute grantees. Journal of Translational Medicine and Epidemiology 2014; 2(2): 1027.
Aguilar-Gaxiola, S, Ahmed, S, Franco, Z, et al. Toward a unified taxonomy of health indicators: academic health centers and communities working together to improve population health. Academic Medicine 2014; 89(4): 564–572.
Kane, M, Trochim, WM. Evaluation of large initiatives of scientific research at the National Institutes of Health. In: Presentation at the American Evaluation Association Conference. Portland, Oregon, USA. November 4, 2006.
Granner, ML, Sharpe, PA. Evaluating community coalition characteristics and functioning: a summary of measurement tools. Health Education Research 2004; 19(5): 514–532.
Sandoval, JA, Lucero, J, Oetzel, J, et al. Process and outcome constructs for evaluating community-based participatory research projects: a matrix of existing measures. Health Education Research 2012; 27(4): 680–690.