Achieving research impact in medical research through collaboration across organizational boundaries: Insights from a mixed methods study in the Netherlands

被引:1
作者
van Oijen, Jacqueline C. F. [1 ]
van Dongen-Leunis, Annemieke [1 ]
Postma, Jeroen [1 ]
van Leeuwen, Thed [2 ]
Bal, Roland [1 ]
机构
[1] Erasmus Univ, Erasmus Sch Hlth Policy & Management, POB 1738, NL-3000 DR Rotterdam, Netherlands
[2] Leiden Univ, Ctr Sci & Technol Studies, Leiden, Netherlands
来源
HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS | 2024年 / 22卷 / 01期
关键词
Collaboration; Research impact; Bibliometric analysis; Organizational boundary work; SCIENTIFIC COLLABORATION; KNOWLEDGE; PRODUCTIVITY; SCIENCE;
D O I
10.1186/s12961-024-01157-z
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundIn the Netherlands, university medical centres (UMCs) bear primary responsibility for conducting medical research and delivering highly specialized care. The TopCare program was a policy experiment lasting 4 years in which three non-academic hospitals received funding from the Dutch Ministry of Health to also conduct medical research and deliver highly specialized care in specific domains. This study investigates research collaboration outcomes for all Dutch UMCs and non-academic hospitals in general and, more specifically, for the domains in the non-academic hospitals participating in the TopCare program. Additionally, it explores the organizational boundary work employed by these hospitals to foster productive research collaborations.MethodsA mixed method research design was employed combining quantitative bibliometric analysis of publications and citations across all Dutch UMCs and non-academic hospitals and the TopCare domains with geographical distances, document analysis and ethnographic interviews with actors in the TopCare program.ResultsQuantitative analysis shows that, over the period of study, international collaboration increased among all hospitals while national collaboration and single institution research declined slightly. Collaborative efforts correlated with higher impact scores, and international collaboration scored higher than national collaboration. A total of 60% of all non-academic hospitals' publications were produced in collaboration with UMCs, whereas almost 30% of the UMCs' publications were the result of such collaboration. Non-academic hospitals showed a higher rate of collaboration with the UMC that was nearest geographically, whereas TopCare hospitals prioritized expertise over geographical proximity within their specialized domains. Boundary work mechanisms adopted by TopCare hospitals included aligning research activities with organizational mindset (identity), bolstering research infrastructure (competence) and finding and mobilizing strategic partnerships with academic partners (power). These efforts aimed to establish credibility and attractiveness as collaboration partners.ConclusionsResearch collaboration between non-academic hospitals and UMCs, particularly where this also involves international collaboration, pays off in terms of publications and impact. The TopCare hospitals used the program's resources to perform boundary work aimed at becoming an attractive and credible collaboration partner for academia. Local factors such as research history, strategic domain focus, in-house expertise, patient flows, infrastructure and network relationships influenced collaboration dynamics within TopCare hospitals and between them and UMCs.
引用
收藏
页数:21
相关论文
共 63 条
  • [1] Abbott A., 1988, SYSTEM PROFESSIONS E
  • [2] Research collaboration and productivity: is there correlation?
    Abramo, Giovanni
    D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea
    Di Costa, Flavia
    [J]. HIGHER EDUCATION, 2009, 57 (02) : 155 - 171
  • [3] Co-authorship in management and organizational studies: An empirical and network analysis
    Acedo, Francisco Jose
    Barroso, Carmen
    Casanueva, Cristobal
    Galan, Jose Luis
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, 2006, 43 (05) : 957 - 983
  • [4] International partnerships for knowledge in business and academia - A comparison between Europe and the USA
    Archibugi, D
    Coco, A
    [J]. TECHNOVATION, 2004, 24 (07) : 517 - 528
  • [5] COLLABORATION AND TEAMWORK IN PHYSICS
    BEAVER, DD
    [J]. CZECHOSLOVAK JOURNAL OF PHYSICS, 1986, 36 (01) : 14 - 18
  • [6] STUDIES IN SCIENTIFIC COLLABORATION .3. PROFESSIONALIZATION AND THE NATURAL-HISTORY OF MODERN SCIENTIFIC CO-AUTHORSHIP
    BEAVER, DD
    ROSEN, R
    [J]. SCIENTOMETRICS, 1979, 1 (03) : 231 - 245
  • [7] Boundary spanning at the science-policy interface: the practitioners' perspectives
    Bednarek, A. T.
    Wyborn, C.
    Cvitanovic, C.
    Meyer, R.
    Colvin, R. M.
    Addison, P. F. E.
    Close, S. L.
    Curran, K.
    Farooque, M.
    Goldman, E.
    Hart, D.
    Mannix, H.
    McGreavy, B.
    Parris, A.
    Posner, S.
    Robinson, C.
    Ryan, M.
    Leith, P.
    [J]. SUSTAINABILITY SCIENCE, 2018, 13 (04) : 1175 - 1183
  • [8] Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art
    Bozeman, Barry
    Fay, Daniel
    Slade, Catherine P.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER, 2013, 38 (01) : 1 - 67
  • [9] Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries
    Carlile, PR
    [J]. ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, 2004, 15 (05) : 555 - 568
  • [10] Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek, Health care institutions