Team science as interprofessional collaborative research practice: a systematic review of the science of team science literature

被引:48
|
作者
Little, Meg M. [1 ]
St Hill, Catherine A. [2 ]
Ware, Kenric B. [3 ]
Swanoski, Michael T. [1 ]
Chapman, Scott A. [2 ]
Lutfiyya, M. Nawal [4 ]
Cerra, Frank B. [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Minnesota, Coll Pharm, Dept Pharm Practice & Pharmaceut Sci, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
[2] Univ Minnesota, Coll Pharm, Dept Expt & Clin Pharmacol, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
[3] South Univ, Dept Pharm Practice, Coll Pharm, Columbia, SC USA
[4] Univ Minnesota, Natl Ctr Interprofess Educ & Practice, Childrens Rehabil Ctr, Minneapolis, MN USA
关键词
Evidence-Based Medicine; Science; Research; CLINICAL-PRACTICE; EDUCATION; HEALTH; CARE;
D O I
10.1136/jim-2016-000216
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
The National Institute of Health's concept of team science is a means of addressing complex clinical problems by applying conceptual and methodological approaches from multiple disciplines and health professions. The ultimate goal is the improved quality of care of patients with an emphasis on better population health outcomes. Collaborative research practice occurs when researchers from >1 health-related profession engage in scientific inquiry to jointly create and disseminate new knowledge to clinical and research health professionals in order to provide the highest quality of patient care to improve population health outcomes. Training of clinicians and researchers is necessary to produce clinically relevant evidence upon which to base patient care for disease management and empirically guided team-based patient care. In this study, we hypothesized that team science is an example of effective and impactful interprofessional collaborative research practice. To assess this hypothesis, we examined the contemporary literature on the science of team science (SciTS) produced in the past 10years (2005-2015) and related the SciTS to the overall field of interprofessional collaborative practice, of which collaborative research practice is a subset. A modified preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) approach was employed to analyze the SciTS literature in light of the general question: Is team science an example of interprofessional collaborative research practice? After completing a systematic review of the SciTS literature, the posed hypothesis was accepted, concluding that team science is a dimension of interprofessional collaborative practice.
引用
收藏
页码:15 / 22
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Commentary: Team Science
    O'Brien, Theresa
    Yamamoto, Keith
    Hawgood, Sam
    ACADEMIC MEDICINE, 2013, 88 (02) : 156 - 157
  • [42] Authorship and Team Science
    Fontanarosa, Phil
    Bauchner, Howard
    Flanagin, Annette
    JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2017, 318 (24): : 2433 - 2437
  • [43] Supporting 'team science'
    Button, Katherine
    PSYCHOLOGIST, 2020, 33 : 30 - 33
  • [44] The science of team effectiveness
    Marks, Michelle
    PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2006, : I - I
  • [45] SCIENCE AND THE TEAM SPIRIT
    NIELD, T
    NEW SCIENTIST, 1989, 122 (1658) : 59 - 59
  • [46] Team science and the NIBIB
    Pettigrew, RI
    SCIENCE, 2006, 312 (5782) : 1873 - 1873
  • [47] SCIENCE AND TEAM DEVELOPMENT
    Akins, Ralitsa B.
    Cole, Bryan R.
    INTERDISCIPLINARY DESCRIPTION OF COMPLEX SYSTEMS, 2006, 4 (01) : 29 - 43
  • [48] Encouraging team science
    Morrissey, SR
    CHEMICAL & ENGINEERING NEWS, 2005, 83 (47) : 47 - 48
  • [49] TEAM WORK IN SCIENCE
    不详
    NATURE, 1945, 156 (3968) : 581 - 584
  • [50] The use of the Design Science Research method in Information Science: a systematic review of the literature
    de Jesus, Ananda Fernanda
    Tadini, Antonio Victor Wolf
    Pereira, Clayton Martins
    Marinho, Ronnie Shida
    de Castro, William Pires
    Segundo, Jose Eduardo Santarem
    ATOZ-NOVAS PRATICAS EM INFORMACAO E CONHECIMENTO, 2023, 12 : 1 - 13