Traditionally, research institutions have valued individual achievements such as principal investigator and lead authorship status as primary indicators in the academic promotions process. However, the scientific process increasingly requires collaboration by teams of researchers across multiple disciplines, sometimes including experts outside academia, often referred to as “team science.” We sought to determine whether there is agreement about what constitutes team science at our academic institution and whether current promotion processes sufficiently incentivize faculty participation in team science.

We conducted 20 qualitative interviews with academic leaders (N = 24) at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) who supervise faculty promotions processes. Participants were asked to share their definitions of team science and the extent to which faculty receive credit for engaging in these activities during the promotions process. A subset of participants also completed a brief survey in which they ranked the importance of participation in team science relative to other factors that are traditionally valued in the promotions process. Interview data were examined by two analysts using structural coding. Descriptive analyses were conducted of survey responses.

Though team science is valued at UCSF, definitions of team science and the approach to assigning credit for team science in academic promotions processes varied widely. Participants suggested opportunities to bolster support for team science.

Efforts to define and provide transparent faculty incentives for team science should be prioritized at institutions, like UCSF, seeking to advance faculty engagement in collaborative research.

To evaluate whether a multipronged pilot intervention promoting healthier beverage consumption improved at-home beverage consumption and weight status among young children.

In this exploratory pilot study, we randomly assigned four childcare centres to a control (delayed-intervention) condition or a 12-week intervention that promoted consumption of healthier beverages (water, unsweetened low- or non-fat milk) and discouraged consumption of less-healthy beverages (juice, sugar-sweetened beverages, high-fat or sweetened milk). The multipronged intervention was delivered via childcare centres; simultaneously targeted children, parents and childcare staff; and included environmental changes, policies and education. Outcomes were measured at baseline and immediately post-intervention and included children’s (n 154) at-home beverage consumption (assessed via parental report) and overweight/obese status (assessed via objectively measured height and weight). We estimated intervention impact using difference-in-differences models controlling for children’s demographics and classroom.

Two northern California cities, USA, 2013–2014.

Children aged 2–5 years and their parents.

Relative to control group children, intervention group children reduced their consumption of less-healthy beverages from baseline to follow-up by 5·9 ounces/d (95 % CI −11·2, −0·6) (–174·5 ml/d; 95 % CI –331·2, –17·7) and increased their consumption of healthier beverages by 3·5 ounces/d (95 % CI −2·6, 9·5) (103·5 ml/d; 95 % CI –76·9, 280·9). Children’s likelihood of being overweight decreased by 3 percentage points (pp) in the intervention group and increased by 3 pp in the control group (difference-in-differences: −6 pp; 95 % CI −15, 3).

Our exploratory pilot study suggests that interventions focused comprehensively on encouraging healthier beverage consumption could improve children’s beverage intake and weight. Findings should be confirmed in longer, larger studies.

Ensuring ready access to free drinking-water in schools is an important strategy for prevention of obesity and dental caries, and for improving student learning. Yet to date, there are no validated instruments to examine water access in schools. The present study aimed to develop and validate a survey of school administrators to examine school access to beverages, including water and sports drinks, and school and district-level water-related policies and practices.

Survey validity was measured by comparing results of telephone surveys of school administrators with on-site observations of beverage access and reviews of school policy documents for any references to beverages. The semi-structured telephone survey included items about free drinking-water access (sixty-four items), commonly available competitive beverages (twenty-nine items) and water-related policies and practices (twenty-eight items). Agreement between administrator surveys and observation/document review was calculated using kappa statistics for categorical variables, and Pearson correlation coefficients and t tests for continuous variables.

Public schools in the San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA.

School administrators (n 24).

Eighty-one per cent of questions related to school beverage access yielded κ values indicating substantial or almost perfect agreement (κ>0·60). However, only one of twenty-eight questions related to drinking-water practices and policies yielded a κ value representing substantial or almost perfect agreement.

This school administrator survey appears reasonably valid for questions related to beverage access, but less valid for questions on water-related practices and policies. This tool provides policy makers, researchers and advocates with a low-cost, efficient method to gather national data on school-level beverage access.