We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Effective interdisciplinary collaboration is essential for addressing complex clinical and translational research challenges. This paper presents and evaluates a structured team science training program developed by the Colorado Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute (CCTSI), while also introducing and validating a novel assessment tool used to measure changes in key teaming competencies.
Methods:
We evaluated the effectiveness of this program between 2020 and 2022 using pre- and post-program surveys (N = 221). Our evaluation tool was designed to capture familiarity with teaming concepts and the frequency of applying collaborative practices. Principal component analysis (PCA) was applied to validate the grouping of these competencies, and paired t-tests were used to measure changes over time.
Results:
PCA revealed three distinct components of team science competencies: Team Planning, Managing a Team, and Interpersonal Relations, all demonstrating strong internal reliability. Participants showed statistically significant improvements (p < 0.05) in all three domains. Gains were robust in Team Planning and Managing a Team, emphasizing structured tools and practices. Although improvement was also observed in Interpersonal Relations, the overall gains were smaller.
Conclusions:
These findings highlight the self-reported value of Team Science Training programs in CTR settings. The TEAMS instrument described in this manuscript offers a novel approach for CTSAs to evaluate their Team Science training programs. Future applications could include longitudinal tracking and integration metrics to support future program planning, particularly fostering interdisciplinary collaboration and team integration.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.