Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Implementation Science
Published in: Implementation Science 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research

Structuring successful collaboration: a longitudinal social network analysis of a translational research network

Authors: Janet C. Long, Peter Hibbert, Jeffrey Braithwaite

Published in: Implementation Science | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In 2012 and 2013, we conducted a social network survey of a new translational research network (TRN) designed to deliver better care to cancer patients. Results of these two surveys showed that silos of researchers and clinicians existed before the TRN was established but that the network had mediated collaborative relationships. This paper reports on a third social network survey of the TRN and focusses on the structure of the collaborative arrangements among members.

Methods

Members of the TRN were invited to complete an on-line, whole network survey in May 2015. The survey asked respondents to identify personal impacts, outputs and wider outcomes attributable to their TRN membership. The final question asked respondents to select the name of TRN members with whom they had collaborated either formally or informally. For each member nominated, they were asked to say whether they had known this person before joining the TRN.

Results

Response rate was 70 %. Over 4 years, the TRN has grown in size from 68 to 244 members. Relationships within and across the TRN have become more collaborative and interactive, with 1658 collaborative ties between members and over 40 % of ties with people unknown to participants before they joined the TRN. This points to a well-functioning network which has retained its focus on the original goals of the TRN and has fostered collaboration between researchers, clinicians, managers, consumers and TRN operational staff. This survey shows that the TRN’s impact goes beyond outcomes from formal TRN-funded projects. About one third of respondents could list projects not directly funded by the TRN but which are attributed to TRN membership. Examples of practice change brought about through the TRN were given by 77 % of respondents. A substantial risk factor for the future is the high levels of dependency on key or central TRN participants.

Conclusions

The structure of the TRN with its active central actors and brokers has been able to foster collaboration on implementation initiatives that result in practice change. The role of a social professional network in driving this collaboration is shown.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Braithwaite J, Marks D, Taylor N. Harnessing implementation science to improve care quality and patient safety: a systematic review of targeted literature. International J Qual Health Care. 2014;26(3):321–9.CrossRef
2.
Taylor N, Lawton R, Slater B, Foy R. The demonstration of a theory-based approach to the design of localized patient safety interventions. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):123.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
3.
4.
Marantz PR, Strelnick AH, Currie B, Bhalla R, Blank AE, Meissner P, et al. Developing a multidisciplinary model of comparative effectiveness research within a clinical and translational science award. Acad Med. 2011;86(6):712–7.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
5.
Tageja N. Bridging the translation gap—new hopes, new challenges. Fundam Clin Pharmacol. 2011;25(2):163–71.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Fixsen DL, Naoom SF, Blase KA, Friedman RM, Wallace F. Implementation research: a synthesis of the literature. Tampa: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network; 2005.
7.
Long JC, Cunningham FC, Braithwaite J. Network structure and the role of key players in a translational cancer research network: a study protocol. BMJ Open. 2012;2(3):e001434.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
8.
Newman MEJ, Watts DJ, Strogatz SH. Random graph models of social networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002;19(99 (Supp 1):2566–72.CrossRef
9.
Scott J. Social network analysis: a handbook. 2nd ed. London: Sage; 2000.
10.
11.
Long JC, Cunningham FC, Carswell P, Braithwaite J. Patterns of collaboration in complex networks: the example of a translational research network. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14(1):225.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
12.
Long JC, Cunningham FC, Wiley J, Carswell P, Braithwaite J. Leadership in complex networks: the importance of network position and strategic action in a translational cancer research network. Implement Sci. 2013;8:122.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
13.
Wood D, Gray B. Towards a comprehensive theory of collaboration. J Appl Behav Sci. 1991;27(2):139–62.CrossRef
14.
Bian J, Xie M, Topaloglu U, Hudson T, Eswaran H, Hogan W. Social network analysis of biomedical research collaboration networks in a CTSA institution. J Biomed Inform. 2014;52:130–40.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
15.
Catala-Lopez F, Alonso-Arroyo A, Aleixandre-Benavent R, Ridao M, Bolanos M, Garcia-Altes A, et al. Coauthorship and institutional collaborations on cost-effectiveness analyses: a systematic network analysis. PLoS One. 2012;7(5), e38012.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
16.
Cross R, Borgatti S, Parker A. Making invisible work visible: using social network analysis to support strategic collaboration. Calif Manage Rev. 2002;44(2):25–46.CrossRef
17.
Braithwaite J, Clay-Williams R, Nugus P, Plumb J. Health care as a complex adaptive system. In: Hollnagel E, Braithwaite J, Wears R, editors. Resilient Health Care. England: Ashgate; 2013. p. 57–73.
18.
Friedkin NE. The development of structure in random networks: an analysis of the effects of increasing network density on five measures of structure. Soc Netw. 1981;3:41–52.CrossRef
19.
Wasserman S, Faust K. Social network analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1994.CrossRef
20.
Dauphinee D, Martin JB. Breaking down the walls: thoughts on the scholarship of integration. Acad Med. 2000;75(9):881–6.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Borgatti SP. NetDraw: graph visualization software. Harvard: Analytic Technologies; 2002.
22.
Borgatti SP, Everett MG, Freeman LC. UCInet for Windows: software for social network analysis. 6th ed. Harvard: Analytic Technologies; 2002.
23.
Knoben J, Oerlemans LAG. Proximity and inter-organizational collaboration: a literature review. Int J Manage Rev. 2006;8(2):71–89.CrossRef
24.
Stokols D, Misra S, Moser R, Hall K, Taylor B. The ecology of team science: understanding contextual influences on transdisciplinary collaboration. Am J Prev Med. 2008;35(2, Supplement):S96–115.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Butler D. Translational research: crossing the valley of death. Nat Med. 2008;453:840–2.
26.
Schwartz K, Vilquin J-T. Building the translational highway: toward new partnerships between academia and the private sector. Nat Med. 2003;9(5):493–5.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Zerhouni EA. Translational and clinical science: time for a new vision. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(15):1621–3.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Cunningham FC, Ranmuthugala G, Plumb J, Georgiou A, Westbrook JI, Braithwaite J. Health professional networks as a vector for improving healthcare quality and safety: a systematic review. BMJ Qual Saf. 2012;21(3):239–49.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
29.
McInnes E, Middleton S, Gardner G, Haines M, Haertsch M, Paul C, et al. A qualitative study of stakeholder views of the conditions for and outcomes of successful clinical networks. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12:49.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
30.
Burt RS. Brokerage and closure: an introduction to social capital. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.
31.
Schleyer T, Spallek H, Butler BS, Subramanian S, Weiss D, Poythress ML, et al. Facebook for scientists: requirements and services for optimizing how scientific collaborations are established. J Med Internet Res. 2008;10(3):e24.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Structuring successful collaboration: a longitudinal social network analysis of a translational research network
Authors
Janet C. Long
Peter Hibbert
Jeffrey Braithwaite
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Implementation Science / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1748-5908
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0381-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Implementation Science 1/2015 Go to the issue

Study protocol

Study protocol for “Healthy Hearts Northwest”: a 2 × 2 randomized factorial trial to build quality improvement capacity in primary care

Study protocol

iLead—a transformational leadership intervention to train healthcare managers’ implementation leadership

Research

High impact of implementation on school-based smoking prevention: the X:IT study—a cluster-randomized smoking prevention trial

Research

Increasing smoking cessation care across a network of hospitals: an implementation study

Research

Understanding the dynamics of the Seguro Popular de Salud policy implementation in Mexico from a complex adaptive systems perspective

Systematic review

Do complexity-informed health interventions work? A scoping review