SCISIPBIO: Understanding and Assembling Dream Teams to Conduct Clinical and Translational Science

我们欢呼个人天才，但科学的成功来自合作 （Farrar，2017）。”生物医学突破来自于跨越界限的合作。界限由 学科、组织、文化、职业和人口统计。团队跨界协作的同时 科学已经证明了它的好处，但研究还表明它们不太可能形成，而且当它们形成时，很容易发生 协调成本（Cooke & Hilton，2015）。该研究项目通过以下方式推进了团队科学的发展 “理解”和“组装”跨界团队进行临床和转化科学。这项研究 使学者和政策制定者能够设计和评估“梦之队”。为了达到理解的目的，我们 对两个机构的 NIH 临床和转化科学试点资助计划进行档案研究以揭示 推动形成和成功的团队组建因素。为了实现组装的目标，我们利用了新的 开发团队推荐系统。根本目标是生成建议以改变组成 特别是提交试点资助申请的团队和一般的跨境科学团队。 该项目的见解恰逢跨界科学对于生物医学至关重要的关键时刻 研究。为了实现这一目标，该项目有两个关键的智力来源。首先，该研究推进了 团队科学的科学（Cooke & Hilton，2015），接听电话以更好地了解团队科学的多层次决定因素 科学团队的成功。它们是如何形成的以及哪些正在发挥作用？跟踪球队从组建到 成熟度提供了对推动团队组建和绩效的因素的全面理解。知道如何 更好地组建科学团队有可能提高主要人力资源来源的职业生产力 资本，并加速生物医学研究的突破。此外，并非所有跨界团队都 成功了。先前的研究为那些组建团队提供了相互竞争的建议。一方面，跨 边界团队最有可能产生新颖的见解（Stvilia 等人，2011；Uzzi 等人，2013），但他们也 最有可能因协调成本而遭受流程损失（Cummings & Kiesler，2007；Cummings 等人， 2013）。这种大规模分析将使我们能够发现区分跨境团队类型的模式 谁最终成功于那些没有成功的人。智力价值的第二个来源是发展 生物医学科学家用于组建跨境团队进行试点项目的团队推荐系统。的 NAS 报告中特别提到了 Dream Team Builder，因为它建立在 NIH 资助的 VIVO 本体之上。我们 扩展此工具以提供团队建议，并研究它们对团队组建和未来绩效的影响。

We hail individual geniuses, but success in science comes through collaboration (Farrar, 2017)." Biomedical breakthroughs come from collaboration that crosses boundaries. Boundaries created by disciplines, organizations, cultures, professions, and demographics. While cross-boundary collaboration in team science has demonstrated benefits, research also suggests they are unlikely to form, and when they do, are prone to coordination costs (Cooke & Hilton, 2015). This research project advances the Science of Team Science by "understanding" and "assembling" cross-boundary teams to conduct clinical and translational science. This research enables scholars and policymakers to design and assess "dream teams." Toward the aim of understanding, we conduct archival studies of NIH's Clinical & Translational Science Pilot Grant programs at two institutions to reveal the team assembly factors that drive formation and success. Toward the aim of assembling, we leverage a newly developed team recommender system.The fundamental goal is to generate recommendations to shift the composition of teams submitting Pilot Grant applications in particular and cross-boundary scientific teams in general. Insights from this project come at a critical point in time, when cross-boundary science is essential for biomedical research. Toward that aim, this project has two key sources of intellectual merit. First, the research advances the science of team science (Cooke & Hilton, 2015), answering calls to better understand the multilevel determinants of science team success. How are they forming and which ones are performing? Following teams from formation to maturity provide a holistic understanding of the factors driving team formation and performance. Knowing how to better assemble scientific teams has the potential to improve the career productivity of a major source of human capital, and to hasten breakthroughs in biomedical research. Furthermore, not all cross-boundary teams are successful. Previous research provides competing advice for those assembling teams. On the one hand, cross- boundary teams are most likely to produce novel insights (Stvilia et al., 2011; Uzzi et al., 2013), but they are also most likely to suffer process losses from their coordination costs (Cummings & Kiesler, 2007; Cummings et al., 2013). This large scale analysis will allow us to discover patterns that differentiate the kinds of crossboundary teams who are ultimately successful from those who are not. The second source of intellectual merit is the development of a team recommender system for biomedical scientists to use to assemble cross-boundary teams for Pilot Projects. The Dream Team Builder was specifically mentioned in the NAS report as it builds on NIH-funded VIVO's ontology. We extend this tool to provide team recommendations, and study their effects on team assembly and future performance.