Science of team science

Science of Team Science (SciTS) is a methodological field that examines and enhances cross-disciplinary collaboration in research. It encompasses conceptual and methodological strategies to understand how scientific research teams can be optimally organized for maximum effectiveness.^[1] SciTS initiatives systematically investigate and manage factors influencing collaborative science while evaluating its outcomes.^[2][3][4]

History

Since the 1990s, interest and large-scale funding for team-based research initiatives have increased substantially, driven by efforts to address complex problems through cross-disciplinary collaboration.^[2][5][6][7] This trend reflects growing recognition that multifaceted challenges—such as climate change and public health crises—benefit substantially from partnerships among scientists and practitioners from diverse fields.^[5][6][8] One SciTS literature review identified team science as essential to interprofessional collaborative research.^[9] The report advocated for its integration into health professions education and clinical practice at the University of Minnesota's National Center for Interprofessional Practice and Education.

The interdisciplinary nature of SciTS emerged from concerns raised by funding agencies seeking to assess team science performance, understand its added value, evaluate returns on investment in large research initiatives, and inform science policy.^[2] The term "science of team science" was first introduced in October 2006 at a conference titled The Science of Team Science: Assessing the Value of Transdisciplinary Research, hosted by the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda, Maryland.^[10] The field was further developed in a supplement to the American Journal of Preventive Medicine published in July 2008. The First Annual International Science of Team Science (SciTS) Conference was held on April 22–24, 2010, in Chicago, Illinois, organized by the Northwestern University Clinical and Translational Sciences (NUCATS) Institute.

In 2013, the National Academy of Sciences established a National Research Council Committee on the Science of Team Science to evaluate the current state of knowledge and practice in SciTS.^[11] A committee report was published in 2015.^[12]

A 2023 review by Forscher et al. identified benefits of big team science, noting that innovations facilitate collection of larger samples and support efforts toward reproducibility and generalizability.^[13][14] However, concerns persist that team science could increasingly influence funding priorities, potentially shifting emphasis from applied science to more theoretical research areas and leading to unsuccessful large-scale projects.^[15] Forscher recommended creating advisory boards and structured by-laws, formalizing contributor feedback mechanisms, engaging in mentoring, and separating idea generation from project implementation.^[14]

Methods

Definitions of team success may vary among stakeholders.^[2] SciTS employs both qualitative and quantitative methods to evaluate antecedent conditions, collaborative processes, and outcomes associated with team science, while also considering organizational, social, and political contexts that influence scientific collaboration.^[2]

A 2018 literature review of SciTS publications between 2006 and 2016 identified 109 articles, reporting that 75% utilized pre-existing data (e.g., archival data), 62% employed bibliometrics, over 40% used surveys, and more than 10% incorporated interview and observational data.^[16]

See also

• Integrative learning
• Interactional expertise
• Interdisciplinarity
• Multidisciplinary
• Multidimensional network
• Transdisciplinary