Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jun 5;7(1):e145.
doi: 10.1017/cts.2023.566. eCollection 2023.

Application of team science best practices to the project management of a large, multi-site lung cancer screening research consortium

Julie S Steiner  1 , Erica Blum-Barnett  1 , Betsy Rolland  2 , Courtney R Kraus  1 , Jocelyn V Wainwright  3 , Ruth Bedoy  1 , Yannica Theda Martinez  4 , Elizabeth R Alleman  5 , Roxy Eibergen  6 , Lisa E Pieper  1 , Nikki M Carroll  1 , Brian Hixon  1 , Andrew Sterrett  1 , Katharine A Rendle  3 , Chelsea Saia  3 , Anil Vachani  3 , Debra P Ritzwoller  1 , Andrea Burnett-Hartman  1
Affiliations

Application of team science best practices to the project management of a large, multi-site lung cancer screening research consortium

Julie S Steiner et al. J Clin Transl Sci. .

Abstract

Research is increasingly conducted through multi-institutional consortia, and best practices for establishing multi-site research collaborations must be employed to ensure efficient, effective, and productive translational research teams. In this manuscript, we describe how the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process Lung Research Center (PROSPR-Lung) utilized evidence-based Science of Team Science (SciTS) best practices to establish the consortium's infrastructure and processes to promote translational research in lung cancer screening. We provide specific, actionable examples of how we: (1) developed and reinforced a shared mission, vision, and goals; (2) maintained a transparent and representative leadership structure; (3) employed strong research support systems; (4) provided efficient and effective data management; (5) promoted interdisciplinary conversations; and (6) built a culture of trust. We offer guidance for managing a multi-site research center and data repository that may be applied to a variety of settings. Finally, we detail specific project management tools and processes used to drive collaboration, efficiency, and scientific productivity.

Keywords: Team science; cancer; consortium; data management; project management.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

KR discloses research grants paid to her institution with funding from Pfizer and AstraZeneca and personal fees as a scientific consultant for Merck and American Journal of Managed Care, all outside of the submitted work. DPR and NMC report grant funding from Pfizer, outside of this work, paid to their institution. AV reports grants from the Moore Foundation, PCORI, Lungevity, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Precyte Inc., Optellum, Ltd, and MagArray Inc. outside of the submitted work and personal fees as scientific advisor for the Lung Cancer Initiative at Johnson and Johnson.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
PROSPR-Lung strategies to implement SciTS best practices. IRB = Institutional Review Board, PARC = Proposal Access Review Committee, SciTS = Science of Team Science.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
PROSPR-Lung’s Proposal Access Review Committee (PARC) intellectual product proposal review, administrative core compliance review, data request, and tracking process. DUA = Data Use Agreement, IRB = Institutional Review Board, PARC = Proposal Access Review Committee.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Project management tools utilized by PROSPR-Lung to drive collaboration, efficiency, and scientific progress. Refer to Fig. 1 for specific SciTS best practices for which these tools were used to implement. CoT = culture of trust, DM = data management, ICs = interdisciplinary conversations, L = leadership, MVGs = mission, vision, and goals, RSS = research support systems.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
PROSPR-Lung’s methodology to capture, harmonize, and provide limited and deidentified datasets. EHR = electronic health record, HFH = Henry Ford Health, KPHI = Kaiser Permanente Hawaii, KPCO = Kaiser Permanente Colorado, MCHS = Marshfield Clinical Health System, NCI = National Cancer Institute, UPHS = University of Pennsylvania Health System.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Bozeman B, Fay D, Slade CP. Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art. J Technol Trans. 2013;38(1):1–67. doi: 10.1007/s10961-012-9281-8. - DOI
    1. Austin CP. Opportunities and challenges in translational science. Clin Transl Sci. 2021;14(5):1629–1647. doi: 10.1111/cts.13055. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rolland B, Burnside ES, Voils CI, Shah MN, Brasier AR. Enhancing reproducibility using interprofessional team best practices. J Clin Transl Sci Jul. 2020;5(1):e20. doi: 10.1017/cts.2020.512. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rendle KA, Burnett-Hartman AN, Neslund-Dudas C, et al. Evaluating lung cancer screening across diverse healthcare systems: a process model from the lung PROSPR consortium. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2020;13(2):129–136. doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-19-0378. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Beaber EF, Kamineni A, Burnett-Hartman AN, et al. Evaluating and improving cancer screening process quality in a multilevel context: the PROSPR II consortium design and research agenda. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2022;2(8):1521–1531. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-22-0100. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources