BACKGROUND: Within many health care disciplines, research networks have emerged to connect researchers who are physically separated, to facilitate sharing of expertise and resources, and to exchange valuable skills. A multicentre research network committed to studying difficult cancer pain problems was launched in 2004 as part of a Canadian initiative to increase palliative and end-of-life care research capacity. Funding was received for 5 years to support network activities. METHODS: Mid-way through the 5-year granting period, an external review panel provided a formal mid-grant evaluation. Concurrently, an internal evaluation of the network by survey of its members was conducted. Based on feedback from both evaluations and on a review of the literature, we identified several components believed to be relevant to the development of a successful clinical cancer research network. RESULTS: THESE COMMON ELEMENTS OF SUCCESSFUL CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH NETWORKS WERE IDENTIFIED: shared vision, formal governance policies and terms of reference, infrastructure support, regular and effective communication, an accountability framework, a succession planning strategy to address membership change over time, multiple strategies to engage network members, regular review of goals and timelines, and a balance between structure and creativity. CONCLUSIONS: In establishing and conducting a multi-year, multicentre clinical cancer research network, network members were led to reflect on the factors that contributed most to the achievement of network goals. Several specific factors were identified that seemed to be highly relevant in promoting success. These observations are presented to foster further discussion on the successful design and operation of research networks.
BACKGROUND: Within many health care disciplines, research networks have emerged to connect researchers who are physically separated, to facilitate sharing of expertise and resources, and to exchange valuable skills. A multicentre research network committed to studying difficult cancer pain problems was launched in 2004 as part of a Canadian initiative to increase palliative and end-of-life care research capacity. Funding was received for 5 years to support network activities. METHODS: Mid-way through the 5-year granting period, an external review panel provided a formal mid-grant evaluation. Concurrently, an internal evaluation of the network by survey of its members was conducted. Based on feedback from both evaluations and on a review of the literature, we identified several components believed to be relevant to the development of a successful clinical cancer research network. RESULTS: THESE COMMON ELEMENTS OF SUCCESSFUL CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH NETWORKS WERE IDENTIFIED: shared vision, formal governance policies and terms of reference, infrastructure support, regular and effective communication, an accountability framework, a succession planning strategy to address membership change over time, multiple strategies to engage network members, regular review of goals and timelines, and a balance between structure and creativity. CONCLUSIONS: In establishing and conducting a multi-year, multicentre clinical cancer research network, network members were led to reflect on the factors that contributed most to the achievement of network goals. Several specific factors were identified that seemed to be highly relevant in promoting success. These observations are presented to foster further discussion on the successful design and operation of research networks.
Entities:
Keywords:
Clinical cancer research; collaboration; multicentre; network evaluation; research network
Authors: Timothy S Carey; Daniel L Howard; Moses Goldmon; James T Roberson; Paul A Godley; Alice Ammerman Journal: Acad Med Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 6.893
Authors: Edward H Wagner; Sarah M Greene; Gene Hart; Terry S Field; Suzanne Fletcher; Ann M Geiger; Lisa J Herrinton; Mark C Hornbrook; Christine C Johnson; Judy Mouchawar; Sharon J Rolnick; Victor J Stevens; Stephen H Taplin; Dennis Tolsma; Thomas M Vogt Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr Date: 2005
Authors: Douglas F Willson; J Michael Dean; Christopher Newth; Murray Pollack; K J S Anand; Kathleen Meert; Joseph Carcillo; Jerry Zimmerman; Carol Nicholson Journal: Pediatr Crit Care Med Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 3.624
Authors: Jason E Lang; Lynda Anderson; James LoGerfo; Joseph Sharkey; Elaine Belansky; Lucinda Bryant; Tom Prohaska; Mary Altpeter; Victor Marshall; William Satariano; Susan Ivey; Constance Bayles; Delores Pluto; Sara Wilcox; R Turner Goins; Robert C Byrd Journal: Prev Chronic Dis Date: 2005-12-15 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Ki E Park; Lemuel A Moyé; Timothy D Henry; Emerson C Perin; Shelly L Sayre; Judy Bettencourt; Rachel W Vojvodic; Rachel E Olson; Carl J Pepine Journal: Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther Date: 2013-10-23
Authors: Andrea R Paolino; Sherry Lee Lauf; Lisa E Pieper; Jared Rowe; Ileana M Vargas; Melissa A Goff; Matthew F Daley; Leah Tuzzio; John F Steiner Journal: EGEMS (Wash DC) Date: 2014-07-10
Authors: Fiona Nemeh; Rachelle Buchbinder; Carmel M Hawley; Mark R Nelson; Jacqui G Waterkeyn; Christopher M Reid Journal: Trials Date: 2022-01-28 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Ar K Aung; Robert Pickles; Anne Knight; Leigh-Anne Shannon; Andrew Bowers; Sinead Donnelly; Douglas F Johnson; Ian A Scott; Elizabeth L Potter Journal: Intern Med J Date: 2022-08-10 Impact factor: 2.611