Rose A Marcelin1, Kristina M Rabarison2,3, Monika K Rabarison4. 1. 1 Division of Population Health, Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Public Health Fellow, Atlanta, GA, USA. 2. 2 Division of Population Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA. 3. 3 Data for Insights, LLC, Washington, DC, USA. 4. 4 Department of Economics and Finance, Robert C. Vackar College of Business and Entrepreneurship, University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Brownsville, TX, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Prevention Research Centers (PRCs) collaborate on public health activities with community agencies and organizations. We evaluated these collaborations by studying the relationships between co-authors from the PRCs and community agencies that published at least 1 article together in the first year of the program. METHODS: We identified all the authors of articles published by PRCs and collaborating members in peer-reviewed journals between September 2014 and September 2015 and constructed a network showing the links between and among all the authors. We characterized the network with 4 measures of social structure (network components, network density, average clustering coefficient, average distance) and 3 measures of individual author performances (degree-, betweenness-, and closeness-centrality). RESULTS: The 413 articles had 1804 individual authors and 7995 co-authorship relationships (links) in 212 peer-reviewed journals. These authors and co-authors formed 44 separate, nonoverlapping groups (components). The largest "giant" component containing most of the links involved 66.3% (n = 1196) of the authors and 73.7% (n = 5889) of the links. We identified 136 "information brokers" (authors with high closeness centrality: those who have the shortest links to the most authors). Two authors with high betweenness centrality (who had the highest number of co-authors; 104 and 107) had the greatest ability to mediate co-authorships. Network density was low; only 0.5% of all potential co-authorships were realized (7995 actual co-authorship/1 628 110 potential co-authorships). CONCLUSION: Information brokers and co-authorship mediators should be encouraged to communicate more with each other to increase the number of collaborations between network members and, hence, the number of co-authorships.
OBJECTIVE: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Prevention Research Centers (PRCs) collaborate on public health activities with community agencies and organizations. We evaluated these collaborations by studying the relationships between co-authors from the PRCs and community agencies that published at least 1 article together in the first year of the program. METHODS: We identified all the authors of articles published by PRCs and collaborating members in peer-reviewed journals between September 2014 and September 2015 and constructed a network showing the links between and among all the authors. We characterized the network with 4 measures of social structure (network components, network density, average clustering coefficient, average distance) and 3 measures of individual author performances (degree-, betweenness-, and closeness-centrality). RESULTS: The 413 articles had 1804 individual authors and 7995 co-authorship relationships (links) in 212 peer-reviewed journals. These authors and co-authors formed 44 separate, nonoverlapping groups (components). The largest "giant" component containing most of the links involved 66.3% (n = 1196) of the authors and 73.7% (n = 5889) of the links. We identified 136 "information brokers" (authors with high closeness centrality: those who have the shortest links to the most authors). Two authors with high betweenness centrality (who had the highest number of co-authors; 104 and 107) had the greatest ability to mediate co-authorships. Network density was low; only 0.5% of all potential co-authorships were realized (7995 actual co-authorship/1 628 110 potential co-authorships). CONCLUSION: Information brokers and co-authorship mediators should be encouraged to communicate more with each other to increase the number of collaborations between network members and, hence, the number of co-authorships.
Keywords:
citation network analysis; collaboration; disease prevention; evaluation; health promotion; prevention research centers; social network analysis
Authors: Mehran S Massoudi; Rose A Marcelin; Belinda-Rose Young; Connie L Bish; Donna Henry; Suzanne Hurley; Kurt J Greenlund; Wayne H Giles Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Bruna de Paula Fonseca E Fonseca; Ricardo Barros Sampaio; Marcus Vinicius de Araújo Fonseca; Fabio Zicker Journal: Health Res Policy Syst Date: 2016-04-30
Authors: Kyle R Busse; Stephenie C Lemon; Beth P Comerford; Nadia S Islam; Brigette F Ulin; Michael P Eriksen; Alice S Ammerman Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2022-01-21 Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Olushina Olawale Awe; Dennis Makafui Dogbey; Ronel Sewpaul; Derrick Sekgala; Natisha Dukhi Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-05-27 Impact factor: 3.390