Eight practices for data management to enable team data science.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Introduction
In clinical and translational research, data science is often and fortuitously integrated with data collection. This contrasts to the typical position of data scientists in other settings, where they are isolated from data collectors. Because of this, effective use of data science techniques to resolve translational questions requires innovation in the organization and management of these data.Methods
We propose an operational framework that respects this important difference in how research teams are organized. To maximize the accuracy and speed of the clinical and translational data science enterprise under this framework, we define a set of eight best practices for data management.Results
In our own work at the University of Rochester, we have strived to utilize these practices in a customized version of the open source LabKey platform for integrated data management and collaboration. We have applied this platform to cohorts that longitudinally track multidomain data from over 3000 subjects.Conclusions
We argue that this has made analytical datasets more readily available and lowered the bar to interdisciplinary collaboration, enabling a team-based data science that is unique to the clinical and translational setting.
SUBMITTER: McDavid A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8057476 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundPublic engagement in health and biomedical research is being influenced by the paradigm of citizen science. However, conventional health and biomedical research relies on sophisticated research data management tools and methods. Considering these, what contribution can citizen science make in this field of research? How can it follow research protocols and produce reliable results?ObjectiveThe aim of this article is to analyze research data management practices in existing biomedical citizen science studies, so as to provide insights for members of the public and of the research community considering this approach to research.MethodsA scoping review was conducted on this topic to determine data management characteristics of health and bio medical citizen science research. From this review and related web searching, we chose five online platforms and a specific research project associated with each, to understand their research data management approaches and enablers.ResultsHealth and biomedical citizen science platforms and projects are diverse in terms of types of work with data and data management activities that in themselves may have scientific merit. However, consistent approaches in the use of research data management models or practices seem lacking, or at least are not prevalent in the review.ConclusionsThere is potential for important data collection and analysis activities to be opaque or irreproducible in health and biomedical citizen science initiatives without the implementation of a research data management model that is transparent and accessible to team members and to external audiences. This situation might be improved with participatory development of standards that can be applied to diverse projects and platforms, across the research data life cycle.
| S-EPMC7309241 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Natural scientists from Climate Central and social scientists from Carnegie Mellon University collaborated to develop science communications aimed at presenting personalized coastal flood risk information to the public. We encountered four main challenges: agreeing on goals; balancing complexity and simplicity; relying on data, not intuition; and negotiating external pressures. Each challenge demanded its own approach. We navigated agreement on goals through intensive internal communication early on in the project. We balanced complexity and simplicity through evaluation of communication materials for user understanding and scientific content. Early user test results that overturned some of our intuitions strengthened our commitment to testing communication elements whenever possible. Finally, we did our best to negotiate external pressures through regular internal communication and willingness to compromise.
| S-EPMC4183174 | biostudies-other
Project description:Scientific research-especially high-impact research-is increasingly being performed in teams that are interdisciplinary and demographically diverse. Nevertheless, very little research has investigated how the climate on these diverse science teams affects data sharing or the experiences of their members. To address these gaps, we conducted a quantitative study of 266 scientists from 105 NSF-funded interdisciplinary environmental science teams. We examined how team climate mediates the associations between team diversity and three outcomes: satisfaction with the team, satisfaction with authorship practices, and perceptions of the frequency of data sharing. Using path analyses, we found that individuals from underrepresented groups perceived team climate more negatively, which was associated with lower satisfaction with the team and more negative perceptions of authorship practices and data sharing on the team. However, individuals on teams with more demographic diversity reported a more positive climate than those on teams with less demographic diversity. These results highlight the importance of team climate, the value of diverse teams for team climate, and barriers to the full inclusion and support of individuals from underrepresented groups in interdisciplinary science teams.
| S-EPMC6638994 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In order to investigate the gene expression profile related to rice internode growth under different nitrogen management practices, Agilent two color microarray chips were used to profile the differentially expressed genes of rice first internode between two nitrogen management. A rice cultivars Yin-Jing-Ruan-Zhan was used as material. First basal internode of YJRZ was taken at 30 days after transplanting, and RNA was extracted for microarray assay. Materials from OPT were label by Cy5 and FFP by Cy3.
2017-08-25 | GSE103063 | GEO
Project description:PurposeMentoring is critical for academic success. As science transitions to a team science model, team mentoring may have advantages. The goal of this study was to understand the process, benefits, and challenges of team mentoring relating to career development and research.MethodA national survey was conducted of Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health (BIRCWH) program directors-current and former scholars from 27 active National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded BIRCWH NIH K12 programs-to characterize and understand the value and challenges of the team approach to mentoring. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively, and qualitative data were analyzed thematically.ResultsResponses were received from 25/27 (93%) program directors, 78/108 (72%) current scholars, and 91/162 (56%) former scholars. Scholars reported that team mentoring was beneficial to their career development (152/169; 90%) and research (148/169; 88%). Reported advantages included a diversity of opinions, expanded networking, development of stronger study designs, and modeling of different career paths. Challenges included scheduling and managing conflicting opinions. Advice by directors offered to junior faculty entering team mentoring included the following: not to be intimidated by senior mentors, be willing to navigate conflicting advice, be proactive about scheduling and guiding discussions, have an open mind to different approaches, be explicit about expectations and mentors' roles (including importance of having a primary mentor to help navigate discussions), and meet in person as a team.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that interdisciplinary/interprofessional team mentoring has many important advantages, but that skills are required to optimally utilize multiple perspectives.
| S-EPMC5263095 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionClinical/translational science (CTS) is team-based, requiring effective collaboration and communication across many disciplines involving a variety of stakeholders. We implemented a pre-doctoral team-based training model with didactic and experiential curricular interventions to support the development of CTS research skills in a cross-disciplinary team environment. We assessed the potential impact of this new training model as a team science intervention that can catalyze new cross-disciplinary collaborations across the institution.MethodsBetween 2016 and 2020, 32 pre-doctoral students and 26 co-mentors participated in the assessment of the CTS Team program over a two-year period of TL1 training grant support. Data collection and analyses followed a program logic model and used a variety of metrics for clinical and translational scientist career success.ResultsCTS training in the context of CTS Teams supported improved self-efficacy for clinical research skills and resulted in a significant increase in the frequency of participation in cross-disciplinary collaborative activities by both trainees and mentors. Most CTS Team co-mentor pairs had not previously collaborated. Two-thirds of the co-mentors plan to continue collaborating, and most (85%) currently use or plan to use collaboration tools, for example, written collaboration plans, authorship agreements.ConclusionsThe CTS Team training model provides a unique clinical and translational science team training experience that embeds authentic cross-disciplinary research collaboration into PhD research projects. It establishes trainee cohorts that are diverse in terms of scientific disciplines and translational research phases, and creates a new cross-disciplinary community of practice across faculty members and research groups in multiple colleges.
| S-EPMC8596063 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe Great CTSA Team Science Contest (GTSC) was developed to discover how Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hubs promote and support team science [1]. The purpose of this study was a secondary qualitative analysis of the GTSC submissions to better understand the diversity of team science initiatives across the CTSA consortium.MethodsSecondary qualitative analysis of the GTSC data addressed the following research questions, which defined the top-level coding: (1) What CTSA component sponsored it? (2) Who was the team doing the work? (3) Who were the intended beneficiaries? (4) What was the intended outcome? (5) What strategies did they use? (6) What translational science (TS) stage was addressed? (7) How do they align with the NCATS team science strategic goals? (8) How do the CTSA's team science efforts align with the National Academies Research Council (NRC) recommendations for enhancing the effectiveness of team science?ResultsThe GTSC received 170 submissions from 45 unique CTSA hubs. Qualitative analysis revealed a great variety of team science strategies for virtually all team science stakeholders. In addition to strategies to promote team science, results show successful examples that focus on outcomes and illustrate ways of measuring success.ConclusionsThe GTSC shows that the CTSA consortium is involved in an extremely diverse array of team science activities, which align well with both the NRC recommendations for enhancing the effectiveness of team science and the NCATS strategic goals for team science. Future research should evaluate the efficacy of team science strategies.
| S-EPMC8411266 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Program supports a national network of medical research institutions working to improve the translational process. High-performing translational teams (TTs) are critical for advancing evidence-based approaches that improve human health. When focused on content-appropriate knowledge, skills, and attitudes, targeted training results in the substantial internalization of training content, producing new skills that can be applied to improve team outputs, outcomes, and benefits. More rigorous approaches to develop, test, and evaluate interventions are needed, and we used the Wisconsin Interventions in Team Science framework as a model to systematize our efforts. We designed, built, and tested a five-session TT Training Program for translational researchers. The 90-minute sessions were pilot-tested with 47 postdoctoral fellows and evaluated through a structured evaluation plan. Ninety-five percent of post-session survey respondents indicated that the content and skills provided would make them more effective collaborators, and one hundred percent would recommend the sessions to colleagues. Respondents' scores increased from pretest to posttest for most learning outcomes. Refinements from participant feedback are described. This work provides a foundation for the continued evolution of evidence-based training programs in the CTSA environment.
| S-EPMC10643908 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of this article is to propose and provide a blueprint for a graduate-level curriculum in clinical data science, devoted to the measurement, acquisition, care, treatment, and inferencing of clinical research data. The curriculum presented here contains a series of five required core courses, five required research courses, and a list of potential electives. The coursework draws from but does not duplicate content from the foundational areas of biostatistics, clinical medicine, biomedical informatics, and regulatory affairs, and may be reproduced by any institution interested in and capable of offering such a program. This new curriculum in "clinical" data science will prepare students for work in academic, industry, and government research settings as well as offer a unifying knowledge base for the profession.
| S-EPMC10432862 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:Biomarkers as common data elements (CDEs) are important for the characterization of biobehavioral symptoms given that once a biologic moderator or mediator is identified, biologically based strategies can be investigated for treatment efforts. Just as a symptom inventory reflects a symptom experience, a biomarker is an indicator of the symptom, though not the symptom per se. The purposes of this position paper are to (a) identify a "minimum set" of biomarkers for consideration as CDEs in symptom and self-management science, specifically biochemical biomarkers; (b) evaluate the benefits and limitations of such a limited array of biomarkers with implications for symptom science; (c) propose a strategy for the collection of the endorsed minimum set of biologic samples to be employed as CDEs for symptom science; and (d) conceptualize this minimum set of biomarkers consistent with National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR) symptoms of fatigue, depression, cognition, pain, and sleep disturbance. DESIGN AND METHODS:From May 2016 through January 2017, a working group consisting of a subset of the Directors of the NINR Centers of Excellence funded by P20 or P30 mechanisms and NINR staff met bimonthly via telephone to develop this position paper suggesting the addition of biomarkers as CDEs. The full group of Directors reviewed drafts, provided critiques and suggestions, recommended the minimum set of biomarkers, and approved the completed document. Best practices for selecting, identifying, and using biological CDEs as well as challenges to the use of biological CDEs for symptom and self-management science are described. Current platforms for sample outcome sharing are presented. Finally, biological CDEs for symptom and self-management science are proposed along with implications for future research and use of CDEs in these areas. FINDINGS:The recommended minimum set of biomarker CDEs include pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines, a hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis marker, cortisol, the neuropeptide brain-derived neurotrophic factor, and DNA polymorphisms. CONCLUSIONS:It is anticipated that this minimum set of biomarker CDEs will be refined as knowledge regarding biologic mechanisms underlying symptom and self-management science further develop. The incorporation of biological CDEs may provide insights into mechanisms of symptoms, effectiveness of proposed interventions, and applicability of chosen theoretical frameworks. Similarly, as for the previously suggested NINR CDEs for behavioral symptoms and self-management of chronic conditions, biological CDEs offer the potential for collaborative efforts that will strengthen symptom and self-management science. CLINICAL RELEVANCE:The use of biomarker CDEs in biobehavioral symptoms research will facilitate the reproducibility and generalizability of research findings and benefit symptom and self-management science.
| S-EPMC5945303 | biostudies-literature