Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Measuring and improving performance in multicenter research consortia.

Sarah M Greene1, Gene Hart, Edward H Wagner

  • 1Group Health Cooperative, Center for Health Studies, 1730 Minor Ave., Ste. 1600, Seattle, WA 98101, USA. greene.sm@ghc.org

Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs
|November 17, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Catching the Wave: AI In Health Services Research.

Learning health systems·2026
Same author

Ten Reasons Why Learning Health Systems Will Have a Transformational Effect on Health and Health Care.

Learning health systems·2025
Same author

Transforming Health Care - Shared Commitments for a Learning Health System.

The New England journal of medicine·2025
Same author

From E-Patients to AI Patients: The Tidal Wave Empowering Patients, Redefining Clinical Relationships, and Transforming Care.

Journal of participatory medicine·2025
Same author

Four distinct models of learning health systems: Strength through diversity.

Learning health systems·2025
Same author

The Right Stuff: Getting the right data at the right time and using that data to drive evidence-based practice and policy.

Learning health systems·2024
Same journal

Impact of WHO Classification of Tumours on cancer prevention, diagnosis, research, public health, and economics.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs·2026
Same journal

Cancer epigenetics: unraveling etiology and mechanisms to advance prevention.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs·2026
Same journal

Oncogenic infections: targets highly amenable to cancer prevention.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs·2026
Same journal

The continuing importance of the IARC's international remit in cancer research.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs·2026
Same journal

Environmental and occupational cancer: highlighting research contributions from the IARC on its 60th anniversary.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs·2026
Same journal

Progress in identifying the preventable causes of human cancer: the experience of the IARC Monographs program.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs·2026
See all related articles

Evaluating research consortium performance through annual surveys improves collaboration and productivity. This approach, exemplified by the HMO Cancer Research Network (CRN), fosters open dialogue for enhanced scientific goal achievement.

Area of Science:

  • Health Services Research
  • Collaborative Science
  • Research Management

Background:

  • Organizational and management quality impacts research consortium productivity and staff satisfaction.
  • Research collaborators often prioritize study implementation over evaluating the collaboration process itself.
  • An evaluation and improvement approach is presented using the HMO Cancer Research Network (CRN) as a case study.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To present an approach for evaluating and improving research consortium operations.
  • To identify critical areas for enhancement within a large research network.
  • To foster open dialogue for performance improvement.

Main Methods:

  • Annual surveys administered to scientists and project staff within the CRN.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Evaluation across five key domains: collaboration, communication, project performance, data quality, scientific productivity, and organizational impact.
  • Systematic assessment of the consortium's collaborative processes.

    • Main Results:

    • Annual evaluations consistently identified areas for collaborative improvement.
    • Tangible changes were implemented, leading to increased consortium productivity.
    • The CRN Evaluation facilitated open dialogue, significantly improving overall performance.

    Conclusions:

    • Optimizing collaborative processes is crucial for achieving scientific objectives.
    • The CRN's experience offers a valuable framework for evaluating consortium-based research structures.
    • Continuous evaluation supports the sustained success of collaborative research initiatives.