Skip Navigation

JNCI Monographs 2005 2005(35):26-32; doi:10.1093/jncimonographs/lgi034
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Supplementary Information
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Greene, S. M.
Right arrow Articles by Wagner, E. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Greene, S. M.
Right arrow Articles by Wagner, E. H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Measuring and Improving Performance in Multicenter Research Consortia

Sarah M. Greene, Gene Hart, Edward H. Wagner

Affiliation of authors: Group Health Cooperative, Center for Health Studies, Seattle, WA

Correspondence to: Sarah M. Greene, MPH, Group Health Cooperative, Center for Health Studies, 1730 Minor Ave., Ste. 1600, Seattle, WA 98101 (e-mail: greene.sm{at}ghc.org).

Background: Some evidence suggests that the quality of the organization and management of research consortia influences productivity and staff satisfaction. Collaborators in a research consortium generally focus on developing and implementing studies and thus rarely assess the process of collaboration. We present an approach to evaluating and improving a research consortium, using the HMO Cancer Research Network (CRN) as an example. Methods: Five domains are evaluated: extent of collaboration and quality of communication; performance of projects and infrastructure; data quality; scientific productivity; and impact on member organizations. The primary assessment tool is a survey of CRN scientists and project staff, undertaken annually. Results: Each year, the evaluation has identified critical aspects of this collaboration that could be improved. Several tangible changes have been implemented to improve productivity of the consortium. The most important result of the CRN Evaluation is the ability to have open dialogue about ways to improve its overall performance. Conclusion: Optimizing the process of collaboration will contribute to achievement of the scientific goals. The experience of the CRN provides a useful framework and process for evaluating the structure of consortium-based research.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Ann Fam MedHome page
W. M. Tierney, C. C. Oppenheimer, B. L. Hudson, J. Benz, A. Finn, J. M. Hickner, D. Lanier, and D. S. Gaylin
A National Survey of Primary Care Practice-Based Research Networks
Ann. Fam. Med, May 1, 2007; 5(3): 242 - 250.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.