What is Team Science?
"Team Science" generally refers to an interdisciplinary and collaborative approach to scientific research. Team Science involves the collaboration of researchers from different disciplines who work together to address complex scientific questions or solve challenging problems. The goal is to leverage diverse expertise, skills, and perspectives to achieve more comprehensive and innovative outcomes than would be possible through individual efforts.
Some of the key characteristics of Team Science include:
- Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Researchers from various disciplines come together to combine their expertise and perspectives. This can include scientists, engineers, social scientists, clinicians, and other professionals working collaboratively.
- Interdependence: Team members rely on each other's contributions to achieve the goals of the research project. Each team member's expertise is considered essential to the success of the overall effort.
- Project Management: Successful Team Science often involves effective project management, including coordination of tasks, timelines, and resources. Clear leadership and communication structures are important for the efficient functioning of the team.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) defines Principal Investigator (PI), Co-Principal Investigator (Co-PI), and Multiple-Principal Investigators (MPI) roles in the context of research grants.
Principal Investigator (PI): The PI is the individual who is responsible for the overall design, conduct, and management of a research project. The PI is typically the lead researcher and the primary contact with the funding agency (in this case, NIH). The PI plays a central role in planning, executing, and reporting the research project.
Co-Principal Investigator (Co-PI): A Co-PI is a researcher who shares responsibility with the PI for the scientific and technical direction of the project. Co-PIs may have specific responsibilities within the project and collaborate closely with the PI. In some cases, especially in larger or collaborative projects, there may be more than one Co-PI.
Multiple-Principal Investigators (MPI): In some NIH grant programs, particularly those involving collaborative and interdisciplinary research, there may be the concept of Multiple-Principal Investigators (MPI). In an MPI model, two or more individuals share the responsibilities and leadership of the project equally. Each MPI is considered equal in status and authority, and they collaborate closely in decision-making and project management.
Annotation of Bibliography and Additions to Portfolio, Letters of recommendation and Promotion Criteria
CV Headings
Grants and Contract Awards: please provide a brief statement that shows your contributions for Grants and Contracts that are a result of Team Science/Multi-Disciplinary efforts explaining your role and contributions
Publications: please provide a brief statement that shows your contributions for publications that are a result of Team Science/Multi-Disciplinary efforts explaining your role and contributions (see below)
For example:
Ghasemi M; Azeem MU; Chu F; Muehlschlegel S; Henninger N. Prescription patterns for routine EEG ordering in patients with intracranial hemorrhage admitted to a neurointensive care unit. J Crit Care. 2019 Apr;50:262-268. doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.01.006. Epub 2019 Jan 11. PubMed PMID: 30660914. Provided neurocritical care perspective, revised manuscript
Portfolio
Criteria for judging excellence of funding or publications is like that described under Research Scholarship, except that collaborative output (e.g., funding and publications) may represent a significant portion of the portfolio. While order of authorship on publications will be considered, there is recognition that the order may not reflect the importance of the contributions made. Similarly, the indicated role of principle investigator is valued, but lesser titles (e.g. Investigator, Collaborator) may not capture sufficiently the significance of the role played by multidisciplinary team science faculty. These considerations will be assessed on an individual basis to fully appreciate the value of the contribution. Therefore, the portfolio should include a detailed explanation of the candidate’s role and contribution on each of the collaborative activities.
The research statement in the portfolio should include the unique role that the investigator has in the team project. It should also specify any leadership roles as a sub-group leader within the team.
[Included in Instructions]
“Define your team-based contribution as an essential part of the work that you have done.
Place emphasis on the fact that you and your team members had roles that were interdependent, but you had an independent contribution to scholarship within an activity.
Also, take credit for having acted as a leader for your part in this project.”
In the list of grants that were awarded for a collaborative team add a short statement to reflect your unique contribution.
[Example]:
“I contributed to the experimental design proposed relative to the inclusion of the [equipment or methodology] which was key to the feasibility of the research described. In addition, I was the only one on the team who supplied [this particular expertise].”
For publications resulting from Team Science efforts, addition of a short statement about the specific role in the project should be included.
[Example]:
“I was the lead biostatistician [or informatics expert, radiologist, computational chemist, structural biologist, clinician, etc.] and I contributed [brief description of the contribution] that was critical to the innovation and impact of the work.”
For Other Scholarly Activities resulting from Team Science efforts, addition of a short statement about the specific role in the project should be included.
[Example]:
"As a dedicated member of the educational competencies implementation team, I have significantly contributed to the enhancement of our medical curriculum. My role involved collaborating with colleagues to design, develop, and integrate competency-based modules that align with current medical standards. By actively participating in the creation of assessment tools and providing continuous feedback, I ensured that our curriculum not only meets accreditation requirements but also fosters the development of highly competent medical professionals. This collaborative effort has resulted in a more robust and effective educational framework, demonstrating my commitment to academic excellence and innovation."
Letters of Recommendation
Additional letters should be provided by members and leaders of the team to attest contributions and unique expertise of the candidate as team member. Also, leadership and managerial attributes critical for team success should be included.
These letters should not be arm’s-length and should be a combination of internal and external letters depending on the nature of the team. If the team includes investigators outside the institution, at least one of the letters should come from an external collaborator.
Promotion Criteria Additions:
Although not formally added to the A&P Guidelines, the A&P Committee has agreed on the definition and new criteria listed below for consideration toward promotion if supporting evidence is include in the letter of nomination, CV and portfolio.
The Macon & Joan Brock Virginia Health Sciences Eastern Virginia Medical School and EVMS School of Health Professions at Old Dominion University encourages and supports the collaborative and interdisciplinary approach to scientific research consistent with the school’s missions, visions, and values. Therefore, collaborative research performed by faculty members while serving a critical role in team research (“Team Science”) will be valued in a manner similar to comparable accomplishments in independent research. Evaluation of scholarly work includes individual achievements (e.g., principal investigator on grants, first and senior authorships on papers). Modern high impact research typically requires robust interdisciplinary team science. Therefore, a faculty member’s unique and original contributions to Team Science shall be considered. Leadership in Team Science may be recognized by multi-principal investigator roles, or other roles in which the faculty member is responsible for significant contributions to the scientific content. Team Science activities are evaluated for the faculty member’s leadership, originality, creativity, indispensability, and/or unique abilities.
Level 2. These activities should be recognized locally or regionally as being meritorious.
o Extramural Funding – Team Science: PI, Co-PI or MPI on indirect cost bearing grants to support research and Co-PI or MPI salary for effort on this project
o Publications – Team Science: 2-3 journal articles/year in mid-tier journals with mid-tier impact or 1 journal article/year in top journal with high impact
Level 3. These activities should be recognized regionally, nationally or internationally as excellent.
o Extramural Funding – Team Science: PI, Co-PI or MPI on indirect cost bearing grants to support research and PI, Co-PI or MPI salary for total effort devoted to research; evidence of sustained support at this level
o Publications – Team Science: 3-4 journal articles/year in mid-tier journals with mid-tier impact or 2 journal articles/year in top journals with high impact
