Abstract
Transdisciplinary (TD) approaches are increasingly used to address complex public health problems such as childhood obesity. Compared to traditional grant-funded scientific projects among established scientists, those designed around a TD, team-based approach yielded greater publication output after three to five years. However, little is known about how a TD focus throughout graduate school training may affect students’ publication-related productivity, impact, and collaboration. The objective of this study was to compare the publication patterns of students in traditional versus TD doctoral training programs. Productivity, impact, and collaboration of peer-reviewed publications were compared between traditional (n = 25) and TD (n = 11) students during the first five years of the TD program. Statistical differences were determined by t-test or chi square test at p < 0.05. The publication rate for TD students was 5.2 ± 10.1 (n = 56) compared to 3.6 ± 4.5 per traditional student (n = 82). Publication impact indicators were significantly higher for TD students vs. traditional students: 5.7 times more citations in Google Scholar, 6.1 times more citations in Scopus, 1.3 times higher journal impact factors, and a 1.4 times higher journal h-index. Collaboration indicators showed that publications by TD students had significantly more co-authors (1.3 times), and significantly more disciplines represented among co-authors (1.3 times), but not significantly more organizations represented per publication compared to traditional students. In conclusion, compared to doctoral students in traditional programs, TD students published works that were accepted into higher impact journals, were more frequently cited, and had more cross-disciplinary collaborations.
Highlights
Transdisciplinary (TD) approaches are an increasingly common set of methods used to address complex global problems [1]
Previous studies looking at publication productivity of established scientific teams at large research centers found that scientists who were part of TD/team science had an initial delay in scientific productivity [8,9,10]
At five years into the TD program, groups were assessed on publication productivity, impact, and collaboration based on previously described characteristics of their peer-reviewed publications (Table 4)
Summary
Previous studies looking at publication productivity of established scientific teams at large research centers found that scientists who were part of TD/team science had an initial delay in scientific productivity [8,9,10]. They compared publication productivity of three different types of research teams that were awarded R01 grants; R01 is the most common NIH grant program, generally awarded for 3–5 years with no specific dollar limit. There are no data published that examine whether a TD focus during graduate school results in delayed student publication productivity, impact, or collaboration
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
