Testing whether the relations between sex and psychopathology are accounted for by structural morphometry in ABCD.

Sex differences in psychopathology are well-established, with females demonstrating higher rates of internalizing (INT) psychopathology and males demonstrating higher rates of externalizing (EXT) psychopathology. Using two waves of data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study (N = 6,778 at each wave), the current study tested whether the relations between sex and psychopathology might be accounted for by structural brain differences. In general, we found robust, relatively consistent relations between sex and structural morphometry across waves. Relatively few morphometric brain variables were significantly related to INT or EXT across waves, however, with very small effect sizes when present. Next, we tested the extent to which each morphometric brain variable could account for the associations of sex with INT and EXT psychopathology. We found a total of 26 brain regions that accounted for significant portions of the associations between sex and psychopathology across both waves (almost all related to EXT), although the effects present were very small. The current evidence suggests that in children aged 9-12, multiple whole-brain and regional brain variables appear to statistically account for small portions of the sex-psychopathology links, especially for externalizing. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Making Every Meeting Count: A Qualitative Investigation of Multiteam Meeting Events and Their Role in Supporting Coordinated Cancer Care Delivery.

PURPOSE: This research considers how cross-disciplinary cancer care meetings can facilitate coordination within the multiteam systems (MTSs) that provide inpatient hospital care. We conducted a series of interviews and observations with members of a single cancer care MTS to address the following research questions: (1) what are the key characteristics of MTS cancer care meetings (with regard to composition, focus, and structure)? and (2) how is cross-team coordination acknowledged and addressed during these meetings? METHODS: In this single-site case study of a MTS operating to provide gynecologic oncology care within a teaching hospital, two types of meetings, called rounds and huddles, were held consistently. We used qualitative methods, including interviews with health care professional subject matter experts and 30 hours of observations of cancer care meetings, and analyzed the data in three stages of qualitative coding. RESULTS: Our analyses resulted in a thematic framework detailing key processes, and subprocesses, identified as central to the activities of observed cancer care meetings. Key processes include information sharing, gaining clarity, strategizing, and pedagogy. Discussions and explanations of this framework showcase the ways in which MTS meetings can bolster cross-team coordination and facilitate MTS activities. CONCLUSION: Inpatient cancer care meetings provide opportunities to facilitate MTS coordination in several ways, yet doing so does not come without challenges. Considering these results together with insights from meeting science and MTS research, this article concludes by putting forward practical recommendations for leveraging opportunities and overcoming challenges to use cancer care meetings as tools to support cross-team coordination.

Structural brain differences do not mediate the relations between sex and personality or psychopathology.

INTRODUCTION: Males and females tend to exhibit small but reliable differences in personality traits and indices of psychopathology that are relatively stable over time and across cultures. Previous work suggests that sex differences in brain structure account for differences in domains of cognition. METHODS: We used data from the Human Connectome Project (N = 1098) to test whether sex differences in brain morphometry account for observed differences in the personality traits neuroticism and agreeableness, as well as symptoms of internalizing and externalizing psychopathology. We operationalized brain morphometry in three ways: omnibus measures (e.g., total gray matter volume), Glasser regions defined through a multi-modal parcellation approach, and Desikan regions defined by structural features of the brain. RESULTS: Most expected sex differences in personality, psychopathology, and brain morphometry were observed, but the statistical mediation analyses were null: sex differences in brain morphometry did not account for sex differences in personality or psychopathology. CONCLUSIONS: Men and women tend to exhibit meaningful differences in personality and psychopathology, as well as in omnibus morphometry and regional morphometric differences as defined by the Glasser and Desikan atlases, but these morphometric differences appear unrelated to the psychological differences.

Functional Leadership in Interteam Contexts: Understanding 'What' in the Context of Why? Where? When? and Who?

Research on team leadership has primarily focused on leadership processes targeted within teams, in support of team objectives. Yet, teams are open systems that interact with other teams to achieve proximal as well as distal goals. This review clarifies that defining 'what' constitutes functionally effective leadership in interteam contexts requires greater precision with regard to where (within teams, across teams) and why (team goals, system goals) leadership processes are enacted, as well as greater consideration of when and among whom leadership processes arise. We begin by synthesizing findings from empirical studies published over the past 30 years that shed light on questions of what, where, why, when, and who related to interteam leadership and end by providing three overarching recommendations for how research should proceed in order to provide a more comprehensive picture of leadership in interteam contexts.

Using the payback framework to evaluate the outcomes of pilot projects supported by the Georgia Clinical and Translational Science Alliance.

INTRODUCTION: The Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) program of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) seeks to improve population health by accelerating the translation of scientific discoveries in the laboratory and clinic into practices for the community. CTSAs achieve this goal, in part, through their pilot project programs that fund promising early career investigators and innovative early-stage research projects across the translational research spectrum. However, there have been few reports on individual pilot projects and their impacts on the investigators who receive them and no studies on the long-term impact and outcomes of pilot projects. METHODS: The Georgia CTSA funded 183 pilot projects from 2007 to 2015. We used a structured evaluation framework, the payback framework, to document the outcomes of 16 purposefully-selected pilot projects supported by the Georgia CTSA. We used a case study approach including bibliometric analyses of publications associated with the selected projects, document review, and investigator interviews. RESULTS: These pilot projects had positive impact based on outcomes in five "payback categories": (1) knowledge; (2) research targeting, capacity building, and absorption; (3) policy and product development; (4) health benefits; and (5) broader economic benefits. CONCLUSIONS: Results could inform our understanding of the diversity and breadth of outcomes resulting from Georgia CTSA-supported research and provide a framework for evaluating long-term pilot project outcomes across CTSAs.

Scope, Influence, and Interdisciplinary Collaboration: The Publication Portfolio of the NIH Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Program From 2006 Through 2017.

The Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) program sponsors an array of innovative, collaborative research. This study uses complementary bibliometric approaches to assess the scope, influence, and interdisciplinary collaboration of publications supported by single CTSA hubs and those supported by multiple hubs. Authors identified articles acknowledging CTSA support and assessed the disciplinary scope of research areas represented in that publication portfolio, their citation influence, interdisciplinary overlap among research categories, and characteristics of publications supported by multihub collaborations. Since 2006, CTSA hubs supported 69,436 articles published in 4,927 journals and 189 research areas. The portfolio is well distributed across diverse research areas with above-average citation influence. Most supported publications involved clinical/health sciences, for example, neurology and pediatrics; life sciences, for example, neuroscience and immunology; or a combination of the two. Publications supported by multihub collaborations had distinct content emphasis, stronger citation influence, and greater interdisciplinary overlap. This study characterizes the CTSA consortium's contributions to clinical and translational science, identifies content areas of strength, and provides evidence for the success of multihub collaborations. These methods lay the foundation for future investigation of the best policies and priorities for fostering translational science and allow hubs to understand their progress benchmarked against the larger consortium.

Understanding job satisfaction in the causal attitude network (CAN) model.

Job satisfaction researchers typically assume a tripartite model, suggesting evaluations of the job are explained by latent cognitive and affective factors. However, in the attitudes literature, connectionist theorists view attitudes as emergent structures resulting from the mutually reinforcing causal force of interacting cognitive evaluations. Recently, the causal attitudes network (CAN; Dalege et al., 2016) model was proposed as an integration of both these perspectives with network theory. Here, we describe the CAN model and its implications for understanding job satisfaction. We extend the existing literature by drawing from both attitude and network theory. Using multiple data sets and measures of job satisfaction, we test these ideas empirically. First, drawing on the functional approach to attitudes, we show the instrumental-symbolic distinction in attitude objects is evident in job satisfaction networks. Specifically, networks for more instrumental features (e.g., pay) show stable, high connectivity and form a single cluster, whereas networks regarding symbolic features (e.g., supervisor) increase in connectivity with exposure (i.e., job tenure) and form clusters based on valence and cognitive-affective distinction. We show these distinctions result in "small-world" networks for symbolic features wherein affective reactions are more central than cognitive reactions, consistent with the affective primacy hypothesis. We show the practical advantage of CAN by demonstrating in longitudinal data that items with high centrality are more likely to affect change throughout the attitude network, and that network models are better able to predict future voluntary turnover compared with structural equation models. Implications of this exciting new model for research and practice are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Learning From the Past to Advance the Future: The Adaptation and Resilience of NASA's Spaceflight Multiteam Systems Across Four Eras of Spaceflight.

Many important "grand" challenges-such as sending a team of humans on a voyage to Mars-present superordinate goals that require coordinated efforts across "multiteam systems" comprised of multiple uniquely specialized and interdependent component teams. Given their flexibility and resource capacity, multiteam system structures have great potential to perform adaptively in dynamic contexts. However, these systems may fail to achieve their superordinate goals if constituent members or teams do not adapt their collaboration processes to meet the needs of the changing environment. In this case study of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)'s Spaceflight Multiteam Systems (SFMTSs), we aim to support the next era of human spaceflight by considering how the history of manned spaceflight might impact a SFMTS's ability to respond adaptively to future challenges. We leverage archival documents, including Oral History interviews with NASA personnel, in order to uncover the key attributes and structural features of NASA's SFMTSs as well as the major goals, critical events, and challenges they have faced over 60 years of operation. The documents reveal three distinct "eras" of spaceflight: (1) Early Exploration, (2) Experimentation, and (3) Habitation, each of which reflected distinct goals, critical events, and challenges. Moreover, we find that within each era, SFMTSs addressed new challenges adaptively by modifying their: (1) technical capabilities; (2) internal collaborative relationships; and/or (3) external partnerships. However, the systems were sometimes slow to implement needed adaptations, and changes were often spurred by initial performance failures. Implications for supporting future SFMTS performance and future directions for MTS theory and research are discussed.

Teamwork situated in multiteam systems: Key lessons learned and future opportunities.

Many important contexts requiring teamwork, including health care, space exploration, national defense, and scientific discovery, present important challenges that cannot be addressed by a single team working independently. Instead, the complex goals these contexts present often require effectively coordinated efforts of multiple specialized teams working together as a multiteam system (MTS). For almost 2 decades, researchers have endeavored to understand the novelties and nuances for teamwork and collaboration that ensue when teams operate together as "component teams" in these interdependent systems. In this special issue on the settings of teamwork, we aim to synthesize what is known thus far regarding teamwork situated in MTS contexts and offer new directions and considerations for developing, maintaining, and sustaining effective collaboration in MTSs. Our review of extant research on MTSs reveals 7 key lessons learned regarding teamwork situated in MTSs, but also reveals that much is left to learn about the science and practice of ensuring effective multiteam functioning. We elaborate these lessons and delineate 4 major opportunities for advancing the science of MTSs as a critical embedding context for collaboration and teamwork, now and in the future. (PsycINFO Database Record

Charting the Publication and Citation Impact of the NIH Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Program From 2006 Through 2016.

PURPOSE: The authors evaluated publication and citation patterns for articles supported by Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) hub investment over the first decade of the CTSA program. The aim was to elucidate a pivotal step in the translational process by providing an account of how time, hub maturity, and hub attributes were related to productivity and influence in the academic literature. METHOD: In 2017, the authors collected bibliometric data from PubMed, Web of Science InCites, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) iCite for articles citing any CTSA hub grants published from hub inception through 2016. They compiled data on publication and citation rates and indices of relative citation impact aggregated by hub funding year cohort. They compared hub-level bibliometric activity by multi- versus single-institution structure and total monetary award sums, compiled from NIH RePORTER. RESULTS: From 2006-2016, CTSA hubs supported over 66,000 publications, with publication rates accelerating as hubs matured. These publications accumulated over 1.2 million citations, with some articles cited over 1,000 times. Indices of relative citation impact indicated CTSA-supported publications were cited more than twice as often as expected for articles of their publication years and disciplines. Multi-institutional hubs and those awarded higher grant sums exhibited significantly higher publication and citation activity. CONCLUSIONS: The CTSA program is yielding a robust and growing body of influential research findings with consistently high indices of relative citation impact. Preliminary evidence suggests multi-institutional collaborations and more monetary resources are associated with elevated bibliometric activity and, therefore, may be worth their investment.

How Team Interlock Ecosystems Shape the Assembly of Scientific Teams: A Hypergraph Approach.

Today's most pressing scientific problems necessitate scientific teamwork; the increasing complexity and specialization of knowledge render "lone geniuses" ill-equipped to make high-impact scientific breakthroughs. Social network research has begun to explore the factors that promote the assembly of scientific teams. However, this work has been limited by network approaches centered conceptually and analytically on "nodes as people," or "nodes as teams." In this paper, we develop a ' team-interlock ecosystem' conceptualization of collaborative environments within which new scientific teams, or other creative team-based enterprises, assemble. Team interlock ecosystems comprise teams linked to one another through overlapping memberships and/or overlapping knowledge domains. They depict teams, people, and knowledge sets as nodes, and thus, present both conceptual advantages as well as methodological challenges. Conceptually, team interlock ecosystems invite novel questions about how the structural characteristics of embedding ecosystems serve as the primordial soup from which new teams assemble. Methodologically, however, studying ecosystems requires the use of more advanced analytics that correspond to the inherently multilevel phenomenon of scientists nested within multiple teams. To address these methodological challenges, we advance the use of hypergraph methodologies combined with bibliometric data and simulation-based approaches to test hypotheses related to the ecosystem drivers of team assembly.

Social network approaches to leadership: an integrative conceptual review.

Contemporary definitions of leadership advance a view of the phenomenon as relational, situated in specific social contexts, involving patterned emergent processes, and encompassing both formal and informal influence. Paralleling these views is a growing interest in leveraging social network approaches to study leadership. Social network approaches provide a set of theories and methods with which to articulate and investigate, with greater precision and rigor, the wide variety of relational perspectives implied by contemporary leadership theories. Our goal is to advance this domain through an integrative conceptual review. We begin by answering the question of why-Why adopt a network approach to study leadership? Then, we offer a framework for organizing prior research. Our review reveals 3 areas of research, which we term: (a) leadership in networks, (b) leadership as networks, and (c) leadership in and as networks. By clarifying the conceptual underpinnings, key findings, and themes within each area, this review serves as a foundation for future inquiry that capitalizes on, and programmatically builds upon, the insights of prior work. Our final contribution is to advance an agenda for future research that harnesses the confluent ideas at the intersection of leadership in and as networks. Leadership in and as networks represents a paradigm shift in leadership research-from an emphasis on the static traits and behaviors of formal leaders whose actions are contingent upon situational constraints, toward an emphasis on the complex and patterned relational processes that interact with the embedding social context to jointly constitute leadership emergence and effectiveness.

Charting a course for collaboration: a multiteam perspective.

The translation of medical research from bench-to-bedside often requires integrated input from multiple expert teams. These collectives can best be understood through the lens of multiteam systems theory. Team charters are a practical tool thought to facilitate team performance through the creation of explicit shared norms for behavior. We extend the current literature on team charters to the multiteam context and make three practical recommendations for multiteam charter content that could facilitate effective communication and leadership processes between teams.