Cited by 32Interdisciplinary Research and CollaborationHealth and Medical Research ImpactsStatistics Education and Methodologies

Methods for training collaborative biostatisticians

Open access
Pomann, Gina-Maria, Boulware, L. Ebony, Cayetano, Shari Messinger, Desai, Manisha, Enders, Felicity T., Gallis, John A., Gelfond, Jonathan, Grambow, Steven C. +15 more·2021·Journal of Clinical and Translational Science

Abstract

The emphasis on team science in clinical and translational research increases the importance of collaborative biostatisticians (CBs) in healthcare. Adequate training and development of CBs ensure appropriate conduct of robust and meaningful research and, therefore, should be considered as a high-priority focus for biostatistics groups. Comprehensive training enhances clinical and translational research by facilitating more productive and efficient collaborations. While many graduate programs in Biostatistics and Epidemiology include training in research collaboration, it is often limited in scope and duration. Therefore, additional training is often required once a CB is hired into a full-time position. This article presents a comprehensive CB training strategy that can be adapted to any collaborative biostatistics group. This strategy follows a roadmap of the biostatistics collaboration process, which is also presented. A TIE approach (Teach the necessary skills, monitor the Implementation of these skills, and Evaluate the proficiency of these skills) was developed to support the adoption of key principles. The training strategy also incorporates a “train the trainer” approach to enable CBs who have successfully completed training to train new staff or faculty.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/cts.2020.518

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The framework established by Pomann et al. and validated by Slade et al. defines three core domains of biostatistical practice in collaborative research settings.

    “This study used a framework established by Pomann et al. [11] and recently validated by Slade et al. [12], defining three core domains of biostatistical practice in collaborative research settings.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. [1]Rubio DM, del Junco DJ, Bhore R, et al. Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design (BERD) Key Function Committee of the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Consortium. Evaluation metrics for biostatistical and epidemiological collaborations. Statistics in Medicine 2011; 30(23): 2767– 2777. 21284015 PMC3139813
  2. [2]Welty LJ, et al.. Strategies for developing biostatistics resources in an academic health center. Academic Medicine 2013; 88(4): 454– 460. 23425984 PMC3610776
  3. [3]Mazumdar M, et al. Evaluating scientist collaboration in team-based research: a proposed framework. Academic Medicine 2015; 90(10): 1302– 1308. 25993282 PMC4653084
  4. [4]Rahbar MH, et al. Characteristics of biostatistics, epidemiology, and research design programs in institutions with Clinical and Translational Science Awards. Academic Medicine 2017; 92(2): 229– 236. 27580435 PMC5263220
  5. [5]Perkins SM, et al. Best practices for biostatistical consultation and collaboration in academic health centers. The American Statistician 2016; 70(2): 187– 194. 27777443 PMC5074551
  6. [7]Tobi H, et al. Towards a curriculum for the consultant biostatistician: Identification of central disciplines. Statistics in Medicine 2001; 20(24): 3921– 3929. 11782043
  7. [8]DeMets DL, et al. Training of the next generation of biostatisticians: a call to action in the US. Statistics in Medicine 2006; 25(20): 3415– 3429. 16927449
  8. [9]Samsa GP. A day in the professional life of a collaborative biostatistician deconstructed: Implications for curriculum design. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching 2018; 7(1): 20– 31.
  9. [10]Begg MD, Vaughan RD. Are biostatistics students prepared to succeed in the era of interdisciplinary science? (And how will we know?). The American Statistician 2011; 65(2): 71– 79.
  10. [11]Sonstein SA, et al. Moving from compliance to competency: a harmonizing core competency framework for the clinical research professional. Journal of Clinical Research Best Practices 2014; 10(6).
  11. [12]Sonstein SA, et al. Leveling the joint task force core competencies for clinical research professionals. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science 2020; 54(1): 1– 20. doi: 10.1007/s43441-019-00024-2 32008235 · DOI
  12. [13]Sonstein SA, Jones CT. Joint task force for clinical trial competency and clinical research professional workforce development. Frontiers in Pharmacology 2018; 9: 1148. 30386238 PMC6198073
  13. [14]Hornung CA, et al. Competency indices to assess the knowledge, skills and abilities of clinical research professionals. International Journal of Clinical Trials 2018; 5(1): 46– 53.
  14. [15]Samsa GP, et al. A model of cross-disciplinary communication for collaborative statisticians: Implications for curriculum design. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching 2018; 7(2): 1– 11.
  15. [16]Spratt H, Strategies for success: Early-stage collaborating biostatistics faculty in an academic health center. The American Statistician 2017; 71(3): 220– 230. 32981940 PMC7518467
  16. [17]International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. (http://www.icmje.org) 25558501
  17. [19]Ioannidis JP. How to make more published research true. PLoS Medicine 2014; 11(10): e1001747. 25334033 PMC4204808
  18. [20]Peng RD. Reproducible research and Biostatistics. Biostatistics 2009; 10(3): 405– 408. 19535325
  19. [21]Begley CG, Ioannidis JP. Reproducibility in science: Improving the standard for basic and preclinical research. Circulation Research 2015; 116(1): 116– 126. 25552691
  20. [22]Zapf A, et al. What makes a biostatistician? Statistics in Medicine 2018; 38(4): 695– 701. 30294934
  21. [23]Chuang-Stein C, et al. Statisticians in the Pharmaceutical Industry: The 21st Century. Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research 2010; 2(2): 145– 152.
  22. [25]Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. (2019). CASP critical review checklists. (https://casp-uk.net)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pomann, G.-M., Boulware, L. E., Cayetano, S. M., Desai, M., Enders, F. T., Gallis, J. A., Gelfond, J., Grambow, S. C., Hanlon, A. L., Hendrix, A., Kulkarni, P., Lapidus, J., Lee, H.-J., Mahnken, J. D., McKeel, J. P., Moen, R., Oster, R. A., Peskoe, S., Samsa, G., Stewart, T. G., Truong, T., Wruck, L., & Thomas, S. M.
Affiliations
  • Duke University (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US)
  • Virginia Tech (US)
  • Covance (United States) (US)
  • Eli Lilly (United States) (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • University of Kansas Medical Center (US)
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
  • Vanderbilt University Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Thomas, Samantha M.
Venue
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
Published
2020-08-04
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
e26-e26
ISSN
2059-8661 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3047060972
Cited by
32
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 4
FWCI
3.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical and Translational Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Gilead Sciences
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR003096, UL1TR003015, UL1TR002366, TR002243, UL1TR002377, UL1TR002243)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (TR002377, TR002243)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health and Medical Research Impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistics Education and Methodologies
Keywords
team science, clinical and translational research, research collaboration, trainer training

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review