It's not easy being interdisciplinary

Co-producing knowledge on the use of urban natural space: Participatory system dynamics modelling to understand a complex urban system

Decision-makers are increasingly asked to act differently in how they respond to complex urban challenges, recognising the value in bringing together and integrating cross-disciplinary, cross-sectoral knowledge to generate effective solutions. Participatory modelling allows to bring stakeholders together, enhance knowledge and understanding of a system, and identify the impacts of interventions to a given problem. This paper uses an interdisciplinary and systems approach to investigate a complex urban problem, using a participatory System Dynamics modelling process as an approach to facilitate learning and co-produce knowledge on the factors influencing the use of urban natural space. Stakeholders used a Systems Dynamics model and interface, as a tool to collectively identify pathways for improving the use of space and simulating their impacts. Under the lens of knowledge co-production, the paper reflects how such mechanisms can lead to the co-production of knowledge and social learning. The findings also contribute to identify ways of increasing the value of urban natural space focusing on urban areas undergoing physical and social transformation, such as the Thamesmead case study, London, UK.

Particles as carriers of matter in the aquatic environment: Challenges and ways ahead for transdisciplinary research

A diverse array of natural and anthropogenic particles found in the aquatic environment, can act as carriers of co-transported matter (CTM), such as nutrients, genetic material and contaminants. Thus, understanding carrier particle transport will increase our understanding of local and global fluxes of exogenous CTM (affiliated with the particle) and endogenous CTM (an inherent part of the particle). In the present contribution, researchers from multiple disciplines collaborated to provide perspectives on the interactions between carrier particles and CTM, and the fundamentals of transport of particles found in the aquatic environment and the generic spherical smooth particles, often used to make predictions about particle behavior in suspension. Evidently, the particles in the aquatic environment show a great variety of characteristics and vary greatly from each other as well as from the generic particle. However, in spite of these differences, many fundamental concepts apply to particles in general. We emphasize the importance of understanding the basic concepts of transport of particle-associated CTM, and the main assumptions in the generic-founded models, which are challenged by the diverging characteristics of particles found in the aquatic environment, as paramount moving forward. Additionally, we identified the need for a conceptual and semantic link between different scientific fields of particle research and initiated the formation of a consistent terminology. Disciplinary and organizational (academic and funding) barriers need to be overcome to enable individual researchers to move beyond their knowledge sphere, to stimulate future interdisciplinary collaborations and to avoid research silos. Hereby, we can foster faster and better progress of evolving research fields on new and emerging anthropogenic carrier particles, and stimulate the development of solutions to the technological and environmental challenges.

Interdisciplinary collaborations in digital health research: a case study using quantitative and qualitative survey methods (Preprint)

Background

Digital innovations in medicine are disruptive technologies that can change the way diagnostic procedures and treatments are delivered. Such innovations are typically designed in teams with different disciplinary backgrounds. This paper concentrates on 2 interdisciplinary research teams with 20 members from the medicine and engineering sciences working jointly on digital health solutions.

Objective

The aim of this paper was to identify factors on the individual, team, and organizational levels that influence the implementation of interdisciplinary research projects elaborating on digital applications for medicine and, based on the results, to draw conclusions for the proactive design of the interdisciplinary research process to make these projects successful.

Methods

To achieve this aim, 2 interdisciplinary research teams were observed, and a small case study (response rate: 15/20, 75%) was conducted using a web-based questionnaire containing both closed and open self-report questions. The Spearman rank correlation coefficient was calculated to analyze the quantitative data. The answers to the open-ended questions were subjected to qualitative content analysis.

Results

With regard to the interdisciplinary research projects investigated, the influencing factors of the three levels presented (individual, team, and organization) have proven to be relevant for interdisciplinary research cooperation.

Conclusions

With regard to recommendations for the future design of interdisciplinary cooperation, management aspects are addressed, that is, the installation of a coordinator, systematic definition of goals, required resources, and necessary efforts on the part of the involved interdisciplinary research partners. As only small groups were investigated, further research in this field is necessary to derive more general recommendations for interdisciplinary research teams.

Trial Registration

German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00023909, https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00023909 ; German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00025077, https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00025077

A new transdisciplinary research model to investigate and improve the health of the public

Transdisciplinary research approaches are being applied to today's complex health problems, including the climate crisis and widening inequalities. Diverse forms of disciplinary and experiential knowledge are required to understand these challenges and develop workable solutions. We aimed to create an updated model reflective of the strengths and challenges of current transdisciplinary health research that can be a guide for future studies. We searched Medline using terms related to transdisciplinary, health and research. We coded data deductively and inductively using thematic analysis to develop a preliminary model of transdisciplinary research. The model was tested and improved through: (i) a workshop with 27 participants at an international conference in Xiamen, China and (ii) online questionnaire feedback from included study authors. Our revised model recommends the following approach: (i) co-learning, an ongoing phase that recognizes the distributed nature of knowledge generation and learning across partners; (ii) (pre-)development, activities that occur before and during project initiation to establish a shared mission and ways of working; (iii) reflection and refinement to evaluate and improve processes and results, responding to emergent information and priorities as an ongoing phase; (iv) conceptualization to develop goals and the study approach by combining diverse knowledge; (v) investigation to conduct the research; (vi) implementation to use new knowledge to solve societal problems. The model includes linear and cyclical processes that may cycle back to project development. Our new model will support transdisciplinary research teams and their partners by detailing the necessary ingredients to conduct such research and achieve health impact.

Societal Need for Interdisciplinary Ageing Research: An International Alliance of Research Universities "Ageing, Longevity and Health" Stream (IARU-ALH) Position Statement

Ageing is a global concern with major social, health, and economic implications. While individual countries seek to develop responses to immediate, pressing needs, international attention and collaboration is required to most effectively address the multifaceted challenges and opportunities an ageing global population presents in the longer term. The Ageing, Longevity and Health stream of the International Alliance of Research Universities (IARU-ALH) was built on a solid foundation of first-class interdisciplinary research and on innovative outreach and communication centres. This interdisciplinary network conducts projects that span biology, medicine, social sciences, epidemiology, public health, policy, and demography, and actively engages with the public and other societal stakeholders. Here we posit that such international interdisciplinary networks are needed and uniquely placed to address major challenges related to health and ageing and ultimately will produce new understanding and knowledge to promote the awareness of healthy ageing and encourage societal change via novel, science-informed interventions. Global interdisciplinary research presents great potential and opportunities to accelerate our understanding of human ageing and to produce new, more effective solutions to a pressing, complex problem. However, more focused, strategic efforts and investments are required in order to deliver on these potentials and reap maximum benefits for individuals and societies. IARU-ALH members are determined to contribute, in collaboration with others, to delivering on this vision.

Pharmacovigilance as Scientific Discovery: An Argument for Trans-Disciplinarity

Pharmacovigilance currently faces several unsolved challenges. Of particular importance are issues concerning how to ascertain, collect, confirm, and communicate the best evidence to assist the clinical choice for individual patients. Here, we propose that these practical challenges partially stem from deeper fundamental issues concerning the epistemology of pharmacovigilance. After reviewing some of the persistent challenges, recent measures, and suggestions in the current pharmacovigilance literature, we support the argument that the detection of potential adverse drug reactions ought to be seen as a serendipitous scientific discovery. We further take up recent innovations from the multidisciplinary field of serendipity research about the importance of networks, diversity of expertise, and plurality of methodological perspectives for cultivating serendipitous discovery. Following this discussion, we explore how pharmacovigilance could be systematized in a way that optimizes serendipitous discoveries of untargeted drug effects, emerging from the clinical application. Specifically, we argue for the promotion of a trans-disciplinary responsive network of scientists and stakeholders. Trans-disciplinarity includes extending the involvement of stakeholders beyond the regulatory community, integrating diverse methods and sources of evidence, and enhancing the ability of diverse groups to raise signals of harms that ought to be followed up by the network. Consequently, promoting a trans-disciplinary approach to pharmacovigilance is a long-term effort that requires structural changes in medical education, research, and enterprise. We suggest a number of such changes, discuss to what extent they are already in process, and indicate the advantages from both epistemological and ethical perspectives.

Alternative causal inference methods in population health research: Evaluating tradeoffs and triangulating evidence

Population health researchers from different fields often address similar substantive questions but rely on different study designs, reflecting their home disciplines. This is especially true in studies involving causal inference, for which semantic and substantive differences inhibit interdisciplinary dialogue and collaboration. In this paper, we group nonrandomized study designs into two categories: those that use confounder-control (such as regression adjustment or propensity score matching) and those that rely on an instrument (such as instrumental variables, regression discontinuity, or differences-in-differences approaches). Using the Shadish, Cook, and Campbell framework for evaluating threats to validity, we contrast the assumptions, strengths, and limitations of these two approaches and illustrate differences with examples from the literature on education and health. Across disciplines, all methods to test a hypothesized causal relationship involve unverifiable assumptions, and rarely is there clear justification for exclusive reliance on one method. Each method entails trade-offs between statistical power, internal validity, measurement quality, and generalizability. The choice between confounder-control and instrument-based methods should be guided by these tradeoffs and consideration of the most important limitations of previous work in the area. Our goals are to foster common understanding of the methods available for causal inference in population health research and the tradeoffs between them; to encourage researchers to objectively evaluate what can be learned from methods outside one's home discipline; and to facilitate the selection of methods that best answer the investigator's scientific questions.

Interdisciplinary working in public health research: a proposed good practice checklist

Background

Guidance on how different disciplines from the natural, behavioural and social sciences can collaborate to resolve complex public health problems is lacking. This article presents a checklist to support researchers and principle investigators to develop and implement interdisciplinary collaborations.

Methods

Fourteen individuals, representing 10 disciplines, participated in in-depth interviews to explore the strengths and challenges of working together on an interdisciplinary project to identify the determinants of substance use and gambling disorders, and to make recommendations for future interdisciplinary teams. Data were analysed thematically and a checklist was derived from insights offered by participants during interview and discussion among the authors on the implications of findings.

Results

Participants identified 18 scientific, interactional and structural strengths and challenges of interdisciplinary research. These findings were used to develop an 18-item BASICS checklist to support future interdisciplinary collaborations. The five domains of the checklist are: (i) Blueprint, (ii) Attitudes, (iii) Staffing, (iv) Interactions and (v) Core Science.

Conclusion

Interdisciplinary work has the potential to advance public health science but the numerous challenges should not be underestimated. Use of a checklist, such as BASICS, when planning and managing projects may help future collaborations to avoid some of the common pitfalls of interdisciplinary research.

Transdisciplinary approaches enhance the production of translational knowledge

The primary goal of translational research is to generate and apply knowledge that can improve human health. Although research conducted within the confines of a single discipline has helped us to achieve this goal in many settings, this unidisciplinary approach may not be optimal when disease causation is complex and health decisions are pressing. To address these issues, we suggest that transdisciplinary approaches can facilitate the progress of translational research, and we review publications that demonstrate what these approaches can look like. These examples serve to (1) demonstrate why transdisciplinary research is useful, and (2) stimulate a conversation about how it can be further promoted. While we note that open-minded communication is a prerequisite for germinating any transdisciplinary work and that epidemiologists can play a key role in promoting it, we do not propose a rigid protocol for conducting transdisciplinary research, as one really does not exist. These achievements were developed in settings where typical disciplinary and institutional barriers were surmountable, but they were not accomplished with a single predetermined plan. The benefits of cross-disciplinary communication are hard to predict a priori and a detailed research protocol or process may impede the realization of novel and important insights. Overall, these examples demonstrate that enhanced cross-disciplinary information exchange can serve as a starting point that helps researchers frame better questions, integrate more relevant evidence, and advance translational knowledge more effectively. Specifically, we discuss examples where transdisciplinary approaches are helping us to better explore, assess, and intervene to improve human health.

Necessary but challenging: Multiple disciplinary approaches to solving conservation problems

Contemporary conservation problems are typically positioned at the interface of complex ecological and human systems. Traditional approaches aiming to compartmentalize a phenomenon within the confines of a single discipline and failing to engage non-science partners are outmoded and cannot identify solutions that have traction in the social, economic, and political arenas in which conservation actions must operate. As a result, conservation science teams must adopt multiple disciplinary approaches that bridge not only academic disciplines but also the political and social realms and engage relevant partners. Five reasons are presented that outline why conservation problems demand multiple disciplinary approaches in order to move forward because: (i) socio-ecological systems are complex, (ii) multiple perspectives are better than one, (iii) the results of research must influence practice, (iv) the heterogeneity of scale necessitates it, and (v) conservation involves compromise. Presenting reasons that support multiple disciplinarity demands a review of the barriers that impede this process, as we are far from attaining a model or framework that is applicable in all contexts. Two challenges that impede multiple disciplinarity are discussed, in addition to pragmatic solutions that conservation scientists and practitioners can adopt in their work. Overall, conservation researchers and practitioners are encouraged to explore the multiple disciplinary dimensions of their respective realms to more effectively solve problems in biodiversity and sustainability.

Os desafios da geração do conhecimento em saúde ambiental: uma perspectiva ecossistêmica

O artigo explora as oportunidades e as limitações da geração de conhecimento no campo da saúde ambiental. Argumenta que a compreensão da complexidade dos fatores que condicionam a saúde humana e dos ecossistemas demanda redefinições na tradicional distribuição de papéis e responsabilidades na pesquisa científica. Estas práticas de pesquisa encerram enfoques inter e transdisciplinares e a aplicação de uma abordagem ecossistêmica (ecosaúde). Desafios e oportunidades da aplicação da inter e transdisciplinaridade a problemáticas de saúde ambiental são discutidos e ilustrados por meio de dois estudos de caso que utilizam uma abordagem ecosaúde: uma experiência brasileira que trata da contaminação e exposição ao mercúrio na Amazônia, e outra nepalense, sobre a transmissão urbana de equinococose. Concluímos apresentando o potencial de uma abordagem ecosaúde na superação dos limites das práticas unidisciplinares e na valorização dos saberes e da participação local.

Solving problems in social-ecological systems: definition, practice and barriers of transdisciplinary research

Translating policies about sustainable development as a social process and sustainability outcomes into the real world of social-ecological systems involves several challenges. Hence, research policies advocate improved innovative problem-solving capacity. One approach is transdisciplinary research that integrates research disciplines, as well as researchers and practitioners. Drawing upon 14 experiences of problem-solving, we used group modeling to map perceived barriers and bridges for researchers' and practitioners' joint knowledge production and learning towards transdisciplinary research. The analysis indicated that the transdisciplinary research process is influenced by (1) the amount of traditional disciplinary formal and informal control, (2) adaptation of project applications to fill the transdisciplinary research agenda, (3) stakeholder participation, and (4) functional team building/development based on self-reflection and experienced leadership. Focusing on implementation of green infrastructure policy as a common denominator for the delivery of ecosystem services and human well-being, we discuss how to diagnose social-ecological systems, and use knowledge production and collaborative learning as treatments.

Consultancies: a model for interdisciplinary training and mentoring of junior faculty investigators

The study of complex, health-related problems is often best addressed by interdisciplinary teams, and yet models for training and mentoring junior investigators in an interdisciplinary mode are not widely available. Here, the authors describe their school's version of the consultancy process, a two-year effort (September 2007 to June 2009) sponsored by the University of Washington's Center for Interdisciplinary Geriatric Research, as a model for short-and long-term, interdisciplinary training and mentoring of junior faculty investigators, and evaluate its effects on establishing productive cross-disciplinary linkages among them. Between September 2007 and December 2008, written feedback was collected from participating faculty after each consultancy session. A brief, Internet-based survey of all attendees was conducted in February 2009 to gather information about longer-term implications and benefits of consultancy participation. Most respondents rated sessions highly, and a majority of the respondents reported increased networking opportunities, access to resources, new research questions, access to expertise beyond their disciplines as a result of the sessions, and a positive impact on cross-disciplinary collaborations. Their responses suggest that the consultancy format may stimulate the formation of new interdisciplinary mentoring relationships and foster cross-disciplinary collaborations.

Researchers' experience with project management in health and medical research: results from a post-project review

Background

Project management is widely used to deliver projects on time, within budget and of defined quality. However, there is little published information describing its use in managing health and medical research projects. We used project management in the Alcohol and Pregnancy Project (2006-2008) http://www.ichr.uwa.edu.au/alcoholandpregnancy and in this paper report researchers' opinions on project management and whether it made a difference to the project.

Methods

A national interdisciplinary group of 20 researchers, one of whom was the project manager, formed the Steering Committee for the project. We used project management to ensure project outputs and outcomes were achieved and all aspects of the project were planned, implemented, monitored and controlled. Sixteen of the researchers were asked to complete a self administered questionnaire for a post-project review.

Results

The project was delivered according to the project protocol within the allocated budget and time frame. Fifteen researchers (93.8%) completed a questionnaire. They reported that project management increased the effectiveness of the project, communication, teamwork, and application of the interdisciplinary group of researchers' expertise. They would recommend this type of project management for future projects.

Conclusions

Our post-project review showed that researchers comprehensively endorsed project management in the Alcohol and Pregnancy Project and agreed that project management had contributed substantially to the research. In future, we will project manage new projects and conduct post-project reviews. The results will be used to encourage continuous learning and continuous improvement of project management, and provide greater transparency and accountability of health and medical research. The use of project management can benefit both management and scientific outcomes of health and medical research projects.

Promoting multi-disciplinary and inter-disciplinary ageing research in the United Kingdom

Multi-disciplinary and inter-disciplinary working has for long been advocated in gerontology, and sometimes contested. Although collaboration between disciplines is common practice in many areas of ageing research, much remains to be done to develop and support such work. Internationally, funding agencies, scientific associations and other stakeholders in ageing research are actively involved in establishing the methods and means to promote cross-disciplinary co-operation in the field. In the United Kingdom (UK) since the late 1990s, the statutory Research Councils with key interests in ageing and older people have been actively pursuing research programmes that feature multi-disciplinarity and inter-disciplinarity. The National Collaboration on Ageing Research (NCAR), a partnership among four of the Research Councils to stimulate cross-disciplinary collaboration, worked with scientists, funding bodies, and research users to develop approaches to multi- and inter-disciplinary research, and their work informed the New Dynamics of Ageing (NDA) Programme, a major cross-Research Council programme of multi-disciplinary research which spans the social, medical, biological and engineering sciences and the arts and humanities. Drawing on the authors' participation in these activities, this article reviews key developments in the promotion of multi-disciplinary science on ageing in the UK and highlights how this is being pursued in the NDA Programme.

Transdisciplinarity as an inference technique to achieve a better understanding in the health and environmental sciences

The problems of the world are not categorised into disciplines. They are far more complex, a reality that the tradition of transdisciplinary research has recognised. When faced with questions in public health and sustainability, the traditional scientific paradigm often seems inadequate, and, at least in medicine, transdisciplinary research has not yet been fully appreciated or acknowledged. This lack of recognition may be partly caused by a lack of cooperation between disciplines and between science and society. In this paper, I discuss some of the challenges that scientists and policymakers face in public health and environment within a methodological context. I present transdisciplinarity as a modern research tool that should be applied in research in health and the environment and argue that these topics can be approached beyond the inherent obstacle of incommensurability between disciplines. Thus, a small step might be taken in this immense research arena.

Perspectives of clinician and biomedical scientists on interdisciplinary health research

BACKGROUND

Interdisciplinary health research is a priority of many funding agencies. We surveyed clinician and biomedical scientists about their views on the value and funding of interdisciplinary health research.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with 31 biomedical and 30 clinician scientists. The scientists were selected from the 2000-2006 membership lists of peer-review committees of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. We investigated respondents' perspectives on the assumption that collaboration across disciplines adds value to health research. We also investigated their perspectives on funding agencies' growing support of interdisciplinary research.

RESULTS

The 61 respondents expressed a wide variety of perspectives on the value of interdisciplinary health research, ranging from full agreement (22) to complete disagreement (11) that it adds value; many presented qualified viewpoints (28). More than one-quarter viewed funding agencies' growing support of interdisciplinary research as appropriate. Most (44) felt that the level of support was unwarranted. Arguments included the belief that current support leads to the creation of artificial teams and that a top-down process of imposing interdisciplinary structures on teams constrains scientists' freedom. On both issues we found contrasting trends between the clinician and the biomedical scientists.

INTERPRETATION

Despite having some positive views about the value of interdisciplinary research, scientists, especially biomedical scientists, expressed reservations about the growing support of interdisciplinary research.

It's all about relationships: a qualitative study of health researchers' perspectives of conducting interdisciplinary health research

Background

Interdisciplinary research has been promoted as an optimal research paradigm in the health sciences, yet little is known about how researchers experience interdisciplinarity in practice. This study sought to determine how interdisciplinary research was conceptualized and operationalized from the researcher's perspective and to better understand how best to facilitate interdisciplinary research success.

Methods

Key informant interviews were conducted with health researchers with expertise or experience in conducting interdisciplinary research. Interviews were completed either in person or over the telephone using a semi-structured interview guide. Data collection occurred simultaneously with data analysis so that emerging themes could be explored in subsequent interviews. A content analysis approach was used.

Results

Nineteen researchers took part in this study. Interdisciplinary research was conceptualized disparately between participants, and there was modest attention towards operationalization of interdisciplinary research. There was one overriding theme, "It's all about relationships", that emerged from the data. Within this theme, there were four related subthemes: 1) Involvement in interdisciplinary research; 2) Why do I do interdisciplinary research?; 3) Managing and fostering interdisciplinary relationships; and 4) The prickly side to interdisciplinary research. Together, these themes suggest that the choice to conduct interdisciplinary research, though often driven by the research question, is highly influenced by interpersonal and relationship-related factors. In addition, researchers preferred to engage in interdisciplinary research with those that they had already established relationships and where their role in the research process was clearly articulated. A focus on relationship building was seen as a strong facilitator of interdisciplinary success.

Conclusion

Many health researchers experienced mixed reactions towards their involvement in interdisciplinary research. A well thought-out rationale for interdisciplinary research, and strategies to utilize the contribution of each researcher involved were seen as facilitators towards maximizing the benefits that could be derived from interdisciplinary research.

The SMILE study: a study of medical information and lifestyles in Eindhoven, the rationale and contents of a large prospective dynamic cohort study

Background

Health problems, health behavior, and the consequences of bad health are often intertwined. There is a growing need among physicians, researchers and policy makers to obtain a comprehensive insight into the mutual influences of different health related, institutional and environmental concepts and their collective developmental processes over time.

Methods/Design

SMILE is a large prospective cohort study, focusing on a broad range of aspects of disease, health and lifestyles of people living in Eindhoven, the Netherlands. This study is unique in its kind, because two data collection strategies are combined: first data on morbidity, mortality, medication prescriptions, and use of care facilities are continuously registered using electronic medical records in nine primary health care centers. Data are extracted regularly on an anonymous basis. Secondly, information about lifestyles and the determinants of (ill) health, sociodemographic, psychological and sociological characteristics and consequences of chronic disease are gathered on a regular basis by means of extensive patient questionnaires. The target population consisted of over 30,000 patients aged 12 years and older enrolled in the participating primary health care centers.

Discussion

Despite our relatively low response rates, we trust that, because of the longitudinal character of the study and the high absolute number of participants, our database contains a valuable set of information.

SMILE is a longitudinal cohort with a long follow-up period (15 years). The long follow-up and the unique combination of the two data collection strategies will enable us to disentangle causal relationships. Furthermore, patient-reported characteristics can be related to self-reported health, as well as to more validated physician registered morbidity. Finally, this population can be used as a sampling frame for intervention studies. Sampling can either be based on the presence of certain diseases, or on specific lifestyles or other patient characteristics.