Collaboration Attitudes and BehaviorNCT05395286

Innovation Labs to Enhance Collaboration

A study testing Innovation Lab in people with Collaboration Attitudes and Behavior, run by State University of New York at Buffalo at 1 site in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record

Search all trials

Trial summary

Conduct and evaluate the impact of two week-long Innovation Labs on collaboration attitudes and behavior among early career scholars. Applicants to each Innovation Lab will be screened and then randomized to either the Innovation Lab group or a control group. Read more about this study

Who is it for?: Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for: Collaboration Attitudes and Behavior
What is being tested?: Innovation Lab
Type of treatment: Lifestyle or therapy programme
Could I receive a placebo?: No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people: 94 participants
Where: 1 siteUnited States
Study dates: 3 Aug 2017to 25 Jun 2020
Phase: Interventional
Are there results?: Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

Ages Any age
All sexes
Healthy volunteers accepted
Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

Completion of application and baseline assessment.
Faculty at a NIH CTSA hub institution or regional partner.
Early stage investigators (NIH-defined as "within 10 years of completing his/her terminal research degree or is within 10 years of completing medical residency (or the equivalent)") who are emerging as independent scholars.
Ratings of goodness of fit with the topic of the Innovation Lab. Applications were reviewed for the above criteria and ranked by committee according to goodness of fit with the topic of the Innovation Lab, the quality and quantity of academic productivity and collaboration, and contribution to diversity of perspectives among Lab participants (e.g., biomedical and social/psychological, basic and applied). Top-ranked applicants were retained for randomization to the Innovation Lab group or control group.

Who cannot join

None listed.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site

University at Buffalo
Buffalo, New York, 14260

Other trials in United States

About this study

Official title: Controlled Evaluation of Innovation Labs for Enhancing Collaboration Among Early Career Scholars in the CTSA Network

Read the detailed description

Building on the science of team science and preliminary work at the Buffalo and Vanderbilt CTSAs, the investigators worked with industry partner Knowinnovation to implement, assess, and disseminate an innovative and promising method for stimulating and nurturing new transdisciplinary research teams across the CTSA Program consortium: Innovation Labs. The study focused on early career investigators. The study took a translational science approach to identify and test "best practices". To accomplish this, the study critically evaluated the impact of Innovation Labs in two preliminary randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In collaboration with NCATs and broad input from the CTSA network, the investigators developed a clinical and translational research grand challenge focus for each Innovation Lab. A diverse applicant pool of early career investigators invited from every CTSA hub in the consortium was reviewed, and top applicants were randomized to a 5-day residential Innovation Lab or "treatment as usual" control group. Measures of process and outcome were collected from the application phase through 12-month follow-up and aggregated across the two RCTs. Given the preliminary nature of the work and an emerging consensus regarding the science of team science, primary outcomes were measures of the depth and breadth of participants collaborative networks and attitudes towards collaboration, which were predicted to be enhanced in the Innovation Lab group compared to the treatment as usual control group. Initial data on the degree to which Innovation Labs resulted in increased transdisciplinary collaborative output were also examined.

Conditions: Collaboration Attitudes and Behavior
Being tested: Innovation Lab
Medical subject headings: Behavior

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

Innovation LabBehavioural
An Innovation Lab is a facilitated 5-day residential event designed to create novel, transdisciplinary and potentially transformative research ideas and proposals to address a specific grand challenge. Participants, along with a director, organizers, subject matter guides, and KI facilitators communally explore the problem space, generate a broad range of ideas, and form transdisciplinary teams to pursue research projects.

Study groups in NCT05395286
Study group	Role	What they receive
Innovation Lab Group	Experimental	Randomized to attend the Innovation Lab Receives: Behavioral: Innovation Lab
Control Group	No intervention	Randomized to NOT attend the Innovation Lab

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

MATRICx Collaboration Benefits/Motivators Scale
Self-report: The Motivation Assessment for Team Readiness, Integration, and Collaboration (MATRICx; Mallinson, Lotrecchiano, et al., 2016) benefits scale includes 17 items that tap into perceived motivators/benefits of collaboration. Each is rated on a 1-4 scale. Scale scores were computed as the mean of all 17 items, for a benefits scale score ranging from 1-4, with higher scores indicating greater collaboration readiness.
Measured: 15 months
MATRICx Collaboration Barriers/Threats Scale
Self-report: The Motivation Assessment for Team Readiness, Integration, and Collaboration (MATRICx; Mallinson, Lotrecchiano, et al., 2016) Threats Scale includes 31 barriers to -- or threats of -- collaboration. Each is rated on a 1-4 scale. Scale scores were computed as the mean of all 31 items, for a Barriers/Threats scale score ranging from 1-4, with lower scores indicating greater collaboration readiness.
Measured: 15 months
Transdisciplinary Orientation Scale
Self-report: The Transdisciplinary Orientation scale (TDO; Misra, Stokols, \& Cheng, 2015) is a 12-item scale that measures values, attitudes, and beliefs, and conceptual skills and behaviors, that assesses the degree to which participants are oriented towards transdisciplinary collaboration. Items are rated on a five-point scale (1="Strongly Disagree," 5="Strongly Agree"). The total score is the mean of all 12 items, with a resulting 1-5 range, in which higher scores indicate greater transdisciplinary collaboration orientation.
Measured: 15 months
Collaboration Network Size
Objective number of collaborators from published articles on PubMed
Measured: 36 Months (18-monts pre- and post-treatment, after excluding articles published within +/-3 months of the Innovation Lab)

Secondary outcomes (5)

Self-Reported Number of Grants Submitted Per Year
Self-Reported Number of Grants Submitted per Year. For the post-treatment period, the number of grants submitted at 6- and 12-M follow-up were summed. To make the pre-treatment period (which covered only 9 months) comparable to the post-treatment period, the number of grants at baseline and EOT were summed, divided by 9, and then multiplied by 12. Participants who did not report the number of grants submitted were coded as zero for the ITT analysis.
Measured: 21 months (9 months pre-treatment [obtained at baseline and EOT]; 12 months post-treatment [obtained at 6- and 12-month follow-up])
ILab Met Goal - New Collab
The Innovation Lab group was asked to rate the degree to which "The Lab met the goal of forming new transdisciplinary collaborations", answering on a 6-point scale (0 = "Strongly Disagree" to 5 = "Strongly Agree"), with higher scores indicating a beneficial effect of the Innovation Lab.
Measured: 12 months (End of Treatment [3 months post-baseline], 6-Month Follow-Up [9 months post-baseline], and 12-Month Follow-Up [15 months post-baseline])
ILab Met Goal - Novel Proposals
The Innovation Lab group was asked to rate the degree to which "The Lab met the goal of developing novel grant proposals", answering on a 6-point scale (0 = "Strongly Disagree" to 5 = "Strongly Agree"), with higher scores indicating a beneficial effect of the Innovation Lab.
Measured: 12 months (End of Treatment [3 months post-baseline], 6-Month Follow-Up [9 months post-baseline], and 12-Month Follow-Up [15 months post-baseline])
ILab - Recommend
The Innovation Lab group was asked to rate the degree to which "I would recommend an Innovation Lab to a colleague", answering on a 6-point scale (0 = "Strongly Disagree" to 5 = "Strongly Agree"), with higher scores indicating a beneficial effect of the Innovation Lab.
Measured: 12 months (End of Treatment [3 months post-baseline], 6-Month Follow-Up [9 months post-baseline], and 12-Month Follow-Up [15 months post-baseline])
ILab - Positive Impact
The Innovation Lab group was asked to rate the degree to which "My experience in the Innovation Lab will have a positive impact on my work at my home institution", answering on a 6-point scale (0 = "Strongly Disagree" to 5 = "Strongly Agree"), with higher scores indicating a beneficial effect of the Innovation Lab.
Measured: 12 months (End of Treatment [3 months post-baseline], 6-Month Follow-Up [9 months post-baseline], and 12-Month Follow-Up [15 months post-baseline])

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

3 Aug 201725 Jun 2020

First posted27 May 2022
Study start3 Aug 2017
Primary completion12 Jul 2019
Study completion25 Jun 2020

Resources

Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
Other trials for Collaboration Attitudes and BehaviorStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design

Study type: Interventional
Phase: Phase N/A
Primary purpose: Other
Allocation: Randomised
Intervention model: Parallel groups
Masking: None (open label)
Enrolment: 94 participants (actual)

IDs, dates and publications

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05395286
Sponsor's protocol ID: STUDY00001360
Status last verified: Mar 2026
First submitted: 19 May 2022
Last updated: 27 Apr 2026
Results posted: Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
Data monitoring committee: No
FDA-regulated drug: No
FDA-regulated device: No

Publications

Hawk LW Jr, Murphy TF, Hartmann KE, Burnett A, Maguin E. A randomized controlled trial of a team science intervention to enhance collaboration readiness and behavior among early career scholars in the Clinical and Translational Science Award network. J Clin Transl Sci. 2023 Dec 14;8(1):e6. doi: 10.1017/cts.2023.692. eCollection 2024.
PubMed 38384923

Study at a glance

From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Apr 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.

Official title: Controlled Evaluation of Innovation Labs for Enhancing Collaboration Among Early Career Scholars in the CTSA Network
ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05395286
Acronym / sponsor ID: STUDY00001360
Conditions: Collaboration Attitudes and Behavior
Study type: Interventional
Recruitment status: Completed
Enrolment: 94 participants (actual)
Lead sponsor: State University of New York at BuffaloUniversity, hospital or other
Collaborators: National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS)
Study start: 3 Aug 2017 (actual)
Primary completion: 12 Jul 2019 (actual)
Study completion: 25 Jun 2020 (actual)
First posted: 27 May 2022 (actual)
Results: Posted 27 Apr 2026

Clinical summary

The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.

Detailed description

Study design

Primary purpose: Other
Allocation: Randomised
Intervention model: Parallel groups
Masking: None (open label)
Number of arms: 2

Arm	Type	Receives
Innovation Lab Group	Experimental	Behavioral: Innovation LabRandomized to attend the Innovation Lab
Control Group	No intervention	–Randomized to NOT attend the Innovation Lab

Who may qualify

Sex: All
Healthy volunteers: Accepted
Age groups: Child, Adult, Older adult

Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)

Completion of application and baseline assessment.
Faculty at a NIH CTSA hub institution or regional partner.
Early stage investigators (NIH-defined as "within 10 years of completing his/her terminal research degree or is within 10 years of completing medical residency (or the equivalent)") who are emerging as independent scholars.
Ratings of goodness of fit with the topic of the Innovation Lab. Applications were reviewed for the above criteria and ranked by committee according to goodness of fit with the topic of the Innovation Lab, the quality and quantity of academic productivity and collaboration, and contribution to diversity of perspectives among Lab participants (e.g., biomedical and social/psychological, basic and applied). Top-ranked applicants were retained for randomization to the Innovation Lab group or control group.

Key exclusion criteria (0 listed)

Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Interventions

Intervention	Type	Arms
Innovation LabAn Innovation Lab is a facilitated 5-day residential event designed to create novel, transdisciplinary and potentially transformative research ideas and proposals to address a specific grand challenge. Participants, along with a director, organizers, subject matter guides, and KI facilitators communally explore the problem space, generate a broad range of ideas, and form transdisciplinary teams to pursue research projects.	Behavioural	Innovation Lab Group

Primary outcome

MATRICx Collaboration Benefits/Motivators Scale
Time frame: 15 months
Self-report: The Motivation Assessment for Team Readiness, Integration, and Collaboration (MATRICx; Mallinson, Lotrecchiano, et al., 2016) benefits scale includes 17 items that tap into perceived motivators/benefits of collaboration. Each is rated on a 1-4 scale. Scale scores were computed as the mean of all 17 items, for a benefits scale score ranging from 1-4, with higher scores indicating greater collaboration readiness.
MATRICx Collaboration Barriers/Threats Scale
Time frame: 15 months
Self-report: The Motivation Assessment for Team Readiness, Integration, and Collaboration (MATRICx; Mallinson, Lotrecchiano, et al., 2016) Threats Scale includes 31 barriers to -- or threats of -- collaboration. Each is rated on a 1-4 scale. Scale scores were computed as the mean of all 31 items, for a Barriers/Threats scale score ranging from 1-4, with lower scores indicating greater collaboration readiness.
Transdisciplinary Orientation Scale
Time frame: 15 months
Self-report: The Transdisciplinary Orientation scale (TDO; Misra, Stokols, \& Cheng, 2015) is a 12-item scale that measures values, attitudes, and beliefs, and conceptual skills and behaviors, that assesses the degree to which participants are oriented towards transdisciplinary collaboration. Items are rated on a five-point scale (1="Strongly Disagree," 5="Strongly Agree"). The total score is the mean of all 12 items, with a resulting 1-5 range, in which higher scores indicate greater transdisciplinary collaboration orientation.
Collaboration Network Size
Time frame: 36 Months (18-monts pre- and post-treatment, after excluding articles published within +/-3 months of the Innovation Lab)
Objective number of collaborators from published articles on PubMed

5 secondary outcomes

Self-Reported Number of Grants Submitted Per Year
Time frame: 21 months (9 months pre-treatment [obtained at baseline and EOT]; 12 months post-treatment [obtained at 6- and 12-month follow-up])
ILab Met Goal - New Collab
Time frame: 12 months (End of Treatment [3 months post-baseline], 6-Month Follow-Up [9 months post-baseline], and 12-Month Follow-Up [15 months post-baseline])
ILab Met Goal - Novel Proposals
Time frame: 12 months (End of Treatment [3 months post-baseline], 6-Month Follow-Up [9 months post-baseline], and 12-Month Follow-Up [15 months post-baseline])
ILab - Recommend
Time frame: 12 months (End of Treatment [3 months post-baseline], 6-Month Follow-Up [9 months post-baseline], and 12-Month Follow-Up [15 months post-baseline])
ILab - Positive Impact
Time frame: 12 months (End of Treatment [3 months post-baseline], 6-Month Follow-Up [9 months post-baseline], and 12-Month Follow-Up [15 months post-baseline])

Results and safety

Results posted to the registry on 27 Apr 2026, as reported by the sponsor. Figures are copied from the record, not re-analysed. Full results on ClinicalTrials.gov.

Participant flow

Group	Started	Completed
Innovation Lab Group	47	39
Control Group	47	34

Primary outcome: MATRICx Collaboration Benefits/Motivators Scale

Time frame: 15 months. Mean (Standard Error). Unit: Score on a scale

Measure	Innovation Lab Group n = 47	Control Group n = 47
Baseline (Month 0)	3.41 (.06)	3.48 (.06)
End of Treatment (Month 3)	3.29 (.06)	3.31 (.07)
6-Month Follow-Up (Month 9)	3.31 (.06)	3.25 (.08)
12-Month Follow-Up (Month 15)	3.34 (.07)	3.27 (.08)

Population analysed: Differing number of participants responded at different assessment points.

Primary outcome: MATRICx Collaboration Barriers/Threats Scale

Time frame: 15 months. Mean (Standard Error). Unit: Score on a scale

Measure	Innovation Lab Group n = 47	Control Group n = 47
Baseline (Month 0)	1.47 (.04)	1.45 (.04)
End of Treatment (Month 3)	1.60 (.04)	1.60 (.06)
6-Month Follow-Up (Month 9)	1.60 (.05)	1.65 (.06)
12-Month Follow-Up (Month 15)	1.61 (.06)	1.58 (.05)

Population analysed: Differing number of participants responded at different assessment points.

Primary outcome: Transdisciplinary Orientation Scale

Time frame: 15 months. Mean (Standard Error). Unit: Score on a scale

Measure	Innovation Lab Group n = 47	Control Group n = 47
Baseline (Month 0)	4.4 (.08)	4.4 (.07)
End of Treatment (Month 3)	4.2 (.08)	4.1 (.11)
6-Month Follow-Up (Month 9)	4.3 (.08)	4.4 (.08)
12-month Follow-Up (Month 15)	4.2 (.09)	4.4 (.08)

Population analysed: Differing number of participants responded at different assessment points.

Primary outcome: Collaboration Network Size

Time frame: 36 Months (18-monts pre- and post-treatment, after excluding articles published within +/-3 months of the Innovation Lab). Mean (Standard Error). Unit: Unique Collaborators

Measure	Innovation Lab Group n = 47	Control Group n = 47
Pre-Treatment	27.6 (4.1)	26.7 (3.7)
Post-Treatment	34.6 (5.3)	30.1 (4.8)

5 secondary outcomes are reported in the full results.

Adverse events

Time frame: 1 year. Other adverse events reported at 0% frequency or more

Group	Serious adverse events	Other adverse events	Deaths
Innovation Lab Group	0 of 47 (0%)	0 of 47 (0%)	0 of 47
Control Group	0 of 47 (0%)	0 of 47 (0%)	0 of 47

Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…

Research links

Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Apr 2026.
Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
Results publication: PubMed 38384923Hawk LW Jr, Murphy TF, Hartmann KE, Burnett A, Maguin E. A randomized controlled trial of a team science intervention to enhance collaboration readiness and behavior among early career scholars in the Clinical and Translational Science Award network. J Clin Transl Sci. 2023 Dec 14;8(1):e6. doi: 10.1017/cts.2023.692. eCollection 2024.

Referral and contact

AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.

The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.

1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Innovation Lab in people with Collaboration Attitudes and Behavior, run by State University of New York at Buffalo at 1 site in United States.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 0 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Apr 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 27 Apr 2026). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

MATRICx Collaboration Benefits/Motivators Scale (time frame: 15 months). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT05395286, which also lists 1 linked publication.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Apr 2026.