Glen D. Morgan

Bio: Glen D. Morgan is an academic researcher from National Institutes of Health. The author has contributed to research in topics: Population & Public health. The author has an hindex of 13, co-authored 19 publications receiving 1562 citations.

Evaluating transdisciplinary science.

Abstract: The past two decades have seen a growing interest and investment in transdisciplinary research teams and centers. The Transdisciplinary Tobacco Use Research Centers (TTURCs) exemplify large-scale scientific collaborations undertaken for the explicit purpose of promoting novel conceptual and methodological integrations bridging two or more fields. Until recently, few efforts have been made to evaluate the collaborative processes, and the scientific and public policy outcomes, of such centers. This manuscript offers a conceptual framework for understanding and evaluating transdisciplinary science and describes two ongoing evaluation studies covering the initial phase of the TTURC initiative. The methods and measures used by these studies are described, and early evaluative findings from the first 4 years of the initiative are presented. These data reveal progress toward intellectual integration within and between several of the TTURCs, and cumulative changes in the collaborative behaviors and values of participants over the course of the initiative. The data also suggest that different centers may follow alternative pathways toward transdisciplinary integration and highlight certain environmental, organizational, and institutional factors that influence each center's readiness for collaboration. Methodological challenges posed by the complexities of evaluating large-scale scientific collaborations (including those that specifically aspire toward transdisciplinary integrations spanning multiple fields) are discussed. Finally, new directions for future evaluative studies of transdisciplinary scientific collaboration, both within and beyond the field of tobacco science, are described.

A four-phase model of transdisciplinary team-based research: goals, team processes, and strategies

Abstract: The complexity of social and public health challenges has led to burgeoning interest and investments in cross-disciplinary team-based research, and particularly in transdisciplinary (TD) team-based research. TD research aims to integrate and ultimately extend beyond discipline-specific concepts, approaches, and methods to accelerate innovations and progress toward solving complex real-world problems. While TD research offers the promise of novel, wide-reaching, and important discoveries, it also introduces unique challenges. In particular, today's investigators are generally trained in unidisciplinary approaches and may have little training in, or exposure to, the scientific skills and team processes necessary to collaborate successfully in teams of colleagues from widely disparate disciplines and fields. Yet these skills are essential to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of TD team-based research. In the current article, we propose a model of TD team-based research that includes four relatively distinct phases: development, conceptualization, implementation, and translation. Drawing on the science of team science field, as well as the findings from previous research on group dynamics and organizational behavior, we identify key scientific goals and team processes that occur in each phase and across multiple phases. We then provide real-world exemplars for each phase that highlight strategies for successfully meeting the goals and engaging in the team processes that are hallmarks of that phase. We conclude by discussing the relevance of the model for TD team-based research initiatives, funding to support these initiatives, and future empirical research that aims to better understand the processes and outcomes of TD team-based research.

Physician advice for smoking cessation

Abstract: Healthcare professionals frequently advise patients to improve their health by stopping smoking. Such advice may be brief, or part of more intensive interventions. The aims of this review were to assess the effectiveness of advice from physicians in promoting smoking cessation; to compare minimal interventions by physicians with more intensive interventions; to assess the effectiveness of various aids to advice in promoting smoking cessation, and to determine the effect of anti-smoking advice on disease-specific and all-cause mortality.

System dynamics modeling for public health: background and opportunities.

Abstract: The systems modeling methodology of system dynamics is well suited to address the dynamic complexity that characterizes many public health issues. The system dynamics approach involves the development of computer simulation models that portray processes of accumulation and feedback and that may be tested systematically to find effective policies for overcoming policy resistance.System dynamics modeling of chronic disease prevention should seek to incorporate all the basic elements of a modern ecological approach, including disease outcomes, health and risk behaviors, environmental factors, and health-related resources and delivery systems. System dynamics shows promise as a means of modeling multiple interacting diseases and risks, the interaction of delivery systems and diseased populations, and matters of national and state policy.

One size does not fit all: the case for tailoring print materials.

Abstract: Printed health education materials frequently consist of mass-produced brochures, booklets, or pamphlets designed for a general population audience. Although this one-size-fits-all approach might be appropriate under certain circumstances and even produce small changes at relatively modest costs, it cannot address the unique needs, interests, and concerns of different individuals. With the advent and dissemination of new communication technologies, our ability to collect information from individuals and provide feedback tailored to the specific information cellected is not only possible, but practical. The purpose of this article is to: (a) distinguish between tailored print communication and other common communication-based approaches to health education and behavior change; (b) present a theoretical and public health rationale for tailoring health information; and (c) describe the steps involved in creating and deliverin tailored print communication programs. Studies suggest computer tailoring is a promising strategy for health education and behavior change. Practitioners and researchers should understand the approach and consider the possibilities it presents for enhancing their work in disease prevention.