%0 Journal Article
%T Co
%A Kristina M. Rabarison
%A Monika K. Rabarison
%A Rose A. Marcelin
%J Public Health Reports
%@ 1468-2877
%D 2019
%R 10.1177/0033354919834589
%X The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention¡¯s Prevention Research Centers (PRCs) collaborate on public health activities with community agencies and organizations. We evaluated these collaborations by studying the relationships between co-authors from the PRCs and community agencies that published at least 1 article together in the first year of the program. We identified all the authors of articles published by PRCs and collaborating members in peer-reviewed journals between September 2014 and September 2015 and constructed a network showing the links between and among all the authors. We characterized the network with 4 measures of social structure (network components, network density, average clustering coefficient, average distance) and 3 measures of individual author performances (degree-, betweenness-, and closeness-centrality). The 413 articles had 1804 individual authors and 7995 co-authorship relationships (links) in 212 peer-reviewed journals. These authors and co-authors formed 44 separate, nonoverlapping groups (components). The largest ¡°giant¡± component containing most of the links involved 66.3% (n = 1196) of the authors and 73.7% (n = 5889) of the links. We identified 136 ¡°information brokers¡± (authors with high closeness centrality: those who have the shortest links to the most authors). Two authors with high betweenness centrality (who had the highest number of co-authors; 104 and 107) had the greatest ability to mediate co-authorships. Network density was low; only 0.5% of all potential co-authorships were realized (7995 actual co-authorship/1£¿628£¿110 potential co-authorships). Information brokers and co-authorship mediators should be encouraged to communicate more with each other to increase the number of collaborations between network members and, hence, the number of co-authorships
%K social network analysis
%K citation network analysis
%K prevention research centers
%K evaluation
%K collaboration
%K health promotion
%K disease prevention
%U https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0033354919834589