The Evaluation Core conducted a Social Network Analysis (SNA) to map and understand collaboration patterns across five years of the Alliance Pilot Project Calls (2020–2025). This innovative approach mapped Principal Investigators (PI)-centered collaborations (i.e., PI-to-collaborator links), representing the proposal-based connections across the research proposals applications submitted (research concepts papers and proposals) from 2020 to 2025.
Alliance Collaboration Network
(2020–2025 Call for
Pilot Projects)
NETWORK HIGHLIGHTS & FINDINGS
GROWING ENGAGEMENT
The network included 189 unique investigators collaborating on 90 submitted research proposals/projects, including proposals application submissions, research concepts, and resubmissions across Calls. Participation grew steadily, with new teams forming and some proposals evolving across multiple Calls.
CROSS-INSTITUTIONAL COLLABORATION
Over 71% of projects included investigators from two or more institutions. UPR-MSC had the largest pool of participants (87 investigators, avg. 3.44 collaborations/investigator), while UCC showed the highest collaboration rate (3.61). PHSU also demonstrated strong engagement with 2.35 collaborations per investigator. For comparison, the overall network average was 1.43, with individual participation ranging from 1 to 17 collaborations.
TRANSDISCIPLINARY REACH
Nearly 68% of projects were transdisciplinary, involving investigators from two or more disciplinary categories. The most represented fields were Clinical Sciences (80 investigators, 284 collaborations) and Basic Sciences (54 investigators, 183 collaborations). Public Health, though smaller in size (25 investigators), matched Clinical Sciences in collaboration rate (3.6 collaborations per investigator). Not Academic partners (e.g., community organizations) also contributed to disciplinary diversity (1.9 collaborations per investigator), which reflects their frequent role as specialized or support collaborators, such as community-based organizations, clinics, and service providers, rather than core research team leaders.
STRATEGIC ROLES AND CONTRIBUTORS
While most investigators had a single role, 14% held multiple roles (e.g., PI and Mentor), often serving as anchors across Calls. Mentors were the most common role overall
KEY INFLUENCERS IDENTIFIED
Using centrality metrics, the Evaluation Core identified bridge-builders and highly engaged PIs who spanned disciplines and institutions, critical players in sustaining the Alliance’s research network.
Spotlight: Strategic Collaborators in the ALLIANCE NETWORK (2020–2025)
These investigators stood out for their consistent and wide-reaching collaboration across multiple Calls and projects. Using SNA, we identified them based on two key metrics: Degree (collaborative reach) and Betweenness (ability to connect separate teams). Investigators with many non-overlapping collaborators often serve as bridges in the network, linking otherwise disconnected teams, Calls, or institutions.
-
- Dr. Karen Martinez-Gonzalez (UPR-MSC, Clinical Sciences) Participated in 4 Calls, submitted 8 unique projects, and collaborated with 5 unique investigators as a Mentor
-
- Dr. Jorge Duconge (UPR-MSC, Basic Sciences) Engaged in 3 Calls, submitted 7 unique projects, and collaborated with 3 unique investigators in his role as Mentor.
-
- Dr. Filipa Godoy-Vitorino (UPR-MSC, Basic Sciences) Served as Collaborator / Co-I / Co-PI across 2 Calls, contributing to 6 unique projects with 4 unique collaborators.
-
- Dr. Valerie Wojna (UPR-MSC, Clinical Sciences) Played multiple roles (Mentor and Collaborator) in 4 Calls, contributing to 7 unique projects and working with 4 unique collaborators.
-
- Dr. Mikhail Inyushin (UCC, Basic Sciences) Participated in 2 Calls, submitted 6 unique projects, and connected with 4 unique collaborators while serving as PI, Mentor, and Collaborator.
-
- Dr. Yaritza Inostroza-Nieves (SJBSM, Basic Sciences) Led 2 unique projects across 2 Calls, connecting with 7 unique collaborators in her role as PI.
-
- Dr. Sandra Ralat (UPR-MSC, Basic Sciences) Submitted 2 unique projects in 1 Call, working with 8 unique collaborators as a PI
We thank these investigators for their outstanding contributions to building a more connected, collaborative, and transdisciplinary research network within the Alliance. Their sustained participation has strengthened institutional ties, nurtured emerging teams, and helped advance the Alliance’s mission in clinical and translational science.
WHAT THIS MEANS FOR FUTURE COLLABORATION
This analysis reveals the intentional and often unseen labor behind research development, beyond funding outcomes. It provides the Alliance with actionable insights for:
- Mentorship planning
- Retention of strategic contributors
- Enhancing institutional and transdisciplinary integration
FUTURE STEPS?
This is Layer 1 of a broader evaluation plan:
- Collaboration Layer (Complete): Who collaborates with whom
- Proposal Pipeline (In Progress): How ideas evolve from concept to funding
- Dissemination Layer (Planned): Measuring real-world outcomes and impact
Together, these layers will help the Alliance track, support, and amplify its collaborative impact in clinical and translational research.
More in-depth results are available in the SNA Supplementary Data.
