Chapter 07: Founding Integrative Epidemiology and New Training for the New Era of Team Science
Files
Description
Dr. Spitz next observes that this has created the need for training programs to provide researchers with the necessary skills to work on teams. She also states that the culture of institutions needs to change to adequately recognize team science. Dr. Spitz talks about her pride in having developed the Integrative Epidemiology Workshop, an outgrowth of her innovative concept of integrative epidemiology. She explains this concept and talks about the mindset, skills, and temperament that researchers need to bring to work in this area. She explains how academic science needs to change to foster more team science. She reflects on the legacy she has left in MD Anderson’s research culture.
Identifier
SpitzM_01_20161013_C07
Publication Date
10-13-2016
Publisher
The Historical Resources Center, Research Medical Library, The University of Texas Cancer Center
City
Houston, Texas
Interview Session
Margaret Spitz, MD, Oral History Interview, October 13, 2016
Keywords
Building the Institution; The Researcher; Discovery and Success; Definitions, Explanations, Translations; Overview; MD Anderson Culture; Multi-disciplinary Approaches; On Research and Researchers; Understanding Cancer, the History of Science, Cancer Research; Education at MD Anderson
Topics Covered
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center - Building the Institution; The Researcher; Discovery and Success; Definitions, Explanations, Translations; Overview; MD Anderson Culture; Multi-disciplinary Approaches; On Research and Researchers; Understanding Cancer, the History of Science, Cancer Research; Education at MD Anderson
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
Disciplines
History of Science, Technology, and Medicine | Oncology | Oral History
Transcript
Margaret Spitz, MD:
And the other thing I did, which I’m very proud of, is I helped—I worked with Tom Sellers from Moffitt and others, and with AACR, to develop an integrative epidemiology training workshop, which is now in its third year. It was funded by NCI, and it’s very successful, highly competitive program. It’s a week-long program, training epidemiologists in integrative epidemiology. And I should have said that’s something I’m also very proud of. I developed the concept of integrative epidemiology.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Yeah, I had that in my notes to ask you about. So maybe you can talk to me about, what is that concept that you developed?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, we believe—it’s part of the fact that the technologies have changed so dramatically, and there is need to integrate all these omics data. And this is not only genomics, it’s proteomics and metabolomics, microbiomics into epidemiologic research. And while we can’t know all these omics approaches, we need to understand the language so that we can communicate with others. And we can—and this is the way epidemiology is moving. And we need to equip our epidemiologists with the skills and the tools to do this. So, for example, we’ve recruited three post-docs. And the one is focusing on integrating genomics into brain tumor research. One will be doing microbiomics of the developing gut and looking at risk of acute lymphocytic leukemia in children. And the third one will be looking at mitochondrial DNA and prostate cancer. So we have these very highly-sophisticated approaches. And each faculty, each trainee, will have a multi-disciplinary mentoring team with an epidemiologist, with one or two basic scientists with a statistician. And this is a whole new way of mentoring our [fellows]—there’s no longer the one-on-one approach.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Tell me what you believe are the skillsets that are needed, I mean beyond kind of the expertise in individual research areas. But what does this new team focused person need to have?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, I think they need to develop, to understand the lab skills in any particular area that they’re interested in. So we’re hoping that for a few months, they’ll immerse themselves in a lab. They don’t need to be doing lab research, but they need to understand it. And then they will do a project on their own, in which they will integrate data with epidemiologic data, with the help of their lab people, bioinformaticians, biostatistics and epidemiologists.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
It seems like that requires an unusual, really an unprecedented degree of mental flexibility.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Yes, absolutely.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Yeah. And are there some people that are more suited to that kind of work?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Yes. We’ve had many more candidates who’ve applied that we’ve rejected, because we didn’t see a focus or an interest in working with omics, or whose entire career until now had been purely classical epidemiology. We thought there would be too much of a learning curve. So we’ve been very restrictive in who we’re inviting to participate.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Is there certain facets of culture in which team science can evolve? You know, do you—and I’m talking here not just people’s technical or information-base areas, but you know, is there a certain personality type or a person who has certain kinds of interpersonal skills that you are—
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Oh, absolutely, because people have to be willing to share their data and specimens, and to lose a little bit of control. And not everybody is willing to do that. Although now, the [genomic] data have to be published in dbGaP. Once the funding period is over and the first paper’s published, then there’s a mandate to make the data publicly available. But even then, the best way of doing research is in team science, where people understand the data and know the intricacies of the data, because some of the epidemiologic data, not only to talk about the omics data, but the epidemiology data are very complex.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Now you mentioned earlier, that you said academic medicine needs to change in certain ways, to support team science.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Yes, or to recognize team science as one of the—you know, we look at papers, published grants funded, how much your educational role. But we don’t give enough weight to participation in team science.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
What’s the obstacle for doing that?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
I think it’s tradition. It just has to be changed.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
But what do those traditional academic science look at that makes team science fall through the tracks?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, they look at first-authored or last-authored publications. And that doesn’t always happen with team science. That’s the issue.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
So what is—how are you thinking differently about how credit is given, or how credits should be evaluated in this kind of scenario, when multiple people are contributing?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
I think there needs to be a—when I look at somebody’s CV, there needs to be a good mix of first-authored, last-authored to show that they’re mentoring others, and collaborative publications. There needs to be a mix and a balance. And I can’t give you statistics, how much of each, it’s just an impression.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Yeah. No, I mean, that’s kind of what I was asking. You know, what do these different mixes communicate to you about this individual’s research values? So when you left MD Anderson and kind of had your track record there, what did you see in terms of the culture of team science that you were leaving behind there?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, I’ll only speak about epidemiology. We had a lot of success in working with other programs and institutions, and forming collaborations and consortia. Not everybody in the department was on the same page, but most were.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Were there training programs, or—?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Oh, yes. The training program was started by Robert Chamberlain, who you might consider interviewing as well.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Okay.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
He would have a very interesting perspective. He became my deputy department chair. And he had the largest and longest standing training program in cancer prevention. And it’s still ongoing now. But I think they’re looking to refund it. I think they’re resubmitting it.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
And he shared your vision for team science?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, it was different, because his was not only epidemiology, it was behavioral science, clinical cancer prevention. And so it was a different approach. Totally different approach. But he certainly shared my vision of where the department should be going. But his training program was different.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Interesting. And this was for fellows?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Pre and post-docs.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Pre and post-docs. Okay. Did we finish up the story of your research?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
I think we covered enough.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
We did? Okay. I noticed you looking at your watch. Do you kind of want to—do you have things you need to turn to today?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
No, but I’m quite tired, actually.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Oh, okay. Then that’s a good reason to say let’s stop for today.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Okay. I think I wouldn’t—
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
That’s fine.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Because we’ve done one and a half hours.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
We have, yes.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
And it went very quickly.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
It did. Well, good. Well, let me just close off for today. I just want to say for the record that the time is 10:37. And I wanted to thank you for your time today.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
It’s a pleasure. I actually enjoyed going back in time.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Yeah? Good. Good. Well, I look forward to our next conversation.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Absolutely.
Recommended Citation
Spitz, Margaret R. MD and Rosolowksi, Tacey A. PhD, "Chapter 07: Founding Integrative Epidemiology and New Training for the New Era of Team Science" (2016). Interview Chapters. 1591.
https://openworks.mdanderson.org/mchv_interviewchapters/1591
Conditions Governing Access
Open
