Conceptualising centres of excellence: a scoping review of global evidence

Abstract

Objective

Globally, interest in excellence has grown exponentially, with public and private institutions shifting their attention from meeting targets to achieving excellence. Centres of Excellence (CoEs) are standing at the forefront of healthcare, research and innovations responding to the world’s most complex problems. However, their potential is hindered by conceptual ambiguity. We conducted a global synthesis of the evidence to conceptualise CoEs.

Design

Scoping review, following Arksey and O’Malley’s framework and methodological enhancement by Levac et al and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews.

Data sources

PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Google Scholar and the Google engine until 1 January 2021.

Eligibility

Articles that describe CoE as the main theme.

Results

The search resulted in 52 161 potential publications, with 78 articles met the eligibility criteria. The 78 articles were from 33 countries, of which 35 were from the USA, 3 each from Nigeria, South Africa, Spain and India, and 2 each from Ethiopia, Canada, Russia, Colombia, Sweden, Greece and Peru. The rest 17 were from various countries. The articles involved six thematic areas—healthcare, education, research, industry, information technology and general concepts on CoE. The analysis documented success stories of using the brand ‘CoE’—an influential brand to stimulate best practices. We identified 12 essential foundations of CoE—specialised expertise; infrastructure; innovation; high-impact research; quality service; accreditation or standards; leadership; organisational structure; strategy; collaboration and partnership; sustainable funding or financial mechanisms; and entrepreneurship.

Conclusions

CoEs have significant scientific, political, economic and social impacts. However, there are inconsistent use and self-designation of the brand without approval by an independent, external process of evaluation and with high ambiguity between ‘CoEs’ and the ordinary ‘institutions’ or ‘centres’. A comprehensive framework is needed to guide and inspire an institution as a CoE and to help government and funding institutions shape and oversee CoEs.

Correspondence to Dr Tsegahun Manyazewal; [email protected]

Strengths and limitations of this study

• To the best of our knowledge, this is the first scoping review to conceptualise centres of excellence based on global evidence.

• The study followed Arksey and O’Malley’s framework and methodological enhancement by Levac et al to analyse the evidence and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews methodological frameworks to guide the retrieval and inclusion of the evidence.

• Five databases were systematically searched to identify scientific and grey literature.

• The study was limited by language restrictions.

Introduction

Globally, interest in excellence has grown exponentially, with public and private institutions shifting their attention from meeting targets to achieving excellence.^{1 2} The term centre of excellence (CoE) has been understood as a team, shared facility or entity that provides high standards of research, leadership, services or education, and brings innovative mechanisms to promote knowledge and scientific advancements.^1–3 The concept has been around since copyrighted by Humana Health Plan⁴; drawing the attention of scientists to enhance collaborations and cultivate access to resources essential for advanced research.⁵ It has been shaping institutions with ways to consolidate and build on their expertise and develop the capacity for scientific and financial gains.⁶ Organisations that work under the CoE model have been pooling existing highly skilled expertise and resources to work hard on their focus area and bring in superior performance and productivity over the others.⁷ The organisations leverage CoE as a specific mechanism to establish and drive world-class excellence within their technical or functional space.

Nonetheless, there has been no consensus as to what CoE means and what operational modalities it should follow and be ruled by.^{6 8} Although many centres are determined as CoE, there is no sufficient clarity as to what constitutes a CoE, the resource requirements, the nature of change they would make, and the processes and activities necessary to sustain the CoE. In the area of healthcare, CoE has been looked at as a specialised programme with potential expertise and resources focusing on particular medical areas and providing exceptional outcomes.^{9 10} Some experts in the field pinpoint particular fronts that distinguish CoE from traditional healthcare delivery models—organisation design, servicescape design, personnel, medical care, marketing and finance.^{9 11} Moreover, many research and higher education institutions^12–16 and healthcare institutions^17–20 across different countries have pursued a CoE status with claims that such institutions have bold distinctions in capacity, resources and outcomes even among themselves. For instance, the African Research Universities Alliance (ARUA) establishes CoEs within its member universities where world-class researchers from member universities assemble to carry out joint researches in 13 priority thematic areas. Drawing on existing university infrastructure and human resources, each CoE needs to bring together leading researchers from Africa and elsewhere in working groups and conduct cutting-edge research that is innovative and with the potential for transformation. ARUA explains CoE as an assembly point for good and committed researchers and students seeking to do cutting-edge work. It conceptualises CoE as a team, a shared facility, or an entity that provides leadership, best practices, research, support and/or training for a focus area which might be a technology, a business concept, a skill or a broad area of study.

Despite these assertions, there is ambiguity and inconsistency in the use of the term, the process of designations, processes of evaluation, and metrics. In this study, we conducted a global synthesis of the evidence to conceptualise CoEs.

Methods

We followed a scoping review procedure to provide greater conceptual clarity and map CoE from heterogeneous sources. Scoping review is the most preferred approach to systematically identify and map key concepts, theories and sources of emerging evidence and gaps in the research. We used Arksey and O’Malley’s framework for scoping reviews,²¹ which has been further enhanced by Levac et al,²² to analyse the evidence. We also used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension (PRISMA) for Scoping Reviews²³ to guide the retrieval and inclusion of the evidence. The review was conducted following the stages described below:

Stage 1: identifying the research question

This stage involved in-depth discussion and consultation with the study team and study collaborators. The main research questions were the following:

• How are CoEs defined?

• What are the building blocks of a CoE?

• What are the frameworks and functions of CoEs?

• What does it need to establish and sustain a CoE?

Stage 2: identifying relevant studies

Search strategy and sources

Relevant empirical and peer-reviewed literature were sourced from electronic databases and search engines including PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL and Google Scholar up to 1 January 2021. Handsearching of contents was conducted for key journals including the Journal of Excellence, International Journal of Excellence in Education, Journal on Centers for Teaching and Learning, International Journal of Business Excellence, Journal of Excellence in College Teaching, Equity and Excellence in Education, Excellence in Medical Education, Journal of Universal Excellence, Excellence International Journal of Education and Research, and Measuring Business Excellence. A precise search strategy for one database is included in online supplemental table 1.

To ensure that all relevant information were captured, we searched the Google engine for grey literature including conference proceedings, working papers, newsletters, business documents, presentations and reports, government documents, technical documents, white papers, policies and bulletins. The references of included literature and documents were also handsearched to get any additional evidence.

The databases were searched using both natural language and controlled vocabulary for ‘excellence’ and the following terms within publication title and/or abstract: Centers of Excellence; Centers of Excellence for Education; Centers of Excellence for Research; Sustaining Centres of Excellence; Barriers to Achieving Excellence; Leadership for Excellence; Promoters of Excellence; Infrastructure for Excellence; and Collaborations for Excellence. The search term ‘'Excellence’' was further extended to include all relevant words through a search of definitions from dictionaries.

Eligibility

To be included in the review, sources of evidence needed to describe CoE as the main theme, which could be defining, theorising, implementing or evaluating a CoE. The search had no restrictions applied on the year of publication, publication status or geographical location to ensure comprehensiveness of coverage, while non-English language literature were excluded. Duplicate citations were also excluded from the initial database.

Stage 3: study selection

An extensive title screening, summary screening, and full-text screening strategy were developed to identify all relevant literature and documents. The title and abstract of all records retrieved were downloaded to and independently assessed for eligibility and screened by two authors after removal of duplicates. Disagreements between the reviewers were decided by consensus. Full-text copies of potentially relevant papers were retrieved for in-depth review.

Stage 4: data charting

Data extraction used a standardised form developed by the investigator team. Information was extracted from each included document on (1) description of the document, including the primary author, publication year and search engine; (2) Thematic area; (3) Essential foundations of the CoE and (4) description of the major finding of the article. We checked if the CoEs had their status approved by an independent body or if they have a standard recognition to function as a CoE. We also checked if the CoEs have described the major barriers and opportunities in the establishment and sustaining of their CoE. Before extracting the actual data, the data extraction sheet was pilot-tested on 10 randomly selected studies, and the extraction sheet was refined as needed. Two authors (TM and AF) extracted the data.

Stage 5: collating, summarising and reporting the results

The results of the review were synthesised and narratively reported. The steps included thematic content analysis for qualitative information; numerical counts and tables for quantitative data; narrative summary and interpretation of all the results; and discussion of gaps in the literature.

Assessing the risk of bias across studies was not feasible due to expected high levels of variation in scope, setting, and time between studies. All given results were included to minimise the risk of selective reporting.

Patient and public involvement

No patient was involved.

Results

Study selection in the PRISMA review

Overall, 52 161 potential documents were included in the initial review from PubMed (n=15 778), Scopus (n=7168), CINAHL (n=1150), Google Scholar (n=10 213), Google engine (n=8142) and other sources (n=23), of which 23 432 were retained after removing duplicates. Following an initial screening, 346 full-text articles were evaluated, of which 78 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review (figure 1).

Figure 1. Flow diagram of the study.

Characteristics of the included studies

The 78 full-text articles included were affiliated with institutions globally from 33 countries, of which 35 were from the USA, 3 each from Nigeria, South Africa, Spain, and India, and 2 each from Ethiopia, Canada, Russia, Colombia, Sweden, Greece and Peru. The rest 17 were from various countries.

The articles involved six thematic areas—health services, education, research, industry, information technology and a general concept of CoE. See online supplemental table 2 for detailed information on individual study characteristics, including the name of the primary author and publication date, country of study origin, name of the designated CoE if any, thematic area of the literature, the essential foundation of the CoE and a brief description of the key message in the literature.

Definition of CoE

CoE is a team of specialised expertise^{2 7 17 24–47} or organisational environment^{2 5 24 30 35 36 48–56} that is established to provide outstanding healthcare,^{2 7 12 17 24–39 41 48 50 51 57–74} research,^{12 17 24 26–28 31 36 40 41 50 52 58 68 72 74–85} education and training,^{12 17 24 25 31 36 38 42 43 68 73 74 76 81–83 85–88} regulatory,^{57 83 89} policy,^{46 49 54 55 82 90} information technology^{45 53 91} or industrial^{44 92 93} services and support in high levels of efficient and effective performance. CoEs are geographically concentrated and focused on high potential in science and industry,⁴⁶ as a world leader or a catalyst between neighbouring countries,^{60 72 82} anywhere from the local research and development (R&D) group up to a network of cooperative partners. They are characterised by the scope of their operations, mandates, funding, executive sponsorship, commitment, responsibilities and powers.⁹⁴ Historically, CoE is leveraged by IT leaders seeking to facilitate the creation of hubs for knowledge sharing and building and enhancing capabilities. The idea had evolved and been used in favour of different targets in the last decade.⁵⁵ Its driver, ‘Excellence’, was not considered an act that has to do with the end product, but a habit to do with the process.

Functions of CoE

When a CoEs is established, it is most often because of a need for implementation infrastructure, the existence of specific relationships, and availability of funding.⁴⁹ Its establishment could favour critical research infrastructure, foster collaboration, train experts and share core facilities.⁶⁸ Regardless of strategic orientation, all CoEs have in common the notion of excellence and the particular requirements that come with that label, such as high research quality and productivity, resource attraction and concentration, international visibility and attractiveness, and organisational robustness.⁴⁶

Within the vertically different higher education, excellence is being equated to ‘being better’ which could mean, excellence in research, top-quality professors, favourable working conditions, job security and good salary and benefits, adequate facilities, adequate funding, academic freedom, an atmosphere of intellectual excitement and faculty self-governance.⁹⁵ Higher education institutions develop such CoEs to address the ongoing critical need for more intensive and specialised training on a specific condition.^{12 81 95}

In the healthcare sector, CoEs can provide breakthrough treatments on specific disease conditions.^26–33 In line with the current COVID-19 pandemic, some hospitals and universities have established COVID-19-specific CoEs.^{24 96}

CoE could be established to provide specific regulatory decision making, including to advance the development and regulation of products^{25 83} and to fill in knowledge gaps.⁹⁷ For instance, the World Bank has an Eastern and Southern Africa Higher Education Centers of Excellence project that strengthen selected Eastern and Southern African higher education institutions to deliver quality postgraduate education and build collaborative research capacity in the regional priority areas.⁸²

Essential foundations of CoE

There were 12 essential foundations on which CoE could be based according to the review of the 78 literature (figure 2). Gaining and retaining such foundations could cultivate the good nature of a CoE, creating more realistic possibilities and opportunities to function as a CoE.

Figure 2. Essential foundations of CoE in literature. CoE, centres of excellence.

Frameworks and models of CoE

Fourteen of the 78 included articles have used or developed a specific framework or model to establish and shape their institutions as a CoE or to distinguish CoE from the traditional institutional or service delivery model. Table 1 summarises the frameworks employed.

Table 1

Frameworks and models of centres of excellence (CoE)

Framework or model	Literature that cited the framework/model
Willis-Knighton’s Health System CoE delivery model	Elrod et al2
REAL-PANLAR Group quality standard requirements for CoE model	Santos-Moreno et al7
Activity-based typing of CoEs	Heyes47
Critical capacities of a CoE	Mettrick et al49
Generalised Criteria and Evaluation Method for CoE	Craig et al53
Key steps to establishing a CoE	Patel et al54
IFSO requirement for CoE programme participation	Melissas et al60
Lean Six Sigma	Itri et al64; Ferguson et al66
E-CoRE conceptual framework	Househ et al72
Three-impact dimensions	Borlaug79
Research Excellence Framework	Terama et al84
Curriculum development framework	Cofrancesco85
Four-domain curricular model	Rugen et al86
Excellence in higher education evaluation model	Brusoni et al94

Elrod and Fortenberry² looked at CoE under the umbrella of the Willis-Knighton Health System and identified six particular fronts—organisation design, servicescape design, personnel, medical care, marketing and finance—that distinguish CoE from traditional healthcare delivery models. Addressing each of these fronts yield an exceptionally high level of care largely exceeding that delivered in traditional settings. Elrod and Fortenberry considered CoE in healthcare as a programme that is assembled to supply an exceptionally high concentration of expertise and related resources centred on a particular area of medicine, delivering associated care in a comprehensive, interdisciplinary fashion to afford the best patient outcomes possible.

Santos-Moreno et al⁷ employed the REAL-PANLAR Group model as a requirement for implementation and accreditation of CoEs in rheumatoid arthritis care. The framework defined three types of CoEs based on structure, process, and outcome indicators—standard, optimal and model. To maintain the comprehensive nature of care, all criteria must be met with a minimum score of 80% for each of the criteria. The approved standards for the ‘standard’ CoE should have a basic structure and process indicators, the ‘optimal’ level should accomplish more structure and process indicators, and the ‘model’ level should fulfil outcome and patient experience indicators. In addition and regardless of institutional category, all CoEs should meet the same standards, and according to the philosophy of the accreditation system, the concepts of continuous improvement and patient-centred management must be included.

Heyes,⁴⁷ as part of his assessment of the nuclear security CoEs, grouped CoEs into five types based on their core activities. Group A centres where the core activities are essentially technical and scientific with a focus on providing training on the use, calibration, and maintenance of equipment. Group B centres where the core activities are essentially educational, offering the course(s) which, although they may have technical content, are designed to provide a broad perspective of nuclear security and an awareness of relevant issues. Group C centres where the core activities encompass a wider range of topics than just nuclear security, or even wider than nuclear security, safety, and safeguards. Group D centres where the core activity is focused on nuclear R&D or which are characterised by strong commercially driven objectives. Group E centres where the core activities are focused on raising awareness of nuclear security issues within the nuclear industry and beyond.

Mettrick et al⁴⁹ indicated that every CoE’s scope of work should have four critical capacities - implementation support, continuous quality improvement for identified interventions, workforce development and technical assistance. As the initial scope of work is refined, these criteria should be used to begin to identify possible organisational candidates to house the CoE.

Craig et al⁵³ proposed a framework that characterised the successes of a CoE through five dimensions—internal business process, customer focus, leadership, innovation and learning, and finance. The framework integrated elements of the balanced scorecard and the Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence to form a background for evaluating organisations as CoE.

Patel and Andrews⁵⁴ proposed a seven key-steps framework to consider in creating a CoE. The steps included defining the CoE and setting vision statement and guiding principles, determining the overall scope for the COE which has three types including knowledge-sharing focus, strategy/guidance focus and strategy/guidance focus with implementation/support focus.

Melissas et al⁶⁰ applied the IFSO (International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders) requirement for CoE programme participation. The IFSO provides designation as CoE in bariatric and metabolic surgery for institutions fulfilling ten requirements focusing on experts’ capacity, infrastructure, a facility set up and appropriate technologies. The authors improved healthcare services following participation in the IFSO.

Itri et al⁶⁴ and Ferguson et al⁶⁶ used the Lean Six Sigma framework with its five distinct phases—define, measure, analyse, improve and control—to establish CoE in healthcare settings. The authors proved that the framework is effective in establishing and organising CoEs.

Househ et al⁷² were guided by a conceptual framework that is comprised of the production, dissemination, and use of knowledge in their establishment of an Electronic Health Centre of Research Excellence. In the framework, knowledge was produced as a result of research efforts, innovation and collaboration, and such generated information is used to formulate decisions.

Borlauge⁷⁹ developed a conceptual framework involving three impact dimensions—organisational, social and international—to examine how CoE schemes have been adapted to two distinct national public research systems in Norway and Sweden. With this framework, the author identified that funding agencies emphasised organisational impact in a country with a highly competitive funding system.

Terama et al⁸⁴ applied Research Excellence Framework to assess the quality and reach of research in UK universities and allocate funding accordingly. The framework assesses the quality of research in higher education institutions in terms of three elements—originality, significance and rigour of research outputs; reach and significance of impact; and vitality and sustainability of research environment. The framework was instrumental in establishing education excellence, while it was unlikely to fully reflect all of the impacts of university research.

Cofrancesco et al⁸⁵ used the six-step curriculum development framework to inspire and support the development and outcomes of excellence in education programmes. The steps included problem identification and general needs assessment; targeted needs assessment; setting goals and objectives; educational strategies; programme implementation; and evaluation and feedback. The authors developed and implemented the Institute for Excellence in education as a structure that works to promote, improve and innovate medical and biomedical education and scholarship.

Rugen et al⁸⁶ developed a curricular model with four domains—shared decision making, sustained relationships, interprofessional collaboration and performance improvementCofrancescoaimed at achieving CoE in primary care education. The model transformed healthcare training from a profession-specific primary care delivery approach to an inter-professional, team-based, patient-centred care delivery paradigm.

Brusoni et al⁹⁴ framed seven evaluation extents to define excellence in higher education—leadership, purposes and plans, beneficiaries and constituencies, programmes and services, faculty/staff and workplace, assessment and information use, and outcomes and achievements. Excellence in Higher Education provides a structured guide for reviewing each of these areas as they operate within a particular institution, department or programme.

Discussion

Our analysis of the scientific and grey literature documented success stories of using the brand ‘CoE’ within the healthcare, research, education, information technology and industry. There were some key milestones commonly applicable to many CoEs; however, there was inconsistent use and self-designation of the brand ‘CoE’ without approval by an independent, external process of evaluation, and with high ambiguity between ‘CoE’ and the ordinary ‘institution’ or ‘centre’. In the developing world, the concept of CoE is getting significant attention, particularly in research and higher education sectors where senior professors are fairly concentrated as our analysis pinpoints. Our review led us to define CoE as a team of specialised expertise or organisational environment that is established to provide outstanding healthcare, research, education and training, regulatory, information technology or industrial services, and support in high levels of efficient and effective performance.

Our analysis showed that a comprehensive framework is needed to guide and inspire an institution as a CoE. There were some existing frameworks that the CoEs used as a benchmark to shape the establishment and implementation of their CoEs; however, there were some important limitations with the frameworks:

• The frameworks were limited to demarcating the unique features of a CoE as compared with an ordinary institution.

• The frameworks were limited to specific facilities or services without analysis at a larger scale.

• The frameworks lacked parameters and levels of indicators to use to follow-up or improve the performance of the CoEs, unlike many accreditation requirements for different research and education ventures.

• The frameworks were not sufficient to enhance CoEs to acquire excellence in both research and education when these two ventures are allied. There were many CoEs tagged as ‘CoE for Research and Education’. As one compliments the other, it could be possible to achieve excellence in both as a singular goal.

• Giving particular emphasis to CoEs in developing countries, the frameworks did not recognise the issue of resource potential and stewardships in such settings.

The scoping review indicates that highly specialised expertise is one of the layers on top, with the number and multidisciplinary nature of the experts influencing the competency of a CoE with the rapidly changing knowledge and development landscape. The CoE needs to ensure that it has the right technical, administrative and operational functions in place, bringing in the right subject-matter expertise at the right time to deliver targeted outcomes. The appointment of expertise needs to be merit based, taking into account each member’s education, training, experience and the broader vision of long-term requirements.

State-of-the-art infrastructure is preeminent in defining and transforming an institution as a CoE. Such infrastructure raises productivity and inspires specialised expertise from different contexts and countries to visit, practice and collaborate. Structurally, the CoEs could be a stand-alone promise or a confirmed part of a legal institution as a separate division in an institution, or a hub location for multicountry functions. The CoE needs to promote a global view aimed at enhancing healthy competitions on a global platform and promoting the development of globalised knowledge. It should benchmark its infrastructure and performance against equivalent CoEs in other settings or countries.

The CoE needs to cultivate innovations to create and transform new ideas, knowledge and procedures that incrementally improve its success and stay ahead in the face of extreme competition. The CoE needs to introduce cutting-edge technologies, devices, or applications that maximise its productivity and competitiveness. For a CoE that focuses on R&D, its research outputs should have a high impact on the knowledge economy for substantial changes beyond scholarly roles. The CoE needs to work to convert its academic or research outputs into new business ventures through an entrepreneurship platform. For a CoE that focuses on service delivery, it should provide services that consistently delight customers’ individual needs and preferences. This includes developing standards of service quality and continuously measuring improvements to raise service quality and create more efficient methods of service delivery. The CoE needs to value accreditation schemes by an external evaluator to continuously measure and assure service quality and enhance its status and reputation.

Leadership is one of the critical components of a CoE. The CoE requires a powerful, goal-oriented leadership to passionately lead the team in a given direction and drives toward success. The CoE leader should have the maximum commitment to achieving excellence, with the potential to influence the overall functions and long-term visions of the CoE. The leadership should explore sustainable financing mechanisms which could be sourced from government institutions, funding agencies, public–private partnerships or generation of revenues through consultancy, training or research services. The leadership should make sure that its staff is highly motivated and ambitious. The CoE needs to develop and implement an organisational structure that works best for its particular interest. This should be supported by a roadmap and strategy that defines the broader vision, mission, goals and objective that deal with the long-term desired status of the CoE.

Conclusion

CoEs have significant scientific, political, economic and social impacts. However, there are inconsistent use and self-designation of the brand without approval by an independent, external process of evaluation, and with high ambiguity between ‘CoEs’ and the ordinary ‘institutions’ or ‘centres’. A comprehensive framework is needed to guide and inspire an institution as a CoE and to help government and funding institutions shape and oversee CoEs.

The World Bank financially supports the Centre for Innovative Drug Development and Therapeutic Trials for Africa (CDT-Africa).

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as online supplemental information.

Ethics statements

Patient consent for publication

Not applicable.

Ethics approval

This study does not involve human participants.

Footnote

Twitter @abebawfekadu

Contributors Conceptualisation, methodology, first draft and the guarantor: TM and AF. Revised the draft: YW, CO, AH, AB, MG, GM, GY, AC and EM. All authors have read, reviewed and approved the final manuscript for publication.

Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interests None declared.

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

References

¹ Fekadu A, Oppenheim C, Manyazewal T, et al. Understanding the key processes of excellence as a prerequisite to establishing academic centres of excellence in Africa. BMC Med Educ 2021; 21: 36. doi:10.1186/s12909-020-02471-0 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33413297

² Elrod JK, Fortenberry JL. Centers of excellence in healthcare institutions: what they are and how to assemble them. BMC Health Serv Res 2017; 17: 425. doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2340-y http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28722562

³ Nakov R, Sarafov S, Gospodinova M, et al. Transthyretin amyloidosis: testing strategies and model for center of excellence support. Clin Chim Acta 2020; 509: 228–34. doi:10.1016/j.cca.2020.06.029 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32564944

⁴ Itri JN, Bakow E, Woods J. Creating an outpatient center of excellence in CT. J Am Coll Radiol 2014; 11: 1137–43. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2014.08.032

⁵ Reichert J, Furlong G. Five key pillars of an analytics center of excellence, which are required to manage populations and transform organizations into the next era of health care. Nurs Adm Q 2014; 38: 159–65. doi:10.1097/NAQ.0000000000000023

⁶ Blokdyk G. Center of excellence a complete guide. 2019 Ed. Australia: Emereo Pty Limited, 2019.

⁷ Santos-Moreno P, Caballero-Uribe CV, Massardo ML, et al. Systematic and progressive implementation of the centers of excellence for rheumatoid arthritis: a methodological proposal. Clin Rheumatol 2017; 36: 2855–8. doi:10.1007/s10067-017-3790-7

⁸ Walshe R, Herrmann-Frank A, Diehl V. [Center of excellence, cancer center, competence network: confusion of terminology?]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2002; 127: 913–4. doi:10.1055/s-2002-25379 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12148345

⁹ Masri A, Bukhari S, Eisele YS, et al. Molecular imaging of cardiac amyloidosis. J Nucl Med 2020; 61: 965–70. doi:10.2967/jnumed.120.245381 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32482792

¹⁰ Drake J, Schreiber KC, Lopez R, et al. Establishing a center of excellence for hereditary diffuse gastric cancer syndrome. J Surg Oncol 2019; 119: 673–4. doi:10.1002/jso.25363 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30618047

¹¹ El-Eshmawi A, Castillo JG, Tang GHL, et al. Developing a mitral valve center of excellence. Curr Opin Cardiol 2018; 33: 155–61. doi:10.1097/HCO.0000000000000498 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29329115

¹² Nwafor IA, Chinawa JM, Adiele DK, et al. Management of complex CHD at the National cardiothoracic center of excellence, University of Nigeria teaching Hospital, Enugu: the role of foreign cardiac missions in 3.5 years. Cardiol Young 2017; 27: 1174–9. doi:10.1017/S1047951116002766 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28120739

¹³ De Angelis F, Abdelgawad M, Rizzello M, et al. Perioperative hemorrhagic complications after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: four-year experience of a bariatric center of excellence. Surg Endosc 2017; 31: 3547–51. doi:10.1007/s00464-016-5383-y http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28008466

¹⁴ Sejdić E, Rothfuss MA, Stachel JR, et al. Innovation and translation efforts in wireless medical connectivity, telemedicine and eMedicine: a story from the RFID center of excellence at the University of Pittsburgh. Ann Biomed Eng 2013; 41: 1913–25. doi:10.1007/s10439-013-0873-8 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23897048

¹⁵ Fife RS. Development of a comprehensive women's health program in an academic medical center: experiences of the Indiana university national center of excellence in women's health. J Womens Health 2003; 12: 869–78. doi:10.1089/154099903770948096 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14670166

¹⁶ JDRF News Column. New stem cell centre of excellence opens in Cambridge. Pract Diab Int 2004; 21: 276. doi:10.1002/pdi.683

¹⁷ Singh M, Sawarkar D, Sharma BS. Neurosurgery at all India Institute of medical sciences, a center of excellence: a success story. Neurol India 2015; 63: 589–96. doi:10.4103/0028-3886.162065 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26238896

¹⁸ Santos-Moreno P, Alvis-Zakzuk NJ, Villarreal-Peralta L, et al. A comprehensive care program achieves high remission rates in rheumatoid arthritis in a middle-income setting. experience of a center of excellence in Colombia. Rheumatol Int 2018; 38: 499–505. doi:10.1007/s00296-017-3903-2 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29248952

¹⁹ Manyazewal T, Woldeamanuel Y, Blumberg HM, et al. The potential use of digital health technologies in the African context: a systematic review of evidence from Ethiopia. NPJ Digit Med 2021; 4: 125. doi:10.1038/s41746-021-00487-4 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34404895

²⁰ The African research universities alliance (ARUA) centers of excellence. Accra, Ghana. Available: https://arua.org.za/centres-of-excellence/

²¹ Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol 2005; 8: 19–32. doi:10.1080/1364557032000119616

²² Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci 2010; 5: 69. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-5-69 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20854677

²³ Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med 2018; 169: 467–73. doi:10.7326/M18-0850 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30178033

²⁴ The University of Texas health science center at Houston (UTHealth). COVID-19 center of excellence. Texas, USA: UTHealth, 2020. https://www.uth.edu/covid-19/

²⁵ Bialous SA, Nohavova I, Kralikova E, et al. Building capacity in tobacco control by establishing the eastern Europe nurses' center of excellence for tobacco control. Tob Prev Cessat 2020; 6: 1–12. doi:10.18332/tpc/128190 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33336120

²⁶ Lipsitz O, McIntyre RS, Rodrigues NB, et al. Does body mass index predict response to intravenous ketamine treatment in adults with major depressive and bipolar disorder? results from the Canadian rapid treatment center of excellence. CNS Spectr 2020: 1–9. doi:10.1017/S1092852920002102 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33267928

²⁷ Komninaka V, Flevari P, Marinakis T, et al. Outcomes of pregnancies in patients with Gaucher disease: the experience of a center of excellence on rare metabolic Disease-Gaucher disease, in Greece. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2020; 254: 181–7. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.09.027 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33032100

²⁸ Araujo-Castro M, Pascual-Corrales E, Martínez San Millan JS, et al. Postoperative management of patients with pituitary tumors submitted to pituitary surgery. experience of a Spanish pituitary tumor center of excellence. Endocrine 2020; 69: 5–17. doi:10.1007/s12020-020-02247-y http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32170587

²⁹ Balkhy HH, Amabile A, Torregrossa G. A shifting paradigm in robotic heart surgery: from Single-Procedure approach to establishing a robotic heart center of excellence. Innovations 2020; 15: 187–94. doi:10.1177/1556984520922933 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32384009

³⁰ Tinc PJ, Wolf-Gould C, Wolf-Gould C, et al. Longitudinal use of the consolidated framework for implementation research to evaluate the creation of a rural center of excellence in transgender health. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020; 17: 9047. doi:10.3390/ijerph17239047 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33291621

³¹ Sarkar T, Karmakar N, Dasgupta A, et al. Quality of life of people living with HIV/AIDS attending antiretroviral clinic in the center of excellence in HIV care in India. J Educ Health Promot 2019; 8: 226. doi:10.4103/jehp.jehp_80_19 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31867390

³² Neal C, Rusangwa C, Borg R, et al. Cost of treating pediatric cancer at the Butaro cancer center of excellence in Rwanda. J Glob Oncol 2018; 4: 1–7. doi:10.1200/JGO.17.00155 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30433841

³³ Choque-Velasquez J, Colasanti R, Baffigo-Torre V, et al. Developing the first highly specialized neurosurgical center of excellence in Trujillo, Peru: work in Progress-Results of the first four months. World Neurosurg 2017; 102: 334–9. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2017.01.063 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28137542

³⁴ Chick JFB, Reddy SN, Pyeritz RE, et al. A survey of pulmonary arteriovenous malformation screening, management, and follow-up in hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia centers of excellence. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2017; 40: 1003–9. doi:10.1007/s00270-017-1604-6 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28188364

³⁵ Casanueva FF, Barkan AL, Buchfelder M, et al. Criteria for the definition of pituitary tumor centers of excellence (PTCOE): a pituitary Society statement. Pituitary 2017; 20: 489–98. doi:10.1007/s11102-017-0838-2 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28884415

³⁶ Cohen MS. Enhancing surgical innovation through a specialized medical school pathway of excellence in innovation and entrepreneurship: lessons learned and opportunities for the future. Surgery 2017; 162: 989–93. doi:10.1016/j.surg.2017.06.012 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28778581

³⁷ Doumouras AG, Saleh F, Anvari S, et al. A longitudinal analysis of short-term costs and outcomes in a regionalized center of excellence bariatric care system. Obes Surg 2017; 27: 2811–7. doi:10.1007/s11695-017-2707-5 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28502029

³⁸ Rani PK, Balakrishnanan D, Padhi TR, et al. Role of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) tertiary centers of excellence in Capacity-building. Indian Pediatr 2016; 53 Suppl 2: S85–8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27915312

³⁹ Keto JL, Kemmeter PR. Effect of center of excellence requirement by centers for Medicare and Medicaid services on practice trends. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2008; 4: 437–40. doi:10.1016/j.soard.2007.11.004 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18226971

⁴⁰ Nwaka S, Ochem A, Besson D, et al. Analysis of pan-African centres of excellence in health innovation highlights opportunities and challenges for local innovation and financing in the continent. BMC Int Health Hum Rights 2012; 12: 11. doi:10.1186/1472-698X-12-11 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22838941

⁴¹ Heining C, von Kalle C. What functions do oncological centers of excellence have in future research? ONKOLOGE 2016; 22: 152–7.

⁴² Voznesenskaya A, Bougrov V, Kozlov S. Itmo Photonics: center of excellence. InOptics education and outreach IV. International Society for Optics and Photonics 2016; 9946: 99460V.

⁴³ Bienenstock A, Schwaag Serger S, Benner M. Combining excellence in education, research and impact: inspiration from Stanford and Berkeley and implications for Swedish universities. SNS Forlag 2014.

⁴⁴ Sobhieh MH, Karimi R, Razmi J. Develop center of excellence (COE) at power plant projects in southern Iran with conceptual model approach to supply chain management in construction industry projects. Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 2016; 11: 967–75.

⁴⁵ Neely JR, de Supinski BR. Application modernization at LLNL and the Sierra center of excellence. Comput Sci Eng 2017; 19: 9–18. doi:10.1109/MCSE.2017.3421556

⁴⁶ Hellström T. Centres of excellence as a tool for capacity building. Case study: Canada. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development: IMHE Higher Education Programme, 2013.

⁴⁷ Heyes A. An assessment of the nuclear security centers of excellence. Stanley Foundation, 2012.

⁴⁸ Perdomo HA. Cancer centers of excellence in Colombia: a fundamental way to work together. Urología colombiana 2017; 26: 157–8.

⁴⁹ Mettrick J, Harburger DS, Kanary PJ. Building Cross-System implementation centers: a roadmap for state and local child serving agencies in developing centers of excellence (COE. Baltimore, MD: The Institute for Innovation & Implementation, University of Maryland, 2015.

⁵⁰ Hershko A, Edri MM, Wirtheim E. Harefuah 2015; 154: 478–542.

⁵¹ Cullen L, Greiner J, Greiner J, et al. Excellence in evidence-based practice: organizational and unit exemplars. Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am 2005; 17: 127-x. doi:10.1016/j.ccell.2005.01.002 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15862735

⁵² Lin C-C, Yang C-H, Cheng A-L, et al. National center of excellence for clinical trials and research at national Taiwan university hospital. Drug Inf J 2009; 43: 361–3. doi:10.1177/009286150904300315

⁵³ Craig W, Fisher M, Garcia S. Generalized criteria and evaluation method for center of excellence: a preliminary report. CARNEGIE-MELLON UNIV PITTSBURGH PA SOFTWARE ENGINEERING INST, 2009.

⁵⁴ Patel J, Andrews L. Seven key steps to establishing a center of EXCELLENCE-If you're struggling to optimize your return on investment from enterprise content management and other strategies, this just might offer a solution. Infonomics 2010; 40.

⁵⁵ Marciniak R. Center of excellence as a next step for shared service center. Journal of International Scientific Publication: Economy & Business. ISBN: ISSN. 2012:1313-2555.

⁵⁶ Antonowicz D, Kohoutek J, Pinheiro R, et al. The roads of ‘excellence’ in Central and Eastern Europe. European Educational Research Journal 2017; 16: 547–67. doi:10.1177/1474904116683186

⁵⁷ Gao JJ, Pazdur R. Fda oncology center of excellence during COVID-19-Working for patients with cancer. JAMA Oncol 2020. doi: doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.6783. [Epub ahead of print: 23 Dec 2020 ]. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33355627

⁵⁸ Miranda JJ, Bernabé-Ortiz A, Diez-Canseco F, et al. Towards sustainable partnerships in global health: the case of the CRONICAS centre of excellence in chronic diseases in Peru. Global Health 2016; 12: 29. doi:10.1186/s12992-016-0170-z http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27255370

⁵⁹ Kouchoukos NT. What is a Cardiothoracic Surgical "Center of Excellence"? Ann Thorac Surg 2016; 102: 1426–7. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.06.034 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27772568

⁶⁰ Melissas J, Stavroulakis K, Tzikoulis V, et al. Sleeve gastrectomy vs Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. data from IFSO-European chapter center of excellence program. Obes Surg 2017; 27: 847–55. doi:10.1007/s11695-016-2395-6 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27761724

⁶¹ Rábago CA, Clouser M, Dearth CL, et al. The extremity trauma and amputation center of excellence: overview of the research and surveillance division. Mil Med 2016; 181: 3–12. doi:10.7205/MILMED-D-16-00279 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27849455

⁶² Mehrotra A, Dimick JB. Ensuring excellence in centers of excellence programs. Ann Surg 2015; 261: 237–9. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001071 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25565122

⁶³ Katz IT, Bogart LM, Cloete C, et al. Understanding HIV-infected patients' experiences with PEPFAR-associated transitions at a centre of excellence in KwaZulu natal, South Africa: a qualitative study. AIDS Care 2015; 27: 1298–303. doi:10.1080/09540121.2015.1051502 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26300297

⁶⁴ Itri JN, Bakow E, Woods J. Creating an outpatient center of excellence in CT. J Am Coll Radiol 2014; 11: 1137–43. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2014.08.032 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25467726

⁶⁵ Zar HJ. Partnering with centers of excellence in high- and low-middle-income countries: a strategy to strengthen child health globally. Pediatr Radiol 2014; 44: 709–10. doi:10.1007/s00247-014-2906-3 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24854949

⁶⁶ Ferguson GM, Froehlich JA. Establishing a center of excellence: the total joint center at the MIRIAM Hospital. R I Med J 2013; 96: 16–18. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23641432

⁶⁷ Mehrotra A, Sloss EM, Hussey PS, et al. Evaluation of a center of excellence program for spine surgery. Med Care 2013; 51: 748–57. doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e31829b091d http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23774514

⁶⁸ National Institutes of Health. NIH centers of excellence: Biennial Report of the Director, National Institutes of Health, Fiscal Years 2008 & 2009. publication no. 11-7701. volume 4. USA: NIH, 2009. https://report.nih.gov/biennialreport/

⁶⁹ Sharkey K, Meeks-Sjostrom D, Baird M. Challenges in sustaining excellence over time. Nurs Adm Q 2009; 33: 142–7. doi:10.1097/NAQ.0b013e3181a10cf3 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19305310

⁷⁰ Anderson RT, Weisman CS, Scholle SH, et al. Evaluation of the quality of care in the clinical care centers of the National centers of excellence in women's health. Womens Health Issues 2002; 12: 309–26. doi:10.1016/s1049-3867(02)00154-8 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12457572

⁷¹ Pennsylvania department of human services (DHS). Centers of excellence: thinking about addiction a different way. Pennsylvania, USA: Pennsylvania DHS, 2016.

⁷² Househ M, Al-Tuwaijri M, Al-Dosari B. Establishing an electronic health center of research excellence (E-CoRE) within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Journal of Health Informatics in Developing Countries 2010; 4.

⁷³ Rocco G, Affonso D, Mayberry L, et al. Center of excellence to build nursing scholarship and improve health care in Italy. Journal of Nursing Scholarship 2015; 47: 170–7. doi:10.1111/jnu.12125

⁷⁴ Kumar S, Abowd G, Abraham WT, et al. Center of excellence for mobile sensor Data-to-Knowledge (MD2K). IEEE Pervasive Comput 2017; 16: 18–22. doi:10.1109/MPRV.2017.29 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29276451

⁷⁵ Dieye B, Affara M, Sangare L, et al. West Africa international centers of excellence for malaria research: drug resistance patterns to Artemether-Lumefantrine in Senegal, Mali, and the Gambia. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2016; 95: 1054–60. doi:10.4269/ajtmh.16-0053 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27549635

⁷⁶ Fekadu A, Hailu A, Makonnen E, et al. Short-Term impact of celebrating the International clinical trial day: experience from Ethiopia. Trials 2017; 18: 332. doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2081-6 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28716101

⁷⁷ McCarthy J. ESRF: a quest for excellence in service to users. Synchrotron Radiat News 2017; 30: 31–6. doi:10.1080/08940886.2017.1267587

⁷⁸ Bloch C, Schneider JW, Sinkjær T. Size, accumulation and performance for research grants: examining the role of size for centres of excellence. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0147726. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0147726 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26862907

⁷⁹ Borlaug SB. Moral hazard and adverse selection in research funding: centres of excellence in Norway and Sweden. Science and Public Policy 2016; 43: 352–62. doi:10.1093/scipol/scv048

⁸⁰ Pislyakov V, Shukshina E. Measuring excellence in Russia: highly cited papers, leading institutions, patterns of national and international collaboration. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 2014; 65: 2321–30. doi:10.1002/asi.23093

⁸¹ Harris TB, Salihu HM. 2019 health equity summer research Summit organized by the center of excellence in health equity, training and research, Baylor College of medicine, Houston, Texas 77030, USA on June 18th, 2019. Int J MCH AIDS 2020; 9: S1–47.

⁸² The World Bank. Eastern and southern Africa higher education centers of excellence. Washington, D.C., USA: World Bank, 2021. https://projects.worldbank.org/en/projects-operations/project-detail/P151847

⁸³ Giacomini KM, Lin L, Altman RB. Research projects supported by the University of California, San Francisco-Stanford center of excellence in regulatory science and innovation. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2019; 105: 815–8. doi:10.1002/cpt.1308 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30773618

⁸⁴ Terama E, Smallman M, Lock SJ, et al. Beyond Academia - Interrogating Research Impact in the Research Excellence Framework. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0168533. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0168533 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27997599

⁸⁵ Cofrancesco J, Barone MA, Serwint JR, et al. Development and implementation of a School-Wide Institute for excellence in education to enable educational scholarship by medical school faculty. Teach Learn Med 2018; 30: 103–11. doi:10.1080/10401334.2017.1325741 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28753084

⁸⁶ Rugen KW, Watts SA, Janson SL, et al. Veteran Affairs centers of excellence in primary care education: transforming nurse practitioner education. Nurs Outlook 2014; 62: 78–88. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2013.11.004 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24630678

⁸⁷ Bittner NP, Ericson K, McCarthy M, et al. Focus on excellence: making a difference through global initiatives. Nurs Educ Perspect 2013; 34: 25–8. doi:10.5480/1536-5026-34.1.25 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23586201

⁸⁸ Balaji R, Venkadasalam S. Developing a marine engineering centre of excellence for competency-based training. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs 2017; 16: 293–311. doi:10.1007/s13437-017-0124-1

⁸⁹ Scheuermann JS, Reddin JS, Opanowski A, et al. Qualification of national cancer Institute-Designated cancer centers for quantitative PET/CT imaging in clinical trials. J Nucl Med 2017; 58: 1065–71. doi:10.2967/jnumed.116.186759 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28254874

⁹⁰ Grant LA, Gulsvig J, Call J. Measuring excellence: the new quality agenda. Provider 2006; 32: 1–7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18214244

⁹¹ Wang M. Cas center for excellence in quantum information and quantum physics: exploring frontiers of quantum physics and quantum technology. Natl Sci Rev 2017; 4: 144–52. doi:10.1093/nsr/nwx025

⁹² Geiger J. Establishing a center of excellence. Information Management 2006; 16: 24.

⁹³ Nqampoyi V, Seymour LF, Laar DS. Effective business process management centres of excellence. InInternational Conference on Research and Practical Issues of Enterprise Information Systems, Springer, Cham, 2016: 207–22.

⁹⁴ Brusoni M, Damian R, Sauri JG, et al. The concept of excellence in higher education. Retrieved on March 2014; 18: 2016.

⁹⁵ Fetrow J, Royster E, Morin D, et al. Development and Implementation of a National Center of Excellence in Dairy Production Medicine Education for Veterinary Students: Description of the Effort and Lessons Learned. J Vet Med Educ 2020; 47: 250–62. doi:10.3138/jvme.1117-161r http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32486946

⁹⁶ NYC Health + Hospitals. Mayor de Blasio and Taskforce on racial inclusion and equity announce new COVID-19 centers of excellence. New York, USA: NYC Health + Hospitals, 2020. https://www.nychealthandhospitals.org/pressrelease/mayor-announces-three-new-covid-19-centers-of-excellence-gotham-health-sites/

⁹⁷ Addis Ababa Science and Technology University (AASTU). The Artificial Intelligence & Robotics Center of Excellence. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: AASTU, 2021. http://www.aastu.edu.et/research-and-technology-transfer-vpresident/the-artificial-intelligence-robotics-center-of-excellence/