Cargando…

134 Comparing Real-World Impacts of Cohorts using the Translational Science Benefits Model

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM), developed at Washington University in St. Louis, was used to create a survey to collect group-level data on the real-world impacts of research. It was used with two cohorts of CTSA-supported pilot studies to compare the benefits of c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Miovsky, Nicole, Woodworth, Amanda, Schneider, Margaret
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10129673/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2023.216
_version_ 1785030800883843072
author Miovsky, Nicole
Woodworth, Amanda
Schneider, Margaret
author_facet Miovsky, Nicole
Woodworth, Amanda
Schneider, Margaret
author_sort Miovsky, Nicole
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM), developed at Washington University in St. Louis, was used to create a survey to collect group-level data on the real-world impacts of research. It was used with two cohorts of CTSA-supported pilot studies to compare the benefits of campus-community partnerships to campus-only projects. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Investigators from two funding streams were surveyed: a campus-based cohort (n=31), and a campus-community partnership cohort (n=6). All studies were related to COVID-19. The Translational Benefits Survey collected quantitative and qualitative data for each of the 30 TSBM benefits, in 4 benefit categories: clinical, community, economic and policy. Text provided by investigators to support each reported benefit was evaluated by two coders through a process that required coder consensus to verify a benefit as realized. Verified benefits were aggregated for each cohort, and the percentage of projects per cohort with realized clinical, community, economic and policy benefits were calculated. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Campus-community partnerships did not realize any clinical benefits, whereas 26% of campus-based projects realized at least one clinical benefit. In contrast, campus-community partnerships were more likely to realize community health benefits (17% vs 10% of campus projects) and economic benefits (17% vs 13% of campus projects). We identified a substantial amount of self-reported benefits (64% across all categories) that were unable to be confirmed as realized using the provided text, which either described activities not relevant to the selected benefit, or lacked critical details needed to verify that the benefit was realized. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This project demonstrates that the TSBM can be utilized to collect group-level data and to compare cohorts’real-world benefits. It also illuminates the need to improve the process for verifying self-reported benefits. Sharing data on these real-world impacts has the potential to convey the strengths of translational science to the public.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10129673
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101296732023-04-26 134 Comparing Real-World Impacts of Cohorts using the Translational Science Benefits Model Miovsky, Nicole Woodworth, Amanda Schneider, Margaret J Clin Transl Sci Evaluation OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM), developed at Washington University in St. Louis, was used to create a survey to collect group-level data on the real-world impacts of research. It was used with two cohorts of CTSA-supported pilot studies to compare the benefits of campus-community partnerships to campus-only projects. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Investigators from two funding streams were surveyed: a campus-based cohort (n=31), and a campus-community partnership cohort (n=6). All studies were related to COVID-19. The Translational Benefits Survey collected quantitative and qualitative data for each of the 30 TSBM benefits, in 4 benefit categories: clinical, community, economic and policy. Text provided by investigators to support each reported benefit was evaluated by two coders through a process that required coder consensus to verify a benefit as realized. Verified benefits were aggregated for each cohort, and the percentage of projects per cohort with realized clinical, community, economic and policy benefits were calculated. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Campus-community partnerships did not realize any clinical benefits, whereas 26% of campus-based projects realized at least one clinical benefit. In contrast, campus-community partnerships were more likely to realize community health benefits (17% vs 10% of campus projects) and economic benefits (17% vs 13% of campus projects). We identified a substantial amount of self-reported benefits (64% across all categories) that were unable to be confirmed as realized using the provided text, which either described activities not relevant to the selected benefit, or lacked critical details needed to verify that the benefit was realized. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This project demonstrates that the TSBM can be utilized to collect group-level data and to compare cohorts’real-world benefits. It also illuminates the need to improve the process for verifying self-reported benefits. Sharing data on these real-world impacts has the potential to convey the strengths of translational science to the public. Cambridge University Press 2023-04-24 /pmc/articles/PMC10129673/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2023.216 Text en © The Association for Clinical and Translational Science 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
spellingShingle Evaluation
Miovsky, Nicole
Woodworth, Amanda
Schneider, Margaret
134 Comparing Real-World Impacts of Cohorts using the Translational Science Benefits Model
title 134 Comparing Real-World Impacts of Cohorts using the Translational Science Benefits Model
title_full 134 Comparing Real-World Impacts of Cohorts using the Translational Science Benefits Model
title_fullStr 134 Comparing Real-World Impacts of Cohorts using the Translational Science Benefits Model
title_full_unstemmed 134 Comparing Real-World Impacts of Cohorts using the Translational Science Benefits Model
title_short 134 Comparing Real-World Impacts of Cohorts using the Translational Science Benefits Model
title_sort 134 comparing real-world impacts of cohorts using the translational science benefits model
topic Evaluation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10129673/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2023.216
work_keys_str_mv AT miovskynicole 134comparingrealworldimpactsofcohortsusingthetranslationalsciencebenefitsmodel
AT woodworthamanda 134comparingrealworldimpactsofcohortsusingthetranslationalsciencebenefitsmodel
AT schneidermargaret 134comparingrealworldimpactsofcohortsusingthetranslationalsciencebenefitsmodel