Cargando…
402 Developing a rubric to distinguish translational science from translational research in CTSA pilot projects
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The goal of the CTSA consortium is to move scientific discoveries to clinical application. Translational science (TS) focuses on the process by which this happens, and NCATS supports pilot projects that propose TS questions. We are developing a rubric to guide program managers’abil...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cambridge University Press
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10129806/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2023.437 |
_version_ | 1785030835081052160 |
---|---|
author | Dillon, Pamela McCoy, Renee Duguid, Paul Sparks, Crystal Thaker, Swathi Xiang, Henry Boerger, Lindsie Hunt, Joe Denne, Scott McCaffree, Tim Lee, Jennifer Schneider, Margaret |
author_facet | Dillon, Pamela McCoy, Renee Duguid, Paul Sparks, Crystal Thaker, Swathi Xiang, Henry Boerger, Lindsie Hunt, Joe Denne, Scott McCaffree, Tim Lee, Jennifer Schneider, Margaret |
author_sort | Dillon, Pamela |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The goal of the CTSA consortium is to move scientific discoveries to clinical application. Translational science (TS) focuses on the process by which this happens, and NCATS supports pilot projects that propose TS questions. We are developing a rubric to guide program managers’ability to discriminate between TS and translational research (TR). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The CTSA External Review Exchange Consortium (CEREC) and CEREC II are reciprocal review collaborations between CTSA hubs that identify reviewers for each other’s pilot grant applications. CEREC and CEREC II partners developed a 31-item rubric, based on NIH’s Translational Science Principles, for discriminating pilot TS grant applications from those proposing TR. The hubs contributed proposals pre-selected as either TS or TR projects. Then, experienced reviewers and/or program administrators from the hubs used the rubric to score each of the proposals. Reliability of the rubric will be assessed using inter-rater reliability (% agreement and kappa). To identify which of the items in the rubric best discriminate between TS and TR, Item Response Theory analysis will be employed. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Ten CEREC participating hubs submitted 30 applications: 20 TS proposals and 10 TR proposals. Twenty-two reviewers from 12 CEREC hubs evaluated the applications by using the scoring rubric; at least two reviewers evaluated each proposal. The results of the analyses will describe the reliability of the rubric and identify which of the seven TS Principles are most useful for distinguishing between TS and TR pilot grant proposals. Ultimately, this work will yield a scoring rubric that will be disseminated throughout the CTSA network to facilitate the screening of TS applications. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Optimizing research processes is critical to ensure that scientific discoveries are integrated into clinical practice and public health policy as rapidly, efficiently, and equitably as possible. By appropriately identifying and funding TS projects, CTSA hubs can accelerate the impact of clinical and translational research. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10129806 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Cambridge University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101298062023-04-26 402 Developing a rubric to distinguish translational science from translational research in CTSA pilot projects Dillon, Pamela McCoy, Renee Duguid, Paul Sparks, Crystal Thaker, Swathi Xiang, Henry Boerger, Lindsie Hunt, Joe Denne, Scott McCaffree, Tim Lee, Jennifer Schneider, Margaret J Clin Transl Sci Research Management, Operations, and Administration OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The goal of the CTSA consortium is to move scientific discoveries to clinical application. Translational science (TS) focuses on the process by which this happens, and NCATS supports pilot projects that propose TS questions. We are developing a rubric to guide program managers’ability to discriminate between TS and translational research (TR). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The CTSA External Review Exchange Consortium (CEREC) and CEREC II are reciprocal review collaborations between CTSA hubs that identify reviewers for each other’s pilot grant applications. CEREC and CEREC II partners developed a 31-item rubric, based on NIH’s Translational Science Principles, for discriminating pilot TS grant applications from those proposing TR. The hubs contributed proposals pre-selected as either TS or TR projects. Then, experienced reviewers and/or program administrators from the hubs used the rubric to score each of the proposals. Reliability of the rubric will be assessed using inter-rater reliability (% agreement and kappa). To identify which of the items in the rubric best discriminate between TS and TR, Item Response Theory analysis will be employed. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Ten CEREC participating hubs submitted 30 applications: 20 TS proposals and 10 TR proposals. Twenty-two reviewers from 12 CEREC hubs evaluated the applications by using the scoring rubric; at least two reviewers evaluated each proposal. The results of the analyses will describe the reliability of the rubric and identify which of the seven TS Principles are most useful for distinguishing between TS and TR pilot grant proposals. Ultimately, this work will yield a scoring rubric that will be disseminated throughout the CTSA network to facilitate the screening of TS applications. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Optimizing research processes is critical to ensure that scientific discoveries are integrated into clinical practice and public health policy as rapidly, efficiently, and equitably as possible. By appropriately identifying and funding TS projects, CTSA hubs can accelerate the impact of clinical and translational research. Cambridge University Press 2023-04-24 /pmc/articles/PMC10129806/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2023.437 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 | Research Management, Operations, and Administration Dillon, Pamela McCoy, Renee Duguid, Paul Sparks, Crystal Thaker, Swathi Xiang, Henry Boerger, Lindsie Hunt, Joe Denne, Scott McCaffree, Tim Lee, Jennifer Schneider, Margaret 402 Developing a rubric to distinguish translational science from translational research in CTSA pilot projects |
title | 402 Developing a rubric to distinguish translational science from translational research in CTSA pilot projects |
title_full | 402 Developing a rubric to distinguish translational science from translational research in CTSA pilot projects |
title_fullStr | 402 Developing a rubric to distinguish translational science from translational research in CTSA pilot projects |
title_full_unstemmed | 402 Developing a rubric to distinguish translational science from translational research in CTSA pilot projects |
title_short | 402 Developing a rubric to distinguish translational science from translational research in CTSA pilot projects |
title_sort | 402 developing a rubric to distinguish translational science from translational research in ctsa pilot projects |
topic | Research Management, Operations, and Administration |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10129806/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2023.437 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dillonpamela 402developingarubrictodistinguishtranslationalsciencefromtranslationalresearchinctsapilotprojects AT mccoyrenee 402developingarubrictodistinguishtranslationalsciencefromtranslationalresearchinctsapilotprojects AT duguidpaul 402developingarubrictodistinguishtranslationalsciencefromtranslationalresearchinctsapilotprojects AT sparkscrystal 402developingarubrictodistinguishtranslationalsciencefromtranslationalresearchinctsapilotprojects AT thakerswathi 402developingarubrictodistinguishtranslationalsciencefromtranslationalresearchinctsapilotprojects AT xianghenry 402developingarubrictodistinguishtranslationalsciencefromtranslationalresearchinctsapilotprojects AT boergerlindsie 402developingarubrictodistinguishtranslationalsciencefromtranslationalresearchinctsapilotprojects AT huntjoe 402developingarubrictodistinguishtranslationalsciencefromtranslationalresearchinctsapilotprojects AT dennescott 402developingarubrictodistinguishtranslationalsciencefromtranslationalresearchinctsapilotprojects AT mccaffreetim 402developingarubrictodistinguishtranslationalsciencefromtranslationalresearchinctsapilotprojects AT leejennifer 402developingarubrictodistinguishtranslationalsciencefromtranslationalresearchinctsapilotprojects AT schneidermargaret 402developingarubrictodistinguishtranslationalsciencefromtranslationalresearchinctsapilotprojects |