Cargando…

14179 Retrospective Case Studies using the TSBM to Evaluate Translation Research Progress

ABSTRACT IMPACT: This effort will ultimately improve both human and community health and translational science by showing the impact of CTR services on different types of projects that meet overall CTR missions and aims. OBJECTIVES/GOALS: CTRs seek to advance translational research to generate clini...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Philibert, Ingrid, Rohde, Jolene, Johnson, LaKaija
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8827724/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2021.578
_version_ 1784647696330522624
author Philibert, Ingrid
Rohde, Jolene
Johnson, LaKaija
author_facet Philibert, Ingrid
Rohde, Jolene
Johnson, LaKaija
author_sort Philibert, Ingrid
collection PubMed
description ABSTRACT IMPACT: This effort will ultimately improve both human and community health and translational science by showing the impact of CTR services on different types of projects that meet overall CTR missions and aims. OBJECTIVES/GOALS: CTRs seek to advance translational research to generate clinical, healthcare delivery, policy and community benefits. We conducted retrospective case studies for selected funded Pilot Projects for the Great Plains IDeA-CTR, focusing on facilitators and barriers to research translation and contrasting community-engaged and other proposals. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We analyzed 8 CTR-funded projects (4 community-engaged (CE) projects and 4 other pilot awards) focusing on outcome domains of the Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM): Clinical, Economic, Policy and Community Benefits as endpoints of successful research translation. We adapted an existing TSBM case study template for use with data required by NIH/NGIMS to map progress toward one or more TSBM outcomes. Using email, we posed three brief open-ended questions to investigators: 1) challenges/ barriers for the project; 2) how the CTR helped move research along and (how it could have moved it further); and 3) how research is progressing and how it could progress further. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: All investigators reported the CTR advanced their project. Non-CE projects appeared to have a more straightforward trajectory, with 2 investigators reporting no challenges and 2 reporting solely institution-internal ones. In contrast, the 4 CE projects reported both benefit from the engagement of the CTR (most prominently the efforts of the community advisory board (CAB) and community liaisons). Yet, they also reported some challenges beyond the CTR’s ability to address, including delays in securing community buy-in and community buy-in of the investigator’s research approach. Some barriers appeared beyond the CTR’s current immediate ability to provide support to advance the project. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDINGS: Findings contribute to efficient approaches for retrospective case studies and emerging information on challenges and opportunities for CE projects. The study will help identify: 1) intermediate milestones and timelines for different projects; 2) advance data for TBSM endpoints; and 3) CTR activities that leverage the translational process.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8827724
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88277242022-02-28 14179 Retrospective Case Studies using the TSBM to Evaluate Translation Research Progress Philibert, Ingrid Rohde, Jolene Johnson, LaKaija J Clin Transl Sci Evaluation ABSTRACT IMPACT: This effort will ultimately improve both human and community health and translational science by showing the impact of CTR services on different types of projects that meet overall CTR missions and aims. OBJECTIVES/GOALS: CTRs seek to advance translational research to generate clinical, healthcare delivery, policy and community benefits. We conducted retrospective case studies for selected funded Pilot Projects for the Great Plains IDeA-CTR, focusing on facilitators and barriers to research translation and contrasting community-engaged and other proposals. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We analyzed 8 CTR-funded projects (4 community-engaged (CE) projects and 4 other pilot awards) focusing on outcome domains of the Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM): Clinical, Economic, Policy and Community Benefits as endpoints of successful research translation. We adapted an existing TSBM case study template for use with data required by NIH/NGIMS to map progress toward one or more TSBM outcomes. Using email, we posed three brief open-ended questions to investigators: 1) challenges/ barriers for the project; 2) how the CTR helped move research along and (how it could have moved it further); and 3) how research is progressing and how it could progress further. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: All investigators reported the CTR advanced their project. Non-CE projects appeared to have a more straightforward trajectory, with 2 investigators reporting no challenges and 2 reporting solely institution-internal ones. In contrast, the 4 CE projects reported both benefit from the engagement of the CTR (most prominently the efforts of the community advisory board (CAB) and community liaisons). Yet, they also reported some challenges beyond the CTR’s ability to address, including delays in securing community buy-in and community buy-in of the investigator’s research approach. Some barriers appeared beyond the CTR’s current immediate ability to provide support to advance the project. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDINGS: Findings contribute to efficient approaches for retrospective case studies and emerging information on challenges and opportunities for CE projects. The study will help identify: 1) intermediate milestones and timelines for different projects; 2) advance data for TBSM endpoints; and 3) CTR activities that leverage the translational process. Cambridge University Press 2021-03-30 /pmc/articles/PMC8827724/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2021.578 Text en © The Association for Clinical and Translational Science 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Evaluation
Philibert, Ingrid
Rohde, Jolene
Johnson, LaKaija
14179 Retrospective Case Studies using the TSBM to Evaluate Translation Research Progress
title 14179 Retrospective Case Studies using the TSBM to Evaluate Translation Research Progress
title_full 14179 Retrospective Case Studies using the TSBM to Evaluate Translation Research Progress
title_fullStr 14179 Retrospective Case Studies using the TSBM to Evaluate Translation Research Progress
title_full_unstemmed 14179 Retrospective Case Studies using the TSBM to Evaluate Translation Research Progress
title_short 14179 Retrospective Case Studies using the TSBM to Evaluate Translation Research Progress
title_sort 14179 retrospective case studies using the tsbm to evaluate translation research progress
topic Evaluation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8827724/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2021.578
work_keys_str_mv AT philibertingrid 14179retrospectivecasestudiesusingthetsbmtoevaluatetranslationresearchprogress
AT rohdejolene 14179retrospectivecasestudiesusingthetsbmtoevaluatetranslationresearchprogress
AT johnsonlakaija 14179retrospectivecasestudiesusingthetsbmtoevaluatetranslationresearchprogress