Reengineering the national clinical and translational research enterprise: the strategic plan of the National Clinical and Translational Science Awards Consortium

Updating and evaluating a research best practices training course for social and behavioral research professionals

Introduction

The clinical and translational research workforce involved in social and behavioral research (SBR) needs to keep pace with clinical research guidance and regulations. Updated information and a new module on community and stakeholder engagement were added to an existing SBR training course. This article presents evaluation findings of the updated course for the Social and Behavioral Workforce.

Methods and Materials

Participants working across one university were recruited. Course completers were sent an online survey to evaluate the training. Some participants were invited to join in a focus group to discuss the application of the training to their work. We performed descriptive statistics and conducted a qualitative analysis on focus group data.

Results

There were 99 participants from diverse backgrounds who completed the survey. Most reported the training was relevant to their work or that of the study teams they worked with. Almost half (46%) indicated they would work differently after participating. Respondents with community or stakeholder engaged research experience vs. those without were more likely to report that the new module was relevant to study teams they worked with (t = 5.61, p = 0.001), and that they would work differently following the training (t = 2.63, p = 0.01). Open-ended survey responses (n = 99) and focus group (n = 12) data showed how participants felt their work would be affected by the training.

Conclusion

The updated course was rated highly, particularly by those whose work was related to the new course content. This course provides an up-to-date resource for the training and development for the Social and Behavioral Workforce.

The Evolve to Next-Gen ACT Network: An evolving open-access, real-world data resource primed for real-world evidence research across the Clinical and Translational Science Award Consortium

The ACT Network was funded by NIH to provide investigators from across the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Consortium the ability to directly query national federated electronic health record (EHR) data for cohort discovery and feasibility assessment of multi-site studies. NIH refunded the program for expanded research application to become "Evolve to Next-Gen ACT" (ENACT). In parallel, the US Food and Drug Administration has been evaluating the use of real-world data (RWD), including EHR data, as sources of real-world evidence (RWE) for its regulatory decisions involving drug and biological products. Using insights from implementation science, six lessons learned from ACT for developing and sustaining RWD/RWE infrastructures and networks across the CTSA Consortium are presented in order to inform ENACT's development from the outset. Lessons include intentional institutional relationship management, end-user engagement, beta-testing, and customer-driven adaptation. The ENACT team is also conducting customer discovery interviews with CTSA hub and investigators using Innovation-Corps@NCATS (I-Corps™) methodology for biomedical entrepreneurs to uncover unmet RWD needs. Possible ENACT value proposition hypotheses are presented by stage of research. Developing evidence about methods for sustaining academically derived data infrastructures and support can advance the science of translation and support our nation's RWD/RWE research capacity.

The Anesthesiologist as Translational Scientist

Translational science seeks to accelerate the multi-step process by which scientific discoveries are transformed into therapies that can improve the health of individuals and their communities. To facilitate crossing the traditional boundaries between basic and clinical research for instance, a systematic understanding of the scientific and operational principles that underlie each step of the translational cycle is developed to identify and address barriers to translation. Skills required by translational scientists, such as being systems thinkers and process innovators, overlap with those of anesthesiologists, and therefore, it is no surprise that anesthesiologists have contributed to this field. Indeed, the safety and efficacy of anesthesia care has greatly evolved over many decades because anesthesiologists have recognized the importance of readily incorporating physiological and pharmacological basic research findings into clinical practice. This article highlights the characteristics that make anesthesiologists well suited to be translational scientists. We also discuss one example of anesthesiology contributing to the field of translational science during the COVID-19 pandemic. We show that anesthesiologists, regardless of their specific clinical or research interests, have the skill set to become effective and critical players in the field of translational science and emphasize the importance of continued leadership in this field to academic anesthesiology.

EHR-based cohort assessment for multicenter RCTs: a fast and flexible model for identifying potential study sites

Objective

The Recruitment Innovation Center (RIC), partnering with the Trial Innovation Network and institutions in the National Institutes of Health-sponsored Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Program, aimed to develop a service line to retrieve study population estimates from electronic health record (EHR) systems for use in selecting enrollment sites for multicenter clinical trials. Our goal was to create and field-test a low burden, low tech, and high-yield method.

Materials and Methods

In building this service line, the RIC strove to complement, rather than replace, CTSA hubs’ existing cohort assessment tools. For each new EHR cohort request, we work with the investigator to develop a computable phenotype algorithm that targets the desired population. CTSA hubs run the phenotype query and return results using a standardized survey. We provide a comprehensive report to the investigator to assist in study site selection.

Results

From 2017 to 2020, the RIC developed and socialized 36 phenotype-dependent cohort requests on behalf of investigators. The average response rate to these requests was 73%.

Discussion

Achieving enrollment goals in a multicenter clinical trial requires that researchers identify study sites that will provide sufficient enrollment. The fast and flexible method the RIC has developed, with CTSA feedback, allows hubs to query their EHR using a generalizable, vetted phenotype algorithm to produce reliable counts of potentially eligible study participants.

Conclusion

The RIC’s EHR cohort assessment process for evaluating sites for multicenter trials has been shown to be efficient and helpful. The model may be replicated for use by other programs.

Building an institutional K awardee program at UC Davis through utilization of CTSA resources

NIH offers multiple mentored career development award mechanisms. By building on the UC Davis Clinical and Translational Science Center (CTSC) from its initial NIH funding in 2006, we created an institution-wide K scholar resource. We investigated subsequent NIH funding for K scholars and to what extent CTSC research resources were used. Using NIH RePORTER, we created a database of UC Davis investigators who obtained K01, K08, K23, K25, or K99, as well as institutional KL2 or K12 awards and tracked CTSC research resource use and subsequent funding success. Overall, 94 scholars completed K training between 2007 and 2020, of which 70 participated in one of four institutional, NIH-funded K programs. An additional 103 scholars completed a mentored clinical research training program. Of 94 K awardees, 61 (65%) later achieved NIH funding, with the majority receiving a subsequent individual K award. A higher proportion (73%) of funded scholars used CTSC resources compared to unfunded (48%). Biostatistics and Biomedical Informatics were most commonly used and 55% of scholars used one or more CTSC resource. We conclude that institutional commitment to create a K scholar platform and use of CTSC research resources is associated with high NIH funding rates for early career investigators.

Translational NLP: A New Paradigm and General Principles for Natural Language Processing Research

Natural language processing (NLP) research combines the study of universal principles, through basic science, with applied science targeting specific use cases and settings. However, the process of exchange between basic NLP and applications is often assumed to emerge naturally, resulting in many innovations going unapplied and many important questions left unstudied. We describe a new paradigm of Translational NLP, which aims to structure and facilitate the processes by which basic and applied NLP research inform one another. Translational NLP thus presents a third research paradigm, focused on understanding the challenges posed by application needs and how these challenges can drive innovation in basic science and technology design. We show that many significant advances in NLP research have emerged from the intersection of basic principles with application needs, and present a conceptual framework outlining the stakeholders and key questions in translational research. Our framework provides a roadmap for developing Translational NLP as a dedicated research area, and identifies general translational principles to facilitate exchange between basic and applied research.

Translational research in Uganda: linking basic science to bedside medicine in a resource limited setting

BACKGROUND

Translational research is a process of applying knowledge from basic biology and clinical trials to techniques and tools that address critical medical needs. Translational research is less explored in the Ugandan health system, yet, it is fundamental in enhancing human health and well-being. With the current high disease burden in Uganda, there are many opportunities for exploring, developing and utilising translational research.

MAIN BODY

In this article, we described the current state, barriers and opportunities for translational research in Uganda. We noted that translational research is underutilised and hindered by limited funding, collaborations, laboratory infrastructure, trained personnel, equipment and research diversity. However, with active collaborations and funding, it is possible to set up and develop thriving translational research in Uganda. Researchers need to leverage existing international collaborations to enhance translational research capacity development.

CONCLUSION

Expanding the integration of clinical and translational research in Uganda health care system will improve clinical care.

Improving the quality and quantity of clinical and translational research statewide: An application of group concept mapping

Introduction:

Advance Clinical and Translational Research (Advance-CTR) serves as a central hub to support and educate clinical and translational researchers in Rhode Island. Understanding barriers to clinical research in the state is the key to setting project aims and priorities.

Methods:

We implemented a Group Concept Mapping exercise to characterize the views of researchers and administrators regarding how to increase the quality and quantity of clinical and translational research in their settings. Participants generated ideas in response to this prompt and rated each unique idea in terms of how important it was and feasible it seemed to them.

Results:

Participants generated 78 unique ideas, from which 9 key themes emerged (e.g., Building connections between researchers). Items rated highest in perceived importance and feasibility included providing seed grants for pilot projects, connecting researchers with common interests and networking opportunities. Implications of results are discussed.

Conclusions:

The Group Concept Mapping exercise enabled our project leadership to better understand stakeholder-perceived priorities and to act on ideas and aims most relevant to researchers in the state. This method is well suited to translational research enterprises beyond Rhode Island when a participatory evaluation stance is desired.

Scope, Influence, and Interdisciplinary Collaboration: The Publication Portfolio of the NIH Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Program From 2006 Through 2017

The Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) program sponsors an array of innovative, collaborative research. This study uses complementary bibliometric approaches to assess the scope, influence, and interdisciplinary collaboration of publications supported by single CTSA hubs and those supported by multiple hubs. Authors identified articles acknowledging CTSA support and assessed the disciplinary scope of research areas represented in that publication portfolio, their citation influence, interdisciplinary overlap among research categories, and characteristics of publications supported by multihub collaborations. Since 2006, CTSA hubs supported 69,436 articles published in 4,927 journals and 189 research areas. The portfolio is well distributed across diverse research areas with above-average citation influence. Most supported publications involved clinical/health sciences, for example, neurology and pediatrics; life sciences, for example, neuroscience and immunology; or a combination of the two. Publications supported by multihub collaborations had distinct content emphasis, stronger citation influence, and greater interdisciplinary overlap. This study characterizes the CTSA consortium's contributions to clinical and translational science, identifies content areas of strength, and provides evidence for the success of multihub collaborations. These methods lay the foundation for future investigation of the best policies and priorities for fostering translational science and allow hubs to understand their progress benchmarked against the larger consortium.

Academia Europaea Position Paper on Translational Medicine: The Cycle Model for Translating Scientific Results into Community Benefits

Introduction: Translational science has gained prominence in medicine, but there is still much work to be done before scientific results are used optimally and incorporated into everyday health practice. As the main focus is still on generating new scientific data with financial resources primarily available for that purpose, other activities that are necessary in the transition from research to community benefit are considered less needy. The European Statistical Office of the European Commission has recently reported that 1.7 million people under 75 years of age died in Europe in 2016, with around 1.2 million of those deaths being avoidable through effective primary prevention and public health intervention. Therefore, Academia Europaea, one of the five Pan-European networks that form SAPEA (Science Advice for Policy by European Academies), a key element of the European Commission’s Scientific Advice Mechanism (SAM), has launched a project to develop a model to facilitate and accelerate the utilisation of scientific knowledge for public and community benefit. Methods: During the process, leaders in the field, including prominent basic and clinical researchers, editors-in-chief of high-impact journals publishing translational research articles, translational medicine (TM) centre leaders, media representatives, academics and university leaders, developed the TM cycle, a new model that we believe could significantly advance the development of TM. Results: This model focuses equally on the acquisition of new scientific results healthcare, understandable and digestible summation of results, and their communication to all participants. We have also renewed the definition in TM, identified challenges and recommended solutions. Conclusion: The authors, including senior officers of Academia Europaea, produced this document to serve as a basis for revising thinking on TM with the end result of enabling more efficient and cost-effective healthcare.

Designs and methods for implementation research: Advancing the mission of the CTSA program

INTRODUCTION

The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) established the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program in response to the challenges of translating biomedical and behavioral interventions from discovery to real-world use. To address the challenge of translating evidence-based interventions (EBIs) into practice, the field of implementation science has emerged as a distinct discipline. With the distinction between EBI effectiveness research and implementation research comes differences in study design and methodology, shifting focus from clinical outcomes to the systems that support adoption and delivery of EBIs with fidelity.

METHODS

Implementation research designs share many of the foundational elements and assumptions of efficacy/effectiveness research. Designs and methods that are currently applied in implementation research include experimental, quasi-experimental, observational, hybrid effectiveness-implementation, simulation modeling, and configurational comparative methods.

RESULTS

Examples of specific research designs and methods illustrate their use in implementation science. We propose that the CTSA program takes advantage of the momentum of the field's capacity building in three ways: 1) integrate state-of-the-science implementation methods and designs into its existing body of research; 2) position itself at the forefront of advancing the science of implementation science by collaborating with other NIH institutes that share the goal of advancing implementation science; and 3) provide adequate training in implementation science.

CONCLUSIONS

As implementation methodologies mature, both implementation science and the CTSA program would greatly benefit from cross-fertilizing expertise and shared infrastructures that aim to advance healthcare in the USA and around the world.

The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners

The Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) data management platform was developed in 2004 to address an institutional need at Vanderbilt University, then shared with a limited number of adopting sites beginning in 2006. Given bi-directional benefit in early sharing experiments, we created a broader consortium sharing and support model for any academic, non-profit, or government partner wishing to adopt the software. Our sharing framework and consortium-based support model have evolved over time along with the size of the consortium (currently more than 3200 REDCap partners across 128 countries). While the "REDCap Consortium" model represents only one example of how to build and disseminate a software platform, lessons learned from our approach may assist other research institutions seeking to build and disseminate innovative technologies.

The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners

The Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) data management platform was developed in 2004 to address an institutional need at Vanderbilt University, then shared with a limited number of adopting sites beginning in 2006. Given bi-directional benefit in early sharing experiments, we created a broader consortium sharing and support model for any academic, non-profit, or government partner wishing to adopt the software. Our sharing framework and consortium-based support model have evolved over time along with the size of the consortium (currently more than 3200 REDCap partners across 128 countries). While the "REDCap Consortium" model represents only one example of how to build and disseminate a software platform, lessons learned from our approach may assist other research institutions seeking to build and disseminate innovative technologies.

Synthetic Biology and the Translational Imperative

Advances at the interface between the biological sciences and engineering are giving rise to emerging research fields such as synthetic biology. Harnessing the potential of synthetic biology requires timely and adequate translation into clinical practice. However, the translational research enterprise is currently facing fundamental obstacles that slow down the transition of scientific discoveries from the laboratory to the patient bedside. These obstacles including scarce financial resources and deficiency of organizational and logistic settings are widely discussed as primary impediments to translational research. In addition, a number of socio-ethical considerations inherent in translational research need to be addressed. As the translational capacity of synthetic biology is tightly linked to its social acceptance and ethical approval, ethical limitations may-together with financial and organizational problems-be co-determinants of suboptimal translation. Therefore, an early assessment of such limitations will contribute to proactively favor successful translation and prevent the promising potential of synthetic biology from remaining under-expressed. Through the discussion of two case-specific inventions in synthetic biology and their associated ethical implications, we illustrate the socio-ethical challenges ahead in the process of implementing synthetic biology into clinical practice. Since reducing the translational lag is essential for delivering the benefits of basic biomedical research to society at large and promoting global health, we advocate a moral obligation to accelerating translational research: the "translational imperative."

A collaborative, academic approach to optimizing the national clinical research infrastructure: The first year of the Trial Innovation Network

Inefficiencies in the national clinical research infrastructure have been apparent for decades. The National Center for Advancing Translational Science—sponsored Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program is able to address such inefficiencies. The Trial Innovation Network (TIN) is a collaborative initiative with the CTSA program and other National Institutes of Health (NIH) Institutes and Centers that addresses critical roadblocks to accelerate the translation of novel interventions to clinical practice. The TIN’s mission is to execute high-quality trials in a quick, cost-efficient manner. The TIN awardees are composed of 3 Trial Innovation Centers, the Recruitment Innovation Center, and the individual CTSA institutions that have identified TIN Liaison units. The TIN has launched a national scale single (central) Institutional Review Board system, master contracting agreements, quality-by-design approaches, novel recruitment support methods, and applies evidence-based strategies to recruitment and patient engagement. The TIN has received 113 submissions from 39 different CTSA institutions and 8 non-CTSA Institutions, with projects associated with 12 different NIH Institutes and Centers across a wide range of clinical/disease areas. Already more than 150 unique health systems/organizations are involved as sites in TIN-related multisite studies. The TIN will begin to capture data and metrics that quantify increased efficiency and quality improvement during operations.

Accrual to Clinical Trials (ACT): A Clinical and Translational Science Award Consortium Network

The Accrual to Clinical Trials (ACT) network is a federated network of sites from the National Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Consortium that has been created to significantly increase participant accrual to multi-site clinical trials. The ACT network represents an unprecedented collaboration among diverse CTSA sites. The network has created governance and regulatory frameworks and a common data model to harmonize electronic health record (EHR) data, and deployed a set of Informatics for Integrating Biology and the Bedside (i2b2) data repositories that are linked by the Shared Health Research Information Network (SHRINE) platform. It provides investigators the ability to query the network in real time and to obtain aggregate counts of patients who meet clinical trial inclusion and exclusion criteria from sites across the United States. The ACT network infrastructure provides a basis for cohort discovery and for developing new informatics tools to identify and recruit participants for multi-site clinical trials.

Building Diverse Careers in Clinical and Translational Research: Evaluation of a Certificate Program in Translational Research

Introduction

The Certificate Program in Translational Research (CPTR) at the Georgia Clinical and Translational Science Alliance provides Ph.D. students, postdoctoral fellows and faculty with didactic, mentored, and experiential training in clinical and translational research.

Methods

Quantitative evaluation includes tracking trainee competency, publications, grants and careers in clinical and translational research. Qualitative evaluation includes interviews with trainees about program experiences.

Results

The CPTR provided knowledge and skills in clinical and translational research through coursework, clinical rotations, and collaboration with interdisciplinary scientists. Trainees reported increased confidence in 22 program competencies. Trainees have published more than 290 peer-reviewed articles and received over $4 million in grants from the NIH, over $15 million from the U.S. Department of Defense, and more than $300,000 from foundations. Trainees who completed the program remained in clinical and translational research.

Conclusions

Programs like the CPTR are needed to train investigators to advance biomedical discoveries into population health.

Using publication data to evaluate a Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) career development program: Early outcomes from KL2 scholars

Introduction

This study uses KL2 scholars' publications to evaluate the types of research the KL2 program supports and to assess the initial productivity and impact of its scholars.

Methods

We illustrate the feasibility of 3 different approaches to bibliometrics, one viable method for determining the types of research a program or hub supports, and demonstrate how these data can be further combined with internal data records.

Results

Gender differences were observed in the types of research scholars undertake. Overall KL2 scholars are performing well, with their publications being cited more than the norm for National Institutes of Health publications. Favorable results were also observed in scholars' continued engagement in research.

Conclusion

This study illustrates that linking bibliometric data and data categorizing publications along the translational spectrum with a Clinical and Translational Science Award hub's internal data records is feasible and offers a number of innovative possibilities for the evaluation of a Clinical and Translational Science Award hub's programs and investigators.

Towards a bioethics of innovation

In recent years, it has become almost axiomatic that biomedical research and clinical practice should be 'innovative'-that is, that they should be always evolving and directed towards the production, translation and implementation of new technologies and practices. While this drive towards innovation in biomedicine might be beneficial, it also raises serious moral, legal, economic and sociopolitical questions that require further scrutiny. In this article, we argue that biomedical innovation needs to be accompanied by a dedicated 'bioethics of innovation' that attends systematically to the goals, process and outcomes of biomedical innovation as objects of critical inquiry. Using the example of personalised or precision medicine, we then suggest a preliminary framework for a bioethics of innovation, based on the research policy initiative of 'Responsible Innovation'. We invite and encourage critiques of this framework and hope that this will provoke a challenging and enriching new bioethical discourse.

StudySearch: a web-based application for posting and searching clinical research studies

Participant accrual into research studies is critical to advancing clinical and translational research to clinical care. Without sufficient recruitment, the purpose of any research study cannot be realized; yet, low recruitment and enrollment of participants persist. StudySearch is a web-based application designed to provide an easily readable, publicly accessible, and searchable listing of IRB-approved protocols that are accruing study participants. The Regulatory, Recruitment and Biomedical Informatics Cores of the Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCTS) at The Ohio State University developed this research study posting platform. Postings include basic descriptive information: study title, purpose of the study, eligibility criteria and study personnel contact information. Language concerning benefits and/or inducements is not included; therefore, while IRB approval for a study to be listed on StudySearch is required, IRB approval of the posted language is not. Studies are listed by one of two methods; one automated and one manual: (1). Studies registered on ClinicalTrials.gov are automatically downloaded once a month; or (2). Studies are submitted directly by researchers to the CCTS Regulatory Core staff. In either case, final language is a result of an iterative process between researchers and CCTS staff. Deployed in January 2011 at OSU, this application has grown to approximately 200 studies currently posted and 1500 unique visitors per month. Locally, StudySearch is part of the CCTS recruitment toolkit. Features continue to be modified to better accommodate user behaviors. Nationally, this open source application is available for use.

[Translation of knowledge on cervical cancer: is there a gap between research on causes and research on patient care?]

This article constructs a map on the translation of knowledge concerning cervical cancer, based on citation networks analysis and the use of Gene Ontology terms and Medical Subject Headings. We identified two areas of research that are poorly interconnected and differ in structure, content, and evolution. One focuses on causes of cancer and the other on patient care. The first research area showed a knowledge translation process where basic research and clinical research are communicated through a set of articles that consolidate human papillomavirus infection as the necessary cause of cervical cancer. The first area aims to prevent HPV infection and the development of cervical cancer, while the second aims to stage and treat the disease.

Research Networking Systems: The State of Adoption at Institutions Aiming to Augment Translational Research Infrastructure

Fostering collaborations across multiple disciplines within and across institutional boundaries is becoming increasingly important with the growing emphasis on translational research. As a result, Research Networking Systems that facilitate discovery of potential collaborators have received significant attention by institutions aiming to augment their research infrastructure. We have conducted a survey to assess the state of adoption of these new tools at the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) funded institutions. Survey results demonstrate that most CTSA funded institutions have either already adopted or were planning to adopt one of several available research networking systems. Moreover a good number of these institutions have exposed or plan to expose the data on research expertise using linked open data, an established approach to semantic web services. Preliminary exploration of these publically-available data shows promising utility in assessing cross-institutional collaborations. Further adoption of these technologies and analysis of the data are needed, however, before their impact on cross-institutional collaboration in research can be appreciated and measured.

A pharma perspective on the systems medicine and pharmacology of inflammation

Biological systems are complex and comprehend multiple scales of organisation. Hence, holistic approaches are necessary to capture the behaviour of these entities from the molecular and cellular to the whole organism level. This also applies to the understanding and treatment of different diseases. Traditional systems biology has been successful in describing different biological phenomena at the cellular level, but it still lacks of a holistic description of the multi-scale interactions within the body. The importance of the physiological context is of particular interest in inflammation. Regulatory agencies have urged the scientific community to increase the translational power of bio-medical research and it has been recognised that modelling and simulation could be a path to follow. Interestingly, in pharma R&D, modelling and simulation has been employed since a long time ago. Systems pharmacology, and particularly physiologically based pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic models, serve as a suitable framework to integrate the available and emerging knowledge at different levels of the drug development process. Systems medicine and pharmacology of inflammation will potentially benefit from this framework in order to better understand inflammatory diseases and to help to transfer the vast knowledge on the molecular and cellular level into a more physiological context. Ultimately, this may lead to reliable predictions of clinical outcomes such as disease progression or treatment efficacy, contributing thereby to a better care of patients.

Assessing the challenges of multi-scope clinical research sites: an example from NIH HIV/AIDS clinical trials networks

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES

Large-scale, multi-network clinical trials are seen as a means for efficient and effective utilization of resources with greater responsiveness to new discoveries. Formal structures instituted within the National Institutes of Health (NIH) HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials facilitate collaboration and coordination across networks and emphasize an integrated approach to HIV/AIDS vaccine, prevention and therapeutics clinical trials. This study examines the joint usage of clinical research sites as means of gaining efficiency, extending capacity, and adding scientific value to the networks.

METHODS

A semi-structured questionnaire covering eight clinical management domains was administered to 74 (62% of sites) clinical site coordinators at single- and multi-network sites to identify challenges and efficiencies related to clinical trials management activities and coordination with multi-network units.

RESULTS

Overall, respondents at multi-network sites did not report more challenges than single-network sites, but did report unique challenges to overcome including in the areas of study prioritization, community engagement, staff education and training, and policies and procedures. The majority of multi-network sites reported that such affiliations do allow for the consolidation and cost-sharing of research functions. Suggestions for increasing the efficiency or performance of multi-network sites included streamlining standards and requirements, consolidating protocol activation methods, using a single cross-network coordinating centre, and creating common budget and payment mechanisms.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this assessment provide important information to consider in the design and management of multi-network configurations for the NIH HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials Networks, as well as others contemplating and promoting the concept of multi-network settings.

Doctoral programs to train future leaders in clinical and translational science

PURPOSE

Although the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has made extensive investments in educational programs related to clinical and translational science (CTS), there has been no systematic investigation of the number and characteristics of PhD programs providing training to future leaders in CTS. The authors undertook to determine the number of institutions that, having had received NIH-funded Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs), currently had or were developing PhD programs in CTS; to examine differences between programs developed before and after CTSA funding; and to provide detailed characteristics of new programs.

METHOD

In 2012, CTS program leaders at the 60 CTSA-funded institutions completed a cross-sectional survey focusing on four key domains related to PhD programs in CTS: program development and oversight; students; curriculum and research; and milestones.

RESULTS

Twenty-two institutions had fully developed PhD programs in CTS, and 268 students were earning PhDs in this new field; 13 institutions were planning PhD programs. New programs were more likely to have fully developed PhD competencies and more likely to include students in medical school, students working only on their PhD, students working on a first doctoral degree, and students working in T1 translational research. They were less likely to include physicians and students working in clinical or T2 research.

CONCLUSIONS

Although CTS PhD programs have similarities, they also vary in their characteristics and management of students. This may be due to diversity in translational science itself or to the relative infancy of CTS as a discipline.

Translational educational research: a necessity for effective health-care improvement

Medical education research contributes to translational science (TS) when its outcomes not only impact educational settings, but also downstream results, including better patient-care practices and improved patient outcomes. Simulation-based medical education (SBME) has demonstrated its role in achieving such distal results. Effective TS also encompasses implementation science, the science of health-care delivery. Educational, clinical, quality, and safety goals can only be achieved by thematic, sustained, and cumulative research programs, not isolated studies. Components of an SBME TS research program include motivated learners, curriculum grounded in evidence-based learning theory, educational resources, evaluation of downstream results, a productive research team, rigorous research methods, research resources, and health-care system acceptance and implementation. National research priorities are served from translational educational research. National funding priorities should endorse the contribution and value of translational education research.

Recruitment of black subjects for a natural history study of intracerebral hemorrhage

Historically, recruitment of minority subjects for clinical research has been challenging. We developed culturally-tailored recruitment materials for a longitudinal, natural history study of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and trained recruiting coordinators in cultural competence. Of 285 subjects meeting inclusion criteria, 158 (55% of those eligible) agreed to participate (60% of eligible Blacks vs. 45% of eligible non-Blacks, p..02). Of those enrolled, 138 (87%) agreed to participate in the genetic sub-study (86% of Blacks vs. 90% of non-Blacks enrolled, p..78). Of those subjects who refused enrollment, lack of interest in research (42%) was the most common reason given for the study as a whole. A higher rate of enrollment was achieved in Blacks vs. non-Blacks in this ICH clinical research study employing culturally tailored recruitment approaches and training of recruitment coordinators to overcome traditional recruitment barriers to research participation in minority patients.

From free to free market: cost recovery in federally funded clinical research

In a climate of increased expectation for the translation of research, academic clinical research units are looking at new ways to streamline their operation and maintain effective translational support services. Clinical research, although undeniably expensive, is an essential step in the translation of any medical breakthrough, and as a result, many academic clinical research units are actively looking to expand their clinical services despite financial pressures. We examine some of the hybrid academic-business models in 19 clinical research centers within the Clinical and Translational Science Award consortium that are emerging to address the issue of cost recovery of clinical research that is supported by the United States federal government. We identify initiatives that have succeeded or failed, essential supporting and regulatory components, and lessons learned from experience to design an optimal cost recovery model and a timeline for its implementation.

Why technology matters as much as science in improving healthcare

Background

More than half a million new items of biomedical research are generated every year and added to Medline. How successful are we at applying this steady accumulation of scientific knowledge and so improving the practice of medicine in the USA?

Discussion

The conventional wisdom is that the US healthcare system is plagued by serious cost, access, safety and quality weaknesses. A comprehensive solution must involve the better translation of an abundance of clinical research into improved clinical practice.

Yet the application of knowledge (i.e. technology) remains far less well funded and less visible than the generation, synthesis and accumulation of knowledge (i.e. science), and the two are only weakly integrated. Worse, technology is often seen merely as an adjunct to practice, e.g. electronic health records.

Several key changes are in order. A helpful first step lies in better understanding the distinction between science and technology, and their complementary strengths and limitations. The absolute level of funding for technology development must be increased as well as being more integrated with traditional science-based clinical research. In such a mission-oriented federal funding strategy, the ties between basic science research and applied research would be better emphasized and strengthened.

Summary

It bears repeating that only by applying the wealth of existing and future scientific knowledge can healthcare delivery and patient care ever show significant improvement.

LC Data QUEST: A Technical Architecture for Community Federated Clinical Data Sharing

The University of Washington Institute of Translational Health Sciences is engaged in a project, LC Data QUEST, building data sharing capacity in primary care practices serving rural and tribal populations in the Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, Idaho region to build research infrastructure. We report on the iterative process of developing the technical architecture for semantically aligning electronic health data in primary care settings across our pilot sites and tools that will facilitate linkages between the research and practice communities. Our architecture emphasizes sustainable technical solutions for addressing data extraction, alignment, quality, and metadata management. The architecture provides immediate benefits to participating partners via a clinical decision support tool and data querying functionality to support local quality improvement efforts. The FInDiT tool catalogues type, quantity, and quality of the data that are available across the LC Data QUEST data sharing architecture. These tools facilitate the bi-directional process of translational research.

An academic-health service partnership in nursing: lessons from the field

PURPOSE

To describe the development of an academic-health services partnership undertaken to improve use of evidence in clinical practice.

APPROACH

Academic health science schools and health service settings share common elements of their missions: to educate, participate in research, and excel in healthcare delivery, but differences in the business models, incentives, and approaches to problem solving can lead to differences in priorities. Thus, academic and health service settings do not naturally align their leadership structures or work processes. We established a common commitment to accelerate the appropriate use of evidence in clinical practice and created an organizational structure to optimize opportunities for partnering that would leverage shared resources to achieve our goal.

FINDINGS

A jointly governed and funded institute integrated existing activities from the academic and service sectors. Additional resources included clinical staff and student training and mentoring, a pilot research grant-funding program, and support to access existing data. Emergent developments include an appreciation for a wider range of investigative methodologies and cross-disciplinary teams with skills to integrate research in daily practice and improve patient outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

By developing an integrated leadership structure and commitment to shared goals, we developed a framework for integrating academic and health service resources, leveraging additional resources, and forming a mutually beneficial partnership to improve clinical outcomes for patients.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Structurally integrated academic-health service partnerships result in improved evidence-based patient care delivery and in a stronger foundation for generating new clinical knowledge, thus improving patient outcomes.

Translational informatics: an industry perspective

Translational informatics (TI) is extremely important for the pharmaceutical industry, especially as the bar for regulatory approval of new medications is set higher and higher. This paper will explore three specific areas in the drug development lifecycle, from tools developed by precompetitive consortia to standardized clinical data collection to the effective delivery of medications using clinical decision support, in which TI has a major role to play. Advancing TI will require investment in new tools and algorithms, as well as ensuring that translational issues are addressed early in the design process of informatics projects, and also given higher weight in funding or publication decisions. Ultimately, the source of translational tools and differences between academia and industry are secondary, as long as they move towards the shared goal of improving health.

Clinical research nursing: a critical resource in the national research enterprise

Translational clinical research has emerged as an important priority for the national research enterprise, with a clearly stated mandate to more quickly deliver prevention strategies, treatments and cures based on scientific innovations to the public. Within this national effort, a lack of consensus persists concerning the need for clinical nurses with expertise and specialized training in study implementation and the delivery of care to research participants. This paper reviews efforts to define and document the role of practicing nurses in implementing studies and coordinating clinical research in a variety of clinical settings, and differentiates this clinical role from the role of nurses as scientists and principal investigators. We propose an agenda for building evidence that having nurses provide and coordinate study treatments and procedures can potentially improve research efficiency, participant safety, and the quality of research data. We also provide recommendations for the development of the emerging specialty of clinical research nursing.

The CTSA Pharmaceutical Assets Portal - a public-private partnership model for drug repositioning

The Pharmaceutical Assets Portal aims to facilitate industry-academic collaborations for discovery of new indications for compounds no longer being developed by pharmaceutical companies, through eliminating barriers to access such compounds. The Portal's enabling infrastructure includes a national investigator database; a Foci-of-Expertise browser; a material transfer agreement template; and a funding partner. Whereas the goal of creating a shared compound repository remains to be achieved, the Portal has established a mechanism to facilitate future drug repositioning opportunities.

The prevalence and economic impact of low-enrolling clinical studies at an academic medical center

PURPOSE

The authors assessed the prevalence and associated economic impact of low-enrolling clinical studies at a single academic medical center.

METHOD

The authors examined all clinical studies receiving institutional review board (IRB) review between FY2006 and FY2009 at Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) for recruitment performance and analyzed them by type of IRB review (full-board, exempt, expedited), funding mechanism, and academic unit. A low-enrolling study included those with zero or one participant at the time of study termination. The authors calculated the costs associated with IRB review, financial setup, contract negotiation, and department study start-up activities and the total economic impact on OHSU of low-enrolling studies for FY2009.

RESULTS

A total of 837 clinical studies were terminated during the study period, 260 (31.1%) of which were low-enrolling. A greater proportion of low-enrolling studies were government funded than industry funded (P=.006). The authors found significant differences among the various academic units with respect to percentages of low-enrolling studies (from 10% to 67%). The uncompensated economic impact of low-enrolling studies was conservatively estimated to be nearly $1 million for FY2009.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of clinical studies incurred high institutional and departmental expense but resulted in little scientific benefit. Although a certain percentage of low-enrolling studies can be expected in any research organization, the overall number of such studies must be managed to reduce the aggregate costs of conducting research and to maximize research opportunities. Effective, proactive interventions are needed to address the prevalence and impact of low enrollment.

A novel protocol for streamlined IRB review of Practice-based Research Network (PBRN) card studies

PURPOSE

The "card study," in which clinicians record brief information about patient visits during usual clinical care, has long been a rapid method for conducting descriptive studies in practice-based research networks. Because an increasingly stringent regulatory environment has made conducting card studies difficult, we developed a streamlined method for obtaining card study institutional review board (IRB) approval.

METHODS

We developed a protocol for a study of the card study method, allowing new card study proposals of specific research questions to be submitted as addenda to the approved Card Study Protocol.

RESULTS

Seven card studies were proposed and approved under the Card Study Protocol during the first year after implementation, contrasted with one-card study proposed in the previous year. New card study ideas submitted as addenda to an approved protocol appeared to increase IRB comfort with the card study as a minimal risk method while reducing the hurdles to developing new study ideas.

CONCLUSIONS

A Card Study Protocol allowing new study questions to be submitted as addenda decreases time between idea generation and IRB approval. Shortened turn-around times may be useful for translating ideas into action while reducing regulatory burden.

Integrating economic evaluation methods into clinical and translational science award consortium comparative effectiveness educational goals

With the ongoing debate over health care reform in the United States, public health and policy makers have paid growing attention to the need for comparative effectiveness research (CER). Recent allocation of federal funds for CER represents a significant move toward increased evidence-based practice and better-informed allocation of constrained health care resources; however, there is also heated debate on how, or whether, CER may contribute to controlling national health care expenditures. Economic evaluation, in the form of cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit analysis, is often an aspect of CER studies, yet there are no recommendations or guidelines for providing clinical investigators with the necessary skills to collect, analyze, and interpret economic data from clinical trials or observational studies. With an emphasis on multidisciplinary research, the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) consortium and institutional CTSA sites serve as an important resource for training researchers to engage in CER. In this article, the authors discuss the potential role of CTSA sites in integrating economic evaluation methods into their comparative effectiveness education goals, using the Columbia University Medical Center CTSA as an example. By allowing current and future generations of clinical investigators to become fully engaged not only in CER but also in the economic evaluations that result from such analyses, CTSA sites can help develop the necessary foundation for advancing research to guide clinical decision making and efficient use of limited resources.

Linking scientific discovery and better health for the nation: the first three years of the NIH's Clinical and Translational Science Awards

A comprehensive system for translating basic biomedical research into useful and effectively implemented clinical diagnostic, preventive, and therapeutic practices is essential to the nation's health. The state of clinical and translational research (CTR) in the United States, however, has been characterized as fragmented, slow, expensive, and poorly coordinated. As part of its Roadmap Initiative, the National Institutes of Health instituted the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA), a sweeping and ambitious program designed to transform the conduct of biomedical research in the United States by speeding the translation of scientific discoveries into useful therapies and then developing methods to ensure that those therapies reach the patients who need them the most. The authors review the circumstances of the U.S. biomedical research enterprise that led to the creation of the CTSA and discuss the initial strategic plan of the CTSA, which was developed from the first three years of experience with the program and was designed to overcome organizational, methodological, and cultural barriers within and among research institutions. The authors also describe the challenges encountered during these efforts and discuss the promise of this vital national health care initiative, which is essential to creating a pipeline for the scientific workforce needed to conduct research that will, in turn, provide a rational evidence base for better health in the United States.