Statistical competencies for medical research learners: What is fundamental?

Introduction

It is increasingly essential for medical researchers to be literate in statistics, but the requisite degree of literacy is not the same for every statistical competency in translational research. Statistical competency can range from ‘fundamental’ (necessary for all) to ‘specialized’ (necessary for only some). In this study, we determine the degree to which each competency is fundamental or specialized.

Methods

We surveyed members of 4 professional organizations, targeting doctorally trained biostatisticians and epidemiologists who taught statistics to medical research learners in the past 5 years. Respondents rated 24 educational competencies on a 5-point Likert scale anchored by ‘fundamental’ and ‘specialized.’

Results

There were 112 responses. Nineteen of 24 competencies were fundamental. The competencies considered most fundamental were assessing sources of bias and variation (95%), recognizing one’s own limits with regard to statistics (93%), identifying the strengths, and limitations of study designs (93%). The least endorsed items were meta-analysis (34%) and stopping rules (18%).

Conclusion

We have identified the statistical competencies needed by all medical researchers. These competencies should be considered when designing statistical curricula for medical researchers and should inform which topics are taught in graduate programs and evidence-based medicine courses where learners need to read and understand the medical research literature.

The role of information science within the clinical translational science ecosystem

Academic health sciences libraries ("libraries") offer services that span the entire research lifecycle, positioning them as natural partners in advancing clinical and translational science. Many libraries enjoy active and productive collaborations with Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Program hubs and other translational initiatives like the IDeA Clinical & Translational Research Network. This article explores areas of potential partnership between libraries and Translational Science Hubs (TSH), highlighting areas where libraries can support the CTSA Program's five functional areas outlined in the Notice of Funding Opportunity. It serves as a primer for TSH and libraries to explore potential collaborations, demonstrating how libraries can connect researchers to services and resources that support the information needs of TSH.

Expand the scorecard for health-care reform to achieve a better result and enhance clinical and translational science

Clinical and translational science is vitally dependent on the nation's underlying health care policies and programs. In a reciprocal fashion, data generated by clinical and translational research can inform both health policy and health care delivery. It is important, therefore to rate health reform proposals comprehensively on a set of criteria that reflect the broad goals of reform, including the potential impact on clinical and translational science and medical education. I propose that the criteria include achieving universal coverage, reducing administrative costs, retaining one's chosen primary care physician, encouraging care coordination, empowering physicians, freeing industry from choosing and administering health plans, providing choice of specialists and hospitals, providing patient education, preventing patient overuse of services, rationalizing resource allocation, encouraging competition, limiting government's role, supporting medical education, training, and research, and freeing industry to make personnel decisions based on business criteria rather than the impact on health care costs to the company. I discuss the rationale for each element and offer a rating of current proposals relative to a proposal previously made.

"This is an opportunity for leadership to lead, but leadership has disappeared": A qualitative case study of clinical and translational scientists during COVID-19

In March of 2020, academic research centers in Colorado were closed to prevent the spread of COVID-19. Scientists and research staff were required to continue their work remotely with little time to prepare for the transition. This survey study used an explanatory sequential mixed method design to explore clinical and translational researcher and staff experiences of the transition to remote work during the first six weeks of the pandemic. Participants indicated the level of interference with their research and shared their experiences of remote work, how they were impacted, how they were adapting and coping, and any short or long-term concerns. Most participants indicated that remote work interfered with their research to a moderate or great degree. Participant stories illuminated the differences of remote work prior to and during COVID-19. They described both challenges and silver linings. Here we describe three themes that highlight the challenges of transitioning to remote work during a pandemic: 1) Leadership: "This is an opportunity for leadership to lead, but leadership has disappeared"; 2) Parenting: Parents are "multitasked to death" every day, and 3) Mental health: The COVID-19 experience is "psychologically taxing";The study findings can be used to assist academic, hospital, department, and team leaders in building community, resiliency, and support productivity during current and future crises.