Exploring barriers, needs, and facilitators for clinical and translational research in Oklahoma: A sequential mixed-methods study.

IF 2 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science Pub Date : 2025-06-18 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1017/cts.2025.10066
Motolani E Ogunsanya, Laura A Beebe, Janis E Campbell, Nicole Holmes, Timothy VanWagoner, Judith James
{"title":"Exploring barriers, needs, and facilitators for clinical and translational research in Oklahoma: A sequential mixed-methods study.","authors":"Motolani E Ogunsanya, Laura A Beebe, Janis E Campbell, Nicole Holmes, Timothy VanWagoner, Judith James","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Clinical and translational research (CTR) plays a vital role in improving health outcomes, but its success relies heavily on institutional support, infrastructure, and workforce capacity. This study aimed to explore the barriers, needs, and facilitators to conducting CTR in Oklahoma, highlighting both the strengths and gaps within the research ecosystem.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A sequential, descriptive mixed-methods design was employed, combining survey data (<i>n</i> = 164) with four qualitative focus groups (<i>n</i> = 23 total participants). The survey assessed research infrastructure, funding, and workforce needs, while the focus groups explored researchers' lived experiences and institutional challenges. Mixed-methods meta-inference approaches, such as convergence, complementarity, and explanatory integration, were used to identify overlapping and distinct patterns across data strands.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Key barriers included lack of protected research time (23.9%), limited pilot funding (15.3%), and administrative hurdles such as IRB delays. Researchers expressed a strong need for centralized tools to support networking, scientific writing, and data access. Qualitative findings revealed additional needs, such as bridge funding and mentorship, not fully captured in the survey. Facilitators included Oklahoma Shared Clinical and Translational Resources (OSCTR)-supported professional development and mentoring programs, though participants noted a heavy reliance on OSCTR as the primary support source, with few decentralized alternatives.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While CTR infrastructure in Oklahoma has expanded, critical gaps remain in mentorship, data access, and institutional support. To build a more resilient and inclusive research environment, stakeholders should consider investing in decentralized systems, bridge funding, structured mentorship, and collaborative tools tailored to the state's rural, tribal, and academic diversity. These findings may inform policy and strategic planning in Oklahoma and other underserved regions aiming to strengthen CTR capacity.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e155"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392360/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.10066","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Clinical and translational research (CTR) plays a vital role in improving health outcomes, but its success relies heavily on institutional support, infrastructure, and workforce capacity. This study aimed to explore the barriers, needs, and facilitators to conducting CTR in Oklahoma, highlighting both the strengths and gaps within the research ecosystem.

Methods: A sequential, descriptive mixed-methods design was employed, combining survey data (n = 164) with four qualitative focus groups (n = 23 total participants). The survey assessed research infrastructure, funding, and workforce needs, while the focus groups explored researchers' lived experiences and institutional challenges. Mixed-methods meta-inference approaches, such as convergence, complementarity, and explanatory integration, were used to identify overlapping and distinct patterns across data strands.

Results: Key barriers included lack of protected research time (23.9%), limited pilot funding (15.3%), and administrative hurdles such as IRB delays. Researchers expressed a strong need for centralized tools to support networking, scientific writing, and data access. Qualitative findings revealed additional needs, such as bridge funding and mentorship, not fully captured in the survey. Facilitators included Oklahoma Shared Clinical and Translational Resources (OSCTR)-supported professional development and mentoring programs, though participants noted a heavy reliance on OSCTR as the primary support source, with few decentralized alternatives.

Conclusions: While CTR infrastructure in Oklahoma has expanded, critical gaps remain in mentorship, data access, and institutional support. To build a more resilient and inclusive research environment, stakeholders should consider investing in decentralized systems, bridge funding, structured mentorship, and collaborative tools tailored to the state's rural, tribal, and academic diversity. These findings may inform policy and strategic planning in Oklahoma and other underserved regions aiming to strengthen CTR capacity.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

探索俄克拉何马州临床和转化研究的障碍、需求和促进因素:一项连续的混合方法研究。
临床和转化研究(CTR)在改善健康结果方面发挥着至关重要的作用,但其成功在很大程度上依赖于机构支持、基础设施和劳动力能力。本研究旨在探索在俄克拉荷马州进行CTR的障碍、需求和促进因素,突出研究生态系统中的优势和差距。方法:采用顺序、描述性混合方法设计,将调查数据(n = 164)与四个定性焦点小组(n = 23)相结合。该调查评估了研究基础设施、资金和劳动力需求,而焦点小组则探讨了研究人员的生活经历和制度挑战。混合方法元推理方法,如收敛、互补性和解释性集成,被用于识别跨数据链重叠和不同的模式。结果:主要障碍包括缺乏受保护的研究时间(23.9%)、有限的试点资金(15.3%)和行政障碍(如IRB延迟)。研究人员表达了对集中工具的强烈需求,以支持网络、科学写作和数据访问。定性的调查结果揭示了额外的需求,如过桥资金和指导,没有在调查中完全捕获。促进者包括俄克拉荷马州共享临床和转化资源(OSCTR)支持的专业发展和指导计划,尽管参与者注意到严重依赖OSCTR作为主要支持来源,很少有分散的替代方案。结论:虽然俄克拉荷马州的CTR基础设施已经扩大,但在指导、数据访问和机构支持方面仍然存在关键差距。为了建立一个更具弹性和包容性的研究环境,利益相关者应该考虑投资于分散的系统、桥梁资金、结构化的指导和适合该州农村、部落和学术多样性的协作工具。这些发现可以为俄克拉荷马州和其他服务不足地区的政策和战略规划提供信息,旨在加强CTR能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
26.90%
发文量
437
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信