Journal of Clinical and Translational Science最新文献

{"title":"Students Participating as Ambassadors for Research in Kentucky (SPARK): A health equity undergraduate research training program.","authors":"Ariel A Arthur, Rebecca L deLacerda Allen, Fidelis Y Sesenu, Maxwell A Groznik, Carrie B Oser, Justin X Moore, Jessica R Thompson, Alexis N James, Madeline N Dunfee, Philip A Kern, Nancy E Schoenberg","doi":"10.1017/cts.2024.688","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2024.688","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Students Participating as Ambassadors for Research in Kentucky (SPARK) program provides novel health equity research training and targeted mentorship for undergraduates, particularly those from groups underrepresented in the biomedical and behavioral research and workforce. SPARK aims to address inadequate diversity in the medical and scientific research fields by providing comprehensive research mentorship and skill-building. Unlike most existing research training programs that are brief, focus on laboratory research, or are limited to graduate students and junior faculty, SPARK delivers a 16-month intensive behavioral and population health science training, equipping students with needed tools to conceptualize, plan, execute, and analyze their own health equity research study. Trainees complete didactic coursework on health equity, study design and proposal development, data analysis, and ethics. Students receive a stipend and research expenses, and multiple mentors guide them in creating original research projects for which they serve as Principal Investigator. Students disseminate their findings annually at an academic research conference as a capstone. Evaluation data from the first three cohorts suggest SPARK has been pivotal in preparing students for graduate studies and research careers in health equity and behavioral and population health sciences, providing strong support for further investments in similar undergraduate research training models.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e21"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11795858/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143255757","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Impacts of pragmatic implementation science in a primary care laboratory.","authors":"Nathalie Huguet, Sonja Likumahuwa-Ackman, Heather Holderness, April Lee, Jennifer E DeVoe","doi":"10.1017/cts.2024.682","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2024.682","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Implementation Science Centers in Cancer Control (ISC3) initiative, funded by the National Cancer Institute, called for the development of implementation laboratories to bolster implementation science, create research-ready environments, and expedite adoption and implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) into practice. The Building Research in Implementation and Dissemination to close Gaps and achieve Equity in Cancer Control (BRIDGE-C2) Center is one of seven ISC3 centers. BRIDGE-C2 aims to identify strategies to improve implementation of cancer prevention EBIs and conduct research / develop pragmatic methods to tailor, enhance, and support the adoption and sustainability of these strategies; advance implementation science; and build capacity and training opportunities. Since its inception, the BRIDGE-C2 Center has been conducting research and training activities to advance knowledge on how to effectively implement strategies to improve cancer prevention EBIs in primary care clinics serving socioeconomically disadvantaged patients. The translational science benefits model (TSBM) provides a useful framework for organizing a description of the BRIDGE-C2 Center's activities. In this paper, we describe examples of BRIDGE-C2 activities and the specific impact indicators within each relevant domain/subdomain of the TSBM, demonstrating that a single activity or project has multiple impacts on methods and capacity building, clinical domains, and community health.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e20"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11795856/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143255599","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Local context review by single institutional review boards: Results from a modified Delphi process.","authors":"Stephanie R Morain, Juli Bollinger, Megan K Singleton, Mia Terkowitz, Christine Weston, Jeremy Sugarman","doi":"10.1017/cts.2024.685","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2024.685","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Local context is the most common concern regarding use of a single institutional review board (sIRB). Yet what \"local context\" constitutes remains underspecified. Developing a shared understanding of the goals of local context review, the categories of information that should be considered, as well as the types of studies for which sIRB review may be inappropriate, are critical for ensuring that sIRB review provides adequate protections for human subjects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a three-round modified Delphi process convening individuals with expertise in the conduct and oversight of multisite research. Delphi surveys explored: (1) the goals of local context review; (2) the types of information that should be considered; and (3) study types that should be exempted from sIRB requirements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-one experts participated. Experts agreed that (1) local context review should aim to both protect local participants and ensure compliance and (2) that four types of information should be considered (population/participant-level characteristics; investigator and research team characteristics; institution-level characteristics; and state and local laws). There was less consensus about whether existing processes facilitated adequate consideration of this information. Experts agreed that exemptions from sIRB requirements should be permitted but disagreed about when and in what circumstances.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is overlapping consensus about both the goals of local context review and the types of information that should be assessed. Future work remains, however, to develop effective processes to best realize the goals of local context review - and do so with appropriate efficiency.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e2"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11736292/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143006285","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Community advisory boards as implementation strategies to center partner and patient voice in community health centers.","authors":"Rebekka M Lee, Kamini Mallick, James G Daly, Vetta Sanders Thompson, Elise Hoffman, Maria Papadopoulos, Stacey Curry","doi":"10.1017/cts.2024.679","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2024.679","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Community advisory boards (CABs) are a promising approach for strengthening patient and partner voices in community health center (CHC) evidence-based decision-making. This paper aims to describe how CHCs used CABs during the COVID-19 pandemic to improve the reach of testing among populations experiencing health disparities and identify transferable lessons for future implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This mixed methods study integrates brief quantitative surveys of community engagement (<i>N</i> = 20) and one-on-one qualitative interviews (<i>N</i> = 13) of staff and community partners engaged in CHC CABs with a cost analysis and qualitative feedback from CHC staff participating in an online learning community (<i>N</i> = 17).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Community partners and staff engaged in the CHC CABs reported high ratings of engagement, with all mean ratings of community engagement principles above a 4 (\"very good\" or \"often\") out of 5. Qualitative findings provided a more in-depth understanding of experiences serving on the CHC CAB and highlighted how engagement principles such as trust and mutual respect were reflected in CAB practices. We developed a CHC CAB toolkit with strategies for governance and prioritization, cost estimates to ensure sustainment, guidance on integrating quality improvement expertise, testimonies from community members on the benefits of joining, and template agendas and facilitator training to ensure meeting success.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In alignment with the Translational Science Benefits Model, this study expands research impact through comprehensive mixed methods measurement of community engagement and by transforming findings into an action-orientated guide for CHCs to implement CABs to guide evidence-based decision-making for community and public health impact.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e14"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11795859/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143255318","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Meaningfulness, feasibility, and usability of quality-of-care measures for maternal and infant health: A structured mixed-methods review.","authors":"Ryan P Theis, Rahma S Mkuu, Hannah Marmol, Lauren Silva, Callie Reeder, Jessica Bahorski, Erica Smith, John C Smulian, Tony S Wen, Amanda Redinger, Tabresha Blake, Elizabeth A Shenkman, Dominick J Lemas","doi":"10.1017/cts.2024.681","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2024.681","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Improving access to and quality of maternal and infant healthcare are important leverage points to address worsening maternal and infant health disparities in the USA. This study evaluates the comprehensiveness of existing maternal and infant quality-of-care measures to identify aspects of quality that need greater attention in quality measurement.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>We conducted a structured, team-based qualitative review of 88 maternal and infant health measures indexed by the National Quality Forum (NQF), the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA). We assessed discrete elements relevant to meaningfulness, feasibility, and usability following AHRQ National Quality Strategy (NQS) criteria, with input from researcher, clinician, and citizen scientist investigators. Descriptive statistics on coded measures were calculated using SPSS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most common AHRQ NQS priorities addressed were mortality (60%) and safety (48%). Average scores across elements were 59% for feasibility, 61% for practice usability, and 31% for policy usability. Fewer measures addressed coordination, affordability, or patient engagement in the postpartum period. Only 23% of measures were endorsed by NQF, only 17% of measures had publicly available benchmarks, and only 14% had specifications updated in the year prior to review.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings from this study can inform the specification of a comprehensive, updated system for maternal and infant quality-of-care evaluation and can facilitate the development of new quality-of-care measures that address underrepresented maternal and infant health issues.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e17"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11795855/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143255605","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Considerations and recommendations for collaborative research networks in epidemiology: Lessons learned from the diabetes LEAD Network.","authors":"Tara P McAlexander, Nora L Lee, Gina S Lovasi, Annemarie G Hirsch, Melissa N Poulsen, Brian Elbel, Lorna E Thorpe, D Leann Long, Leslie A McClure","doi":"10.1017/cts.2024.670","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2024.670","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Multi-site and multi-organizational teams are increasingly common in epidemiologic research; however, there is a lack of standards or best practices for achieving success in collaborative research networks in epidemiology. We summarize our experiences and lessons learned from the Diabetes Location, Environmental Attributes, and Disparities (LEAD) Network, a collaborative agreement between the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and research teams at Drexel University, New York University, Johns Hopkins University and Geisinger, and the University of Alabama at Birmingham. We present a roadmap for success in collaborative epidemiologic research, with recommendations focused on the following areas to maximize efficiency and success in collaborative research agreements: 1) operational and administrative considerations; 2) data access and sharing of sensitive data; 3) aligning network research aims; 4) harmonization of methods and measures; and 5) dissemination of findings. Future collaborations can be informed by our experiences and ultimately dedicate more resources to achieving scientific aims and efficiently disseminating scientific work products.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e7"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11736290/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143006265","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Training T-shaped translational scientists.","authors":"Molly Wasko, Kathryn Allen Nearing, Stacey L Neves, Amy Carrillo, Julie Rainwater, Jennifer A Croker, Robert P Kimberly","doi":"10.1017/cts.2024.674","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2024.674","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To evaluate the design of I-Corps@NCATS as a translational scientist training program, we mapped specific elements of the program's content and pedagogy to the characteristics of a translational scientist, as first defined by Gilliland et al. []: systems thinker, process innovator, boundary spanner, team player, and skilled communicator. Using a mixed-methods evaluation, we examined how the I-Corps@NCATS training program, delivered across twenty-two Clinical and Translational Science Award Hubs, impacted the development of these key translational scientist characteristics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed survey items to assess the characteristics of systems thinker, process innovator, boundary spanner, team player, and skilled communicator. Data were collected from a national sample of 281 participants in the I-Corps@NCATS program. Using post-then-retrospective-pre survey items, participants self-reported their ability to perform skills associated with each of the translational scientist characteristics. Additionally, two open-ended survey questions explored how the program shifted participants' translational orientation, generating 211 comments. These comments were coded through a team-based, iterative process.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Respondents reported the greatest increases in self-assessed abilities related to systems thinking and skilled communication. Participants indicated the highest levels of abilities related to team player and boundary crosser. From the coding of open-ended comments, we identified two additional characteristics of translational scientists: intellectual humility and cognitive flexibility.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Participation in I-Corps@NCATS accelerates translational science in two ways: 1) by teaching the process of scientific translation from research ideas to real-world solutions, and 2) by encouraging growth in the mindset and characteristics of a translational scientist.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e5"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11736293/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143006324","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A structured approach to developing an introductory statistics course for graduate students: Using data to teach about data.","authors":"Lisa Eunyoung Lee, Sobiga Vyravanathan, Tony Panzarella, Caitlin Gillan, Nicole Harnett","doi":"10.1017/cts.2024.672","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2024.672","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/objective: </strong>It was identified in the largest graduate unit of the Faculty of Medicine of a major Canadian University that there was a critical unmet curricular need for an introductory statistics and study design course. Based on the collective findings of an external institute review, both quantitative and qualitative data were used to design, develop, implement, evaluate, and refine such a course.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In response to the identified need and inherent challenges to streamlining curriculum development and instructional design in research-based graduate programs representing many biomedical disciplines, the institute used the analyze, design, develop, implement and evaluate instructional design model to guide the data-driven development and ongoing monitoring of a new study design and statistics course.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results demonstrated that implementing recommendations from the first iteration of the course (Fall 2021) into the second iteration (Winter 2023) led to improved student learning experience (3.18/5 weighted average (Fall 2021) to 3.87/5 (Winter 2023)). In the second iteration of the course, a self-perceived statistics anxiety test was administered, showing a reduction in statistics anxiety levels after completing the course (2.41/4 weighted average before the course to 1.65/4 after the course).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our experiences serve as a valuable resource for educators seeking to implement similar improvement approaches in their educational settings. Furthermore, our findings offer insights into tailoring course development and teaching strategies to optimize student learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e13"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11795862/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143254769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Through the lens of Good Participatory Practice: Findings and lessons learned from the healthcare worker subcommittee of the COVID-19 Healthcare Worker Exposure Response and Outcomes Registry.","authors":"Mei Lin Chen-Lim, Jayne F Koellhoffer, Kisha Batey Turner, Martha Summerlin, Anoop George, Eileen Handberg, Daryl Lawrence, Syed Hasan Naqvi, Emily O'Brien, Lauren Cohen, Patty McAdams, Laura Webb, Renee Leverty","doi":"10.1017/cts.2024.668","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2024.668","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Participant representation, including the Good Participatory Practice guidelines, in the design and execution of clinical research can profoundly affect research structure and process. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, an online registry called the Healthcare Worker Exposure Response and Outcomes (HERO) Registry, was launched to capture the experiences of healthcare workers (HCWs) on the pandemic frontlines. It evolved into a program that distributed COVID-19-related information and connected participants with COVID-19-related research opportunities. Furthermore, a subcommittee of HCWs was created to inform the COVID-19-related clinical research, engagement, and communication efforts. This paper, coauthored by the HERO HCW subcommittee, describes how it was formed, the impact of community participation on the HERO Registry and Research Program, reflections on lessons learned, and implications for future research. Engagement of the HCW Subcommittee resulted in representing their lived experience and ensured that their perspectives as HCWs were incorporated into the HERO Research. The strategies not only supported recruitment and retention efforts but also influenced the HERO research team in framing research questions and data collection pertinent to the participant community. This experience demonstrated the importance of having participants' input as expert advisors to an investigative team in their research efforts during a global health emergency.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e9"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11736295/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143006319","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The rural health initiative: Bridging gaps in healthcare access and grant-funded research in central Idaho.","authors":"Monica Zigman Suchsland, Dillon van Rensburg, Kelly McGrath, Cody Wilkinson, Kimberly Johnson, Ashley Steinbruecker, James Probus, Allison Cole","doi":"10.1017/cts.2024.669","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2024.669","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Translational science rarely addresses the needs of rural communities, perpetuating health inequities. Furthermore, policy and resource allocation reflect this dynamic. Through a partnership between a rural community and a community engagement program, the Rural Health Initiative (RHI) was developed with the goal of building capacity for community-driven translational research in rural settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We describe the process of forming the RHI and selection of a community health priority to motivate the translational research agenda in this particular rural setting. We used a mixed methods approach utilizing literature review, community survey data, and qualitative evaluation of community meeting discussions. Consensus on a final health priority was built through voting and comparison of voting responses across the three RHI counties through Fisher's Exact test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four priority topics were identified through literature search, community needs assessment, state/national trend data, and community experts. Priority ranking from a community forum and survey selected the final health priority topic. Healthcare access was selected by all three counties in the RHI community as the most critical health priority to address.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This program highlights the importance of and methods for community involvement in directing the research conducted in their community. Additionally, through this project, guidance was developed to define the role of community engagement programs supporting work led by communities.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e4"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11736294/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143006303","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}