Journal of Clinical and Translational Science最新文献

{"title":"Adoption of E2PLUS tools and resources to promote the development of institutional capacity for patient-centered and community-engaged research at a cancer center.","authors":"Katherine J Briant, Prajakta Adsul, Elizabeth A Carosso, Marty Chakoian, Diane Mapes, Terri Coutee, Bridgette Hempstead, Laurie Hassell, Wendy Law, Jason A Mendoza","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.27","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.27","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The Fred Hutch/University of Washington/Seattle Children's Cancer Consortium's (Consortium) Office of Community Outreach & Engagement (OCOE) joined Stanford Medicine and Morehouse School of Medicine in implementing Engage for Equity Plus (E2PLUS), a multi-institutional community of practice to learn and share patient-centered and community-engaged research (P/CEnR) practices. University of New Mexico (UNM) facilitated this collaboration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Consortium formed a Champion Team of 12 people who participated in two virtual workshops facilitated by UNM. Consortium executive leadership (<i>n</i> = 4) participated in interviews, and investigators (<i>n</i> = 4) and community members/patient advocates (<i>n</i> = 8) participated in focus groups to provide institutional context regarding P/CEnR. This is a paper on the process and findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Through E2PLUS engagement, the Champion Team identified four strategies to address institutional health inequities: 1) increase participation of underrepresented groups at all levels of institutional leadership and advisory boards; 2) create an Office of Patient Engagement to train and support patients who participate in institutional initiatives and advise research teams; 3) expand community engagement training, resources, and institutional commitment to focus on community-identified social and health needs; and 4) establish an umbrella entity for health equity efforts across the Consortium.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While the Consortium had longstanding community advisory boards and faculty and staff with P/CEnR expertise, it did not have centralized and institutionally supported P/CEnR resources, policies, and infrastructure. By participating in E2PLUS, the Champion Team received technical assistance to leverage qualitative data to influence strategies to guide the development of Consortium health equity infrastructure and capacity for P/CEnR in Washington.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e72"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11975779/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143811357","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":"2024 Physician-Scientist Trainee Diversity Summit conference proceedings.","authors":"Jessica Weng, Cynthia Y Tang, Kyle T Enriquez, Rohini N Guin, Briana Christophers, Yentli E Soto Albrecht, Daniel B Amusin, Deborah D Rupert, Paige Cooper Byas","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.24","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.24","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Physician-Scientist Trainee Diversity Summit, hosted by the American Physician Scientists Association and the Burroughs Wellcome Fund, was conceived in 2019 with the mission of developing strategic plans to diversify the physician-scientist community using human-centered design thinking. In June 2024, the second iteration of this conference was held in Raleigh, North Carolina, and brought together a network of scientific and medical organizations to discuss issues of justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion facing physician-scientist trainees. This article summarizes the progress made from the first meeting, the proceedings of the 2024 Summit, and a thematic analysis of the recent meeting, offering tangible solutions to the physician-scientist community for supporting diversity and accessibility.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e49"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11975769/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143811121","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":"Toward equity in cultivating a \"<i>garden of mentors</i>:\" An exploration of networking experiences in an implementation research training program.","authors":"Loni J Parrish, Amanda Gilbert, Kate Hoppe, Gloria D Coronado, Karen M Emmons, Amy A Eyler, Debra Haire-Joshu, Rebekah R Jacob, Alison B Hamilton, Shelly J Kannuthurai, Ross C Brownson","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.17","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The Institute for Implementation Science Scholars (IS-2) is a dissemination and implementation (D&I) science training and mentoring program. A key component of IS-2 is collaborating and networking. To build knowledge on effective networking and mentoring, this study sought to 1) conduct a social network analysis to determine whether underrepresented scholars have equivalent levels of connection and 2) gain insights into the differences in networking among racial/ethnic subgroups of scholars.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Social network survey data were used to select participants based on number of collaborative connections (highest, lowest) and racial/ ethnic category (underrepresented, not underrepresented). Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded using an iterative process.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The sample consisted of eight highly networked scholars, eight less networked scholars, seven from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, and nine from not underrepresented groups. Qualitative data showed a lack of connection, reluctance to network, and systematic issues including institutional biases as possible drivers of group differences. In addition, scholars provided suggestions on how to overcome barriers to networking and provided insights into how IS-2 has impacted their D&I research and knowledge.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Underrepresented scholars have fewer network contacts than not underrepresented scholars in the IS-2 training program. It is imperative for leadership to be intentional with mentorship pairing, especially for underrepresented scholars. Future research might include interviews with program leaders to understand how network pairings are built to improve the mentorship experience.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e50"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11975770/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143811619","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":"Building a community-centered clinical research center in an underserved New York City neighborhood to enhance access to research, equity, and quality of care.","authors":"Amin Yakubov, James Holahan, Aaron Lord, Melanie Jay, Rachel Gross, Celia Engelson, Zariya Alvarez, Miguel Rodriguez, Leomaris Caba Caceres, Michael Reyes, Emily Drum, Xiaoting Xing, Rosario Medina, Shilpa Londhe, Brita Roy, Imad Alsayed, Gabrielle Gold-von Simson, Miriam A Bredella","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.23","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Access to an academic clinical research center (CRC) in health professional shortage areas (HPSA) can help address healthcare disparities and increase research accessibility and enrollment. Here we describe the development of a community-centered CRC in the underserved area of Sunset Park, Brooklyn, New York, centered within a larger academic health network and the evaluation of its outcomes within the first two years. In addition to resources and space, establishment of the CRC required a culturally competent and multilingual team of healthcare professionals and researchers and buy-in from the community. Between 1/2022 and 12/2023, the CRC opened 21 new trials (10 interventional and 11 noninterventional) with greater than 500 participant visits that reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of the community. These participants represent 110 distinct zip codes; 76% of these zip codes are underserved and designated HPSA. 60% self-identified as non-White and 20% identified as Hispanic, with 12 other distinct ethnicities represented. 28% of participants speak 11 languages other than English. Community-based CRCs can be created with sustainable growth to align with the mission of the National Institutes of Health and U.S. Food and Drug Administration to meet the ever-growing clinical, social, and research needs of the communities they serve.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e51"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11975791/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143811528","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":"Implementing TeamMAPPS: Formative qualitative findings from the dissemination and implementation study of a new evidence-based team science intervention.","authors":"Stephen Molldrem, Heidi Luft, Jeffrey S Farroni, Elizabeth J Lyons, Kevin Wooten","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.22","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Team Methods to Advance Processes and Performance in Science (TeamMAPPS) is an evidence-based Team Science competency model and intervention. TeamMAPPS was developed by experts in the Science of Team Science with translational teams in mind. TeamMAPPS focuses on three core teamwork competencies: (1) psychological safety, (2) awareness and exchange, and (3) self-correction and adaptation. In 2023, the TeamMAPPS framework was operationalized into five online training modules that can be used to train whole teams or individuals, with or without facilitation, in any order. This article reports formative findings from the pre-implementation stage of the TeamMAPPS Dissemination and Implementation (D&I) study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted 27 interviews and participant-observation fieldwork with 23 individuals involved in the conceptualization, design, or implementation of TeamMAPPS (four were interviewed twice). All implementers were affiliated with a Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hub. Data were collected during pre-implementation, when modules were being tested and early-stage implementers were being trained. We used D&I theories and frameworks to structure the study, analyze interview data, and recommend implementation strategies.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>\"Adoption,\" \"reach,\" and \"effectiveness\" emerged as key implementation outcomes. TeamMAPPS was perceived to be evidence-based, highly adaptable, and a Team Science intervention offering unique benefits. We draw on participants' responses and expert recommendations to suggest implementation strategies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CTSAs and other organizations can use varied strategies to implement TeamMAPPS. The flexibility of the intervention and its rootedness in an evidence-base synthesized by Team Science leaders make TeamMAPPS appealing for CTSAs seeking to enhance their team training offerings.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e68"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11975785/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143811487","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":"Goal alignment and unintended consequences of accountable care: How the structure of Oregon's Medicaid coordinated care model shapes health plan-clinic partnerships.","authors":"Erin S Kenzie, Jean Campbell, Mellodie Seater, Maya A Singh, Alissa Robbins, Melinda M Davis","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.26","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.26","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Accountable care models for Medicaid reimbursement aim to improve care quality and reduce costs by linking payments to performance. Oregon's coordinated care organizations (CCOs) assume financial responsibility for their members and are incentivized to help clinics improve performance on specific quality metrics. This study explores how Oregon's CCO model influences partnerships between payers and primary care clinics, focusing on strategies used to enhance screening and treatment for unhealthy alcohol use (UAU).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this qualitative study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with informants from 12 of 13 Oregon CCOs active in 2019 and 2020. The interviews focused on payer-provider partnerships, specifically around UAU screening and treatment, which is a long-standing CCO metric. We used thematic analysis to identify key themes and causal-loop diagramming to uncover feedback dynamics and communicate key findings. Meadows' leverage point framework was applied to categorize findings based on their potential to drive change.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>CCO strategies to support clinics included building relationships, reporting on metric progress, providing EHR technical assistance, offering training, and implementing alternative payment methods. CCOs prioritized clinics with more members and those highly motivated. Our analysis showed that while the CCO model aligned goals between payers and clinics, it may perpetuate rural disparities by prioritizing larger, better-resourced clinics.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Oregon's CCO model fosters partnerships centered on quality metrics but may unintentionally reinforce rural disparities by incentivizing support for larger clinics. Applying the Meadows framework highlighted leverage points within these partnerships.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e46"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11975777/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143811555","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":"Developing the engage for equity institutional multi-sector survey: Assessing academic institutional culture and climate for community-based participatory research (CBPR).","authors":"Elizabeth Dickson, Alena Kuhlemeier, Prajakta Adsul, Shannon Sanchez-Youngman, Katie Myers, Tabia Henry Akintobi, Lisa G Rosas, Jason A Mendoza, John Oetzel, Paige Castro-Reyes, Christina Alaniz, Belkis Jacquez, Nina Wallerstein","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.20","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.20","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Community-engaged research/community-based participatory research/patient-engaged research (CEnR/CBPR/PEnR) are increasingly recognized as important approaches for addressing health equity. However, there is limited support for CEnR/CBPR/PEnR within Academic Health Centers (AHCs). It is important for AHCs to measure and monitor the context, process, and policies in support for CEnR/CBPR/PEnR. The <i>Engage for Equity (E2)</i> team developed the first Institutional Multi-Sector Survey (IMSS) instrument to assess and explore CEnR/CBPR/PEnR-related practices at three AHCs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Working with \"champion teams\" consisting of academic leaders, researchers, and patient/community partners at each AHC, we developed the IMSS to assess the following domains: institutional mission, vision, and values; CEnR/CBPR/PEnR policies/practices; community processes/structures; function of formal community advisory boards; climate/culture for CEnR/CBPR; perceptions of institutional leadership for CEnR/CBPR/PEnR. The survey was piloted to a convenience sample of CEnR/CBPR/PEnR participants at each AHC site.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A sample aggregated across all sites consisting of community (<i>n</i> = 49) and academic (<i>n</i> = 50) participants perceived high levels of advocacy for CEnR/CBPR/PEnR among their AHC research teams. Participants indicated that institutional leadership supported CEnR/CBPR/PEnR in principle, but resources to build CEnR/CBPR/PEnR capacity at their respective institutions were lacking. Differences in responses from community and academic partners are summarized.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While limited by survey length and question adaptation, the findings contribute to identification of institutional barriers and facilitators to CEnR/CBPR/PEnR in AHCs. These findings are critically important to support and improve CEnR/CBPR/PEnR practice in academic institutions and to elevate community partner voices and needs for advancing community and patient partners' research.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e44"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11975786/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143811547","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":"Ask the experts: Community Engagement studios to inform research on cannabis use in cancer symptom management.","authors":"Brittney Greene, Grace Mckenzie, Keenan Gibbons, Salimah H Meghani, Brooke Worster, Rebecca L Ashare","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.10","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Despite one-third of patients with cancer using cannabis for symptom management, little is known about their access to and usage of cannabis. Community Engagement (CE) studios involving community experts with chronic health conditions were used to inform a qualitative study on access to and use of cannabis products among patients with cancer.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We conducted two 2-hour CE studios with residents from Western NY (WNY) (<i>N</i> = 18). Our sample primarily included White and Black residents (56% vs. 39%). After a researcher-led 10-minute presentation, a community facilitator led the discussion, which focused on questions about challenges to cannabis use, recommendations for providers when discussing cannabis with patients, and community factors influencing use.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Community experts reported that state legalization of cannabis made it easier to access cannabis, but the costs of cannabis and distance to dispensaries hindered their ability to obtain it. Discrimination was also a key barrier to medical cannabis receipt. There were differences in the perceived safety of where to obtain cannabis (dispensaries vs. friends). Community experts wanted providers to be more informed and less biased about recommending cannabis. Community experts recommended conducting focus groups for the subsequent study to ask questions about cannabis use.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The CE studios encouraged us to switch formats from qualitative interviews to focus groups and provided guidance on question topics for the subsequent study. Incorporating community expert's feedback through CE studios is an effective strategy to design more impactful studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e47"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11975768/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143811525","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":"Using technology to increase reach and optimize consent experience for a large-scale research program.","authors":"Emma Coen, Daniel P Judge, Samantha Norman, John T Clark, Andrew Cates, Randolph Thornhill, Kelly Hunt, Lori McMahon, Leslie Lenert, Caitlin G Allen","doi":"10.1017/cts.2024.640","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2024.640","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The consent process for research studies can be burdensome for potential participants due to complex information and lengthy consent forms. This pragmatic study aimed to improve the consent experience and evaluate its impact on participant decision making, study knowledge, and satisfaction with the In Our DNA SC program, a population-based genomic screening initiative. We compared two consent procedures: standard consent (SC) involving a PDF document and enhanced consent (EC) incorporating a pictograph and true or false questions. Decision-making control, study knowledge, satisfaction, and time to consent were assessed. We analyzed data for 109 individuals who completed the SC and 96 who completed the EC. Results indicated strong decision-making control and high levels of knowledge and satisfaction in both groups. While no significant differences were found between the two groups, the EC experience took longer for participants to complete. Future modifications include incorporating video modules and launching a Spanish version of the consent experience. Overall, this study contributes to the growing literature on consent improvements and highlights the need to assess salient components and explore participant preferences for receiving consent information.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e15"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11795863/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143255760","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":"Engaging stakeholders to strengthen support for community-engaged research at Stanford School of Medicine: An institutional assessment and action planning approach.","authors":"Patricia Rodriguez Espinosa, Anisha I Patel, Starla Gay, Ysabel Duron, Alyce S Adams, Nina Wallerstein, Ruth O'Hara, Lisa G Rosas","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.8","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.8","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Despite the central role that patient and community engagement plays in translational science and health equity research, there remain significant institutional barriers for researchers and their community partners to engage in this work meaningfully and sustainably. The goal of this paper is to describe the process and outcomes of Engage for Equity PLUS at Stanford School of Medicine, which was aimed at understanding and addressing institutional barriers and facilitators for community-engaged research (CEnR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A Stanford champion team of four faculty and two community partners worked with the University of New Mexico team to conduct two workshops (<i>n</i> = 26), focus groups (<i>n</i> = 2), interviews with leaders (<i>n</i> = 4), and an Institutional Multi-Stakeholder Survey (<i>n</i> = 35). These data were employed for action planning to identify strategies to build institutional support for CEnR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Findings revealed several key institutional barriers to CEnR, such as the need to modify organizational policies and practices to expedite and simplify CEnR administration, silos in collaboration, and the need for capacity building. Facilitators included several offices devoted to and engaging in innovative CEnR efforts. Based on these findings, action planning resulted in three priorities: 1) Addressing IRB barriers, 2) Addressing barriers in post-award policies and procedures, and 3) Increasing training in CEnR within Stanford and for community partners.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Addressing institutional barriers is critical for Academic Medical Centers and their partners to meaningfully and sustainably engage in CEnR. The Engage for Equity PLUS process offers a roadmap for Academic Medical Centers with translational science and health equity goals.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e36"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11883597/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143573049","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}