Journal of Clinical and Translational Science最新文献

{"title":"Neonatal and 3-month cerebrovascular oxygenation, stability, and extraction in congenital heart disease versus control infants.","authors":"Nhu N Tran, Jodie K Votava-Smith, John C Wood, Joanne Yip, Andrew Pham, Mary-Lynn Brecht, Panteha Hayati Rezvan, Anthony R Colombo, Philippe Friedlich, Ken M Brady, Bradley S Peterson","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10106","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10106","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We compared indices for cerebrovascular health (i.e., physiological responses to tilts by measuring regional cerebral oxygenation [rcSO₂], cerebrovascular stability, and cerebral fractional tissue oxygen extraction [FTOE]) in infants with congenital heart disease (CHD) versus healthy controls (HC) at neonatal and 3-month ages.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Our cohort study included 101 neonates (52 CHD, 49 HC) and 108 infants at 3-months (45 CHD, 63 HC). We used an innovative and replicable evaluation tool to noninvasively and rapidly measure indices of cerebrovascular health. Changes in near infrared spectroscopy measures of rcSO₂ after tilting (from supine to sitting, ∼150 values) assessed cerebrovascular stability. Mixed-effects regression models examined rcSO₂ and FTOE differences between groups, and group-by-posture interactions, adjusting for postconceptional age, sex, ethnicity, and preductal systemic oxygenation (SpO₂) at both ages.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Infants with CHD had significantly lower rcSO₂ (13% at neonatal and 11% at 3-months, both <i>p</i> < 0.001), increased FTOE (∼0.14 points higher at neonatal and ∼ 0.09 points at 3-months, both <i>p</i> < 0.001), and reduced cerebrovascular stability compared with HC at both ages (both <i>p</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CHD infants had persistently poorer indices of cerebrovascular health (i.e., lower rcSO₂, increased FTOE, and reduced cerebrovascular stability) through the 3-month age compared to controls. Sustained cerebral hypoxia, reduced cerebrovascular stability, and increased FTOE may contribute to neurodevelopmental delays (NDDs) and could serve as early biomarkers for identifying infants at higher risk for NDD.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e175"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12444710/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145113237","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 collaborative ecosystem across the IDeA-CTR networks in response to a public health emergency.","authors":"A Jerrod Anzalone, Sharon Patrick, Amber Abel, Brad Price, Elizabeth Reisher, Kent Ripplinger, Mary Emmett, Ronald Horswell, San Chu, William B Hillegass, Francisco S Sy, Brian Melancon, H Timothy Bunnell, Lucio Miele, Mary Helen Mays, Joseph Keawe'aimoku Kaholokula, Elizabeth S Chen, Karen M Crowley, Indra Neil Sarkar, Susan L Santangelo, Clifford J Rosen, Jeremy Harper, David Bard, William Beasley, Sally L Hodder","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10098","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10098","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The urgency and scale of the COVID-19 pandemic demanded a coordinated response from public health agencies and the biomedical research community. The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) was established as a centralized enclave in 2020 to support the study of COVID-19 across the U.S. The Institutional Development Award for Clinical and Translational Research (IDeA-CTR) centers enhanced N3C's national response by bringing representation from rural and medically underserved communities. This improved the representation of our diverse populations in the N3C Enclave and its use for research by IDeA-state investigators.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed an organizational structure across the IDeA-CTRs to improve research productivity in resource-challenged areas of the U.S. This socio-technical ecosystem, informed by community input, included a governance committee and two workstreams. The operations workstream focused on data management and regulatory compliance, while the navigation, education, analysis, and training (NEAT) workstream supported educational and analytical activities for the N3C Enclave.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our collaborative approach led to participation by 12 IDeA-CTRs, representing over 400 investigators from 23 sites. The shared governance, investigator engagement, and resource pooling enhanced research productivity and engagement with researchers across IDeA states. Participation in this IDeA-CTR N3C consortium enhanced informatics research capacity and collaboration across the IDeA-CTRs for participating networks.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This collaborative model provides a roadmap and framework for future efforts among IDeA-CTRs and other academic partnerships. The socio-technical ecosystem fostered collectivism and team science, enabling the consortium to achieve far more than isolated efforts could, offering valuable insights for interdisciplinary research across geographically dispersed communities.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e168"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12444709/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145113420","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 community participatory approach to enhancing capacity in patient-centered alcohol research: Bridging translational science and empowering women.","authors":"Pravesh Sharma, Hannah Kolarik, Christopher Plapparampil Benny, Brianna N Tranby, Tessa Vance, Tommi Thompson, Kasey R Boehmer, Alanna M Chamberlain, Christi A Patten","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10102","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10102","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Alcohol misuse among women has risen compared to men. Women experience barriers to engaging in patient-centered comparative effectiveness research (CER) that, in turn, limits the evidence base for addressing alcohol misuse in this population. In this manuscript, we describe WomenWise, a community-partnered project and outline how we co-developed community focused CER training curriculum and collaboratively planned future partnered learning sessions (PLSs) with Community Advisory Board (CAB) feedback. Through this approach we aim to empower women to contribute to future patient-centered CER and enhance the stakeholder capacity for future patient-centered research.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e165"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392341/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144955943","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":"\"Meet us where we're at:\" Towards engaging and inclusive research with young adults with a lived experience of cancer.","authors":"Nicole Collaço, Céline Bolliger, Kirsten Efremov, Peter Dawes, Sonia Obiokafor, Anne-Sophie Darlington, Samantha Sodergren","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10101","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10101","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/objective: </strong>Meaningful engagement with young adults (YAs) with a lived experience of cancer is important for conducting impactful research on issues that matter to them, and ensures their voices are central to shaping cancer research outcomes. This preliminary study explored barriers and facilitators to participation in research to identify strategies for making cancer research more inclusive and responsive to the needs of YAs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This qualitative study involved twelve YAs (aged 21-43 years at time of interview) with a lived experience of cancer, who participated in a focus group or interview. Participants were recruited via multiple cancer charities/organizations and social media platforms. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Barriers to research participation were Person Specific (<i>health and wellbeing, logistical and practical challenges, knowledge, understanding and confidence</i>) and Systemic (<i>lack of advocacy, social and cultural influences</i>). A multi-pronged approach to engage YAs in cancer research should include framing research to make it more relatable, using accessible language, and showcasing its potential value and impact. Incentivising participation and offering flexible engagement formats, (e.g., online surveys and videos), to <i>meet individuals where they are,</i> can aid participation. Collaboration with trusted organizations, ensuring diverse representation in recruitment materials, and using social media platforms were recognized as effective ways to reach a broader audience and ensure inclusivity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We provide practical strategies on how to implement these approaches. From a researcher perspective, early consideration of funding allocation (e.g., dedicated person for social media engagement, time of Patient and Public Involvement) is key to support these strategies and enhance engagement.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e159"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392343/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144955933","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":"Erratum: 238 The Translational Science Promotion and Research Capacity (T-SPARC) framework: Developing institutional capacity for translational science - CORRIGENDUM.","authors":"Jessica Sperling, Stella Quenstedt, Perusi Muhigaba, F Joseph McClernon, Kristine Glauber, Eman Ghanem, Tarun Saxena, Vonda Rodriguez, Cinthia Sanchez","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10093","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.10093","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1017/cts.2024.885.].</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e143"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12305372/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144742234","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":"Group coaching for career development: Supporting the endangered early career researcher.","authors":"Lucy Palmer, Anupama Wadhwa, Susan Matulevicius, Anand Rohatgi, Heidi T Jacobe","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10089","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10089","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Early career researchers have unique demands, many of which contribute to increased stress, decreased professional fulfillment, and burnout. Consequently, academic institutions and government organizations, such as the National Institutes of Health, are beginning to embrace structured coaching as a tool to support physician wellbeing. To date, such coaching programs have demonstrated promising results, but little is known about whether early career research faculty find coaching feasible, accessible, or helpful. To explore this question further, we developed a novel group coaching intervention for clinician researchers and scientific faculty at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center based on the concept of appreciative inquiry, grounding the program in a positive and hopeful approach to the challenges faced by clinicians and researchers. Results from our program indicate this intervention is feasible, satisfactory, and helpful, with participants reporting enhanced self-reflection and empowerment. Effective for a wide array of research faculty, our program brought together diverse faculty, fostered connections, and encouraged future collaborations among this translational group. This suggests that our program provides a foundational blueprint that can be used by other academic medical centers who aim to develop group coaching efforts.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e166"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392355/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144955934","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/patient group champion team retrospective look at engage for equity PLUS: Results from a post-intervention champion team focus group.","authors":"Michael Muhammad, Paige Castro-Reyes, Marty Chakoian, Ysabel Duron, Starla Gay, Howard Grant, Bridgette Hempstead, LaShawn Hoffman, Diane Mapes","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10092","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10092","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Community/patient voice has long been stifled in favor of the priorities of powerful health organizations that set the agenda for institutional practices and policies shaping health equity research. Academic Health Centers (AHC) and Clinical Translational Science Centers (CTSC) promote missions that are often unaligned with the realities of community and patient experiences when interacting with researchers and representatives from these institutions. Implementation science has increasingly adopted collaborative and participatory approaches to the design and implementation of health interventions co-created with community/patient group members as equal participants within community-academic partnerships. Community-based participatory research/community-engaged research are widely recognized as approaches to health intervention research that offers the potential for community-patient voice to be heard when the principles of authentic participatory research are adhered to throughout all aspects of the project. For AHC's and CTSC's to be fully engaged, the populations they serve must have access to institutional leadership and influence over decision-making about the organizational resources allocated to community/patient groups beyond efforts to cultivate a positive public image. The E2 community/patient champion team focus groups provide unique perspectives on how equitable institutional transformation can be accomplished in a retrospective assessment of the E2 PLUS Intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e179"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12444717/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145113392","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":"Representation of women on National Institutes of Health study sections before and during COVID-19 pandemic.","authors":"Lucy O Alejandro, Alexandra Knitter, Monica Kowalczyk, Wen Wan, Valerie G Press, Vineet M Arora, Anna Volerman","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10091","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10091","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Women remain underrepresented in National Institutes of Health (NIH) study sections, panels of scientists who review grant applications to inform national research priorities and funding allocations. This longitudinal, retrospective study examined the representation of women on study sections before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, 16,902 reviewers served on 1,045 study sections across 2019, 2020, and 2021, of which 40.1% (<i>n</i> = 6,786) were women. The likelihood of reviewers being women significantly increased from 2019 to 2021, except among chairpersons. Understanding the representation of scientists influencing NIH grant decisions is important to ensuring scientific discovery that meets the nation's pluralistic needs.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e152"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392349/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144956152","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 translational science promotion and research capacity (T-SPARC) framework: Developing institutional capacity for translational science.","authors":"Jessica Sperling, Stella Quenstedt, Kristine Glauber, Perusi B Muhigaba, Eman Ghanem, Tarun Saxena, Vonda Rodriguez, Cinthia Sanchez, F Joseph McClernon","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10056","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10056","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recent years have seen increasing focus, including by the National Institutes for Health (NIH), on developing the field of translational science (TS). TS focuses on improving the process of translational research (TR), including generating knowledge that can facilitate TR across specific diseases or translational stages. With TS as an emerging field, research organizations have an increasing need to understand how to develop capacity for and support the advancement of TS. To support such institutional and infrastructural change, this paper outlines a Translational Science Promotion and Research Capacity (T-SPARC) Framework. The T-SPARC Framework provides a foundation to 1) inform the development of TS-creating and science-supporting interventions and programs, and 2) examine the effectiveness of said interventions and programs. The framework outlines organizational levels that T-SPARC programs can target; mechanisms, or intervention activities, that can foster change; and outcomes, including specific attitudinal or behavioral changes, institutional changes, and domains on which TS changes can focus. T-SPARC's capacity-building focus builds upon earlier efforts focused on conceptualizing and defining TS. T-SPARC supports movement towards TS goals of reducing longstanding challenges in the TR process, thus accelerating the health impact of TR, and ultimately improving health outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e157"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392354/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144956155","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":"Researcher and community partner perspectives on community-engaged research during the COVID-19 pandemic.","authors":"Simone C Frank, Mary E Grewe, Milenka Jean-Baptiste, Alicia Bilheimer, Alexandra F Lightfoot, Laura Villa-Torres","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10090","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10090","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We sought to explore how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted community-engaged research (CEnR) from both researcher and community partner perspectives, identify challenges and facilitators affecting their experiences, and describe desired supports for CEnR during future health crises.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted semi-structured, virtual interviews with ten researchers and eight partners who conducted or collaborated on CEnR during the COVID-19 pandemic. Interviews were recorded and transcribed for analysis. We analyzed the transcribed data thematically through an iterative process involving memoing, consensus coding, and reviewing memos and code reports to identify and describe key categories and themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Challenges identified were related to wellbeing and personal circumstances, such as feeling burnt out, managing increased caregiving responsibilities, or concern about risk of illness; institutional barriers, such as inflexible and burdensome financial, regulatory, and administrative policies; and virtual engagement, such as distractions, limited Internet access, or difficulty forming relationships online. Facilitators fell into two categories. Foundational factors such as strong existing partnerships, funding, and project-specific circumstances were critical to facilitating CEnR activities. Strategy-based facilitators focused on overcoming challenges and included communication, flexibility, risk mitigation, and utilizing techniques to enhance virtual engagement. Desired supports included flexible funding, resources for navigating research during crises, and increased virtual engagement accessibility and guidance.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>By better understanding challenges and facilitators affecting experiences of researchers and community partners during the COVID-19 pandemic, we can develop strategies and resources to better support CEnR partnerships during future crises.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e163"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392356/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144956157","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}