Journal of Clinical and Translational Science最新文献

{"title":"Exploring grant writing coaching and its role in professional development of health equity investigators: A qualitative study.","authors":"Yulia A Levites Strekalova, Selin Kavak, Vanessa Caridad Rodriguez, Sara Midence, Lee S Caplan, Winston Thompson, Muhammed Y Idris, Jonathan Stiles, Priscilla Pemu, Alexander Quarshie, Adriana Baez, Maritza Salazar Campo, Elizabeth Ofili","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10080","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10080","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>External funding is a critical metric in research career advancement, particularly in biomedical fields. Grant-writing coaching emerges as a strategy in biomedical workforce development. Recognizing disparities in grant success among early-career investigators from underrepresented groups, the National Research Mentoring Network Strategic Empowerment Tailored for Health Equity Investigators (NRMN-SETH) provides grant-writing coaching to support these scholars. This study explores the roles of NRMN-SETH grant-writing coaches in fostering technical skills and social support in a group setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This qualitative study employed semi-structured interviews with 16 NIH-funded investigators who served as coaches within the NRMN-SETH program. Data were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using the Framework Method, identifying key roles related to coaching practices.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Findings reveal that grant-writing coaching involved personalized guidance, confidence-building, and structured group interactions. Coaches emphasized individualized feedback on grant components and provided iterative guidance. The group-based coaching environment fostered peer support and normalized challenges, creating a collaborative atmosphere conducive to skill-building. Coaches noted the importance of institutional support in enabling participants to engage in the program, though challenges arose in managing participants with varying grant-writing experience.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study highlights the potential of grant-writing coaching to enhance research capacity among underrepresented scholars, offering a structured, supportive approach that complements traditional mentorship. Integrating tailored coaching programs within biomedical workforce development, particularly at minority-serving and low-resourced institutions, may reduce disparities in grant success. Future research could expand on these findings by investigating the long-term career impacts of coaching and testing the effectiveness of peer-led, group-based components in grant-writing success.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e178"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12444689/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145113380","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 Clinical and Translational Science Award compendium of dissemination and implementation science resource catalogs: Capacity building tools for clinical and translational scientists.","authors":"Lindsay A Lennox, Rachel C Shelton, Catherine L Rohweder, Bethany M Kwan","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10087","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10087","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper describes the development and initial implementation of the Compendium of D&I Catalogs, a tool created by a Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) consortium working group to streamline navigation of the proliferating online resources, catalogs and interactive tools designed to guide application of dissemination and implementation (D&I) science. The Compendium is a curated, dynamically-updated list of 35 D&I resource catalogs organized into eight categories: comprehensive resources; frameworks, theories, and models; methods and measures; funding; practitioner resources; training; CTSA infrastructure; health equity. Eight CTSA hubs volunteered to serve as \"early adopters\" for the tool and completed an evaluation of its initial implementation. Among these \"early adopters,\" half had implemented the Compendium within their websites, describing the web implementation process as \"easy.\" Remaining \"early adopter\" respondents cited institutional web development capacity concerns and competing priorities as reasons for delayed implementation. All respondents valued the Compendium's dynamic updates. Among implementing sites, roughly two-thirds directly embedded the Compendium into their institutional websites, with the others providing a link to the Compendium. For CTSAs striving to meet the rising demand for D&I expertise and resources, the Compendium of D&I Catalogs represents a simple, low-cost tool to enhance accessibility of D&I capacity-building resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e154"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392346/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144956166","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":"Team science training for clinical and translational Scientists: An assessment of effectiveness.","authors":"Anne Mook, Verena Knerich, Goldie Komaie, Lisa Cicutto, Jennifer Cross","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10088","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10088","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Effective interdisciplinary collaboration is essential for addressing complex clinical and translational research challenges. This paper presents and evaluates a structured team science training program developed by the Colorado Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute (CCTSI), while also introducing and validating a novel assessment tool used to measure changes in key teaming competencies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We evaluated the effectiveness of this program between 2020 and 2022 using pre- and post-program surveys (<i>N</i> = 221). Our evaluation tool was designed to capture familiarity with teaming concepts and the frequency of applying collaborative practices. Principal component analysis (PCA) was applied to validate the grouping of these competencies, and paired <i>t</i>-tests were used to measure changes over time.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PCA revealed three distinct components of team science competencies: Team Planning, Managing a Team, and Interpersonal Relations, all demonstrating strong internal reliability. Participants showed statistically significant improvements (<i>p</i> < 0.05) in all three domains. Gains were robust in Team Planning and Managing a Team, emphasizing structured tools and practices. Although improvement was also observed in Interpersonal Relations, the overall gains were smaller.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings highlight the self-reported value of Team Science Training programs in CTR settings. The TEAMS instrument described in this manuscript offers a novel approach for CTSAs to evaluate their Team Science training programs. Future applications could include longitudinal tracking and integration metrics to support future program planning, particularly fostering interdisciplinary collaboration and team integration.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e158"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392353/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144956130","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":"Insights from the trial innovation network's initial consultation process.","authors":"Paul A Harris, Nan Kennedy, Consuelo H Wilkins, Karen Lane, Gordon R Bernard, Jonathan D Casey, Daniel E Ford, Salina P Waddy, Ken L Wiley, Terri L Edwards, Nichol McBee, Dixie D Thompson, Mary Stroud, Emily S Serdoz, Sarah J Nelson, Michelle Jones, Lindsay M Eyzaguirre, Leslie R Boone, Jessica Baird, Colleen E Lawrence, Elizabeth Holthouse, Sarah K Cook, Maeve Tischbein, Natalya Amrine, Tiffany Chen, Jodie Cohen, LaShondra Deyampert, Natalie A Dilts, Delicia Burts, Amna Baig, Joseph G Christodoulou, Mariela Rodriguez, Edgar R Miller, James F Casella, W Andrew Mould, J Michael Dean, Daniel K Benjamin, Harry P Selker, Marisha E Palm, Lori Poole, Jeri S Burr, Sara Hassani, Angeline Nanni, Meghan Hildreth, Daniel F Hanley","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10084","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10084","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Multicenter clinical trials are essential for evaluating interventions but often face significant challenges in study design, site coordination, participant recruitment, and regulatory compliance. To address these issues, the National Institutes of Health's National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences established the Trial Innovation Network (TIN). The TIN offers a scientific consultation process, providing access to clinical trial and disease experts who provide input and recommendations throughout the trial's duration, at no cost to investigators. This approach aims to improve trial design, accelerate implementation, foster interdisciplinary teamwork, and spur innovations that enhance multicenter trial quality and efficiency. The TIN leverages resources of the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) program, complementing local capabilities at the investigator's institution. The Initial Consultation process focuses on the study's scientific premise, design, site development, recruitment and retention strategies, funding feasibility, and other support areas. As of 6/1/2024, the TIN has provided 431 Initial Consultations to increase efficiency and accelerate trial implementation by delivering customized support and tailored recommendations. Across a range of clinical trials, the TIN has developed standardized, streamlined, and adaptable processes. We describe these processes, provide operational metrics, and include a set of lessons learned for consideration by other trial support and innovation networks.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e149"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12305380/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144742238","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":"Health Equity Leadership and Mentoring (HELM): A health equity-focused early-career development program to promote biomedical workforce diversity.","authors":"Melanie Steiner, Susan A Everson-Rose, April F Mohanty, José E Rodríguez, Molly B Conroy, Michele L Allen, Antonia Apolinário-Wilcoxon, Kolawole S Okuyemi","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10083","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10083","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Intentionally enhancing and supporting the early careers of individuals from populations underrepresented in science and medicine (URSM) is essential to achieving health equity. The Health Equity Leadership and Mentoring (HELM) Program at the University of Minnesota and the University of Utah is designed to foster academic excellence and build leadership capacity of postdoctoral fellows, clinical fellows, and early-career faculty who identify as URSM and/or who are committed to careers in health equity research and clinical care. HELM models a culture of psychosocial safety to create a sense of belonging and uses evidence-based and culturally aware mentoring and career development strategies with the goal of retaining diverse faculty. HELM proved agile and adaptive during the Covid-19 pandemic and has been successful in states with and without legislation limiting diversity programs. Across the 2 institutions, the HELM program has supported over 200 trainees and early-career faculty through mid-2024. Among HELM participants who joined the program as faculty, 85%-95% have remained in their faculty positions.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e183"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12444691/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145113007","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":"Translating implementation science principles and methods to front-line clinicians: The Implementation Science Scholars Program.","authors":"Geoffrey M Curran, Sara J Landes, Taren Massey-Swindle, Benjamin S Teeter, Cynthia L Mosley, Jennifer Naylor, Laura P James","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10072","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10072","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article describes the Implementation Science (IS) Scholars Program at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS). The program's goal is to translate knowledge, approaches, and methods from IS to front-line clinicians in an academic medical center, thereby supporting its goals as a learning health system and promoting a dynamic workforce of IS-informed change leaders. Initiated in 2020, the program is relatively unique in that it attempts to translate concepts and knowledge <i>from</i> IS to clinicians to improve their skills as implementers and change agents. The program is supported by the Translational Research Institute, the UAMS' awardee of the Clinical and Translational Science Award Program. The two-year program provides 20% salary coverage, bespoke didactics, and close mentoring on a Scholar-initiated project to improve care in their clinical context. The program has trained four cohorts of Scholars over the program's initial five years. We describe the program, our evaluation of it thus far, and future plans. The program has contributed to numerous healthcare improvements and served as a gateway to future implementation and other research activities among some Scholars.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e147"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12305373/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144742239","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":"Perceptions of a comprehensive telehealth intervention in patients with persistently poor type 2 diabetes control.","authors":"Jashalynn German, Madeleine R Eldridge, Lucy Esteve, Anastasia-Stefania Alexopoulos, Connor Drake, Allison Lewinski, Hayden B Bosworth, David Edelman, Karen Steinhauser, Matthew J Crowley","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10082","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10082","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To understand participant perspectives on an effective, practical, comprehensive telehealth intervention for persistently poorly controlled diabetes mellitus and examine how its components contributed to improved outcomes, with the goal of informing broader telehealth-based diabetes management strategies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted semi-structured interviews of a purposive sample of patients and staff in the comprehensive telehealth arm of the Practical Telehealth to Improve Control and Engagement for Patients with Clinic-Refractory Diabetes Mellitus study. Using the lens of patient engagement, we applied directed content analysis to categorize themes across the five components of the intervention.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The purposive sample included 19 patients (79% male, 53% Black, varying levels of intervention engagement) and 8 staff. The telemonitoring component was associated with encouragement and motivation among patients; staff found satisfaction in providing metrics of success for participants. For the self-management component, patients saw staff as helpful with problem-solving; staff felt patients were receptive to education. Medication management supported medication adherence and optimization and was acceptable to patients. Diet/activity support motivated behavioral changes among patients. Staff felt that depression support allowed for responsiveness to medical and behavioral factors influencing self-management. Identified areas for improvement included staff time constraints, patient difficulties with taking and transmitting data, and challenges with patient adherence among those with mental health conditions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Findings from this study provide insights that may inform the design, implementation, and scalability of comprehensive telehealth models for diabetes management across diverse healthcare settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e153"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392345/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144955944","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":"Comparing methods for glomerular filtration rate estimation.","authors":"Xiaoqian Zhu, Tariq Shafi, Keith C Norris, Jeannette Simino, Srishti Shrestha, Thomas H Mosley, Michael E Griswold, Seth T Lirette","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10057","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10057","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The glomerular filtration rate (GFR), estimated from serum creatinine (SCr), is widely used in clinical practice for kidney function assessment, but SCr-based equations are limited by non-GFR determinants and may introduce inaccuracies across racial groups. Few studies have evaluated whether advanced modeling techniques enhance their performance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using multivariable fractional polynomials (MFP), generalized additive models (GAM), random forests (RF), and gradient boosted machines (GBM), we developed four SCr-based GFR-estimating equations in a pooled data set from four cohorts (<i>n</i> = 4665). Their performance was compared to that of the refitted linear regression-based 2021 CKD-EPI SCr equation using bias (median difference between measured GFR [mGFR] and estimated GFR [eGFR]), precision, and accuracy metrics (e.g., P10 and P30, percentage of eGFR within 10% and 30% of mGFR, respectively) in a pooled validation data set from three additional cohorts (<i>n</i> = 2215).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the validation data set, the greatest bias and lowest accuracy, were observed in Black individuals for all equations across subgroups defined by race, sex, age, and eGFR. The MFP and GAM equations performed similarly to the refitted CKD-EPI SCr equation, with slight improvements in P10 and P30 in subgroups including Black individuals and females. The GBM and RF equations demonstrated smaller biases, but lower accuracy compared to other equations. Generally, differences among equations were modest overall and across subgroups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings suggest that advanced methods provide limited improvement in SCr-based GFR estimation. Future research should focus on integrating novel biomarkers for GFR estimation and improving the feasibility of GFR measurement.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e148"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12305378/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144742233","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":"Improving the usability of online resources to support implementation research and practice: The RE-AIM website use case.","authors":"Emiliane L Pereira, Thomas E Strayer, Samantha M Harden, Russell E Glasgow, Christina Studts, Paul A Estabrooks, Amy G Huebschmann","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10070","DOIUrl":"10.1017/cts.2025.10070","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Our overall goal was to enhance the usability and interactivity of the RE-AIM website (re-aim.org) and improve resources to support the application of the RE-AIM framework within the context of dissemination & implementation (D&I) research and practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We applied a mixed-methods approach to obtain user feedback from 24 D&I researchers and practitioners. Usability (System Usability Scale) and interactivity (Interactivity Scale) were assessed through validated surveys, at baseline and after two iterative rounds of website modifications (Phase 1 and Phase 2). We also conducted qualitative assessments at each phase.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Qualitative baseline and Phase 1 findings indicated a need to simplify organization, enhance information accessibility, provide concrete guidance on applying RE-AIM, and clarify contextual factors related to RE-AIM constructs. After streamlining website and homepage organization, Phase 2 qualitative results suggested improved user navigation experience; users also requested greater interactivity. Modifications included: new interactive planning tool and a video introduction of contextual factors influencing RE-AIM outcomes. Significant improvements were found in the SUS score from baseline to Phase 1(64.2[SD18.7] to 80.8 [SD 12.1] (<i>p</i> < .05) and remained higher in Phase 2(77.1[SD 15] (<i>p</i> = 0.08). Interactivity also improved from baseline to Phase 2(3.5[SD1.2] to 41[0.9], though not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>User-centered feedback on online resources, as exemplified by this use case example of enhancements to the RE-AIM website, are important in bridging the gap between research and practice, and the revised website should be more accessible and useful to users.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e146"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12305379/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144742237","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":"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":"10.1017/cts.2025.10066","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":2.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392360/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144955883","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}