The Multidisciplinary Translational Team (MTT) Model for Training and Development of Translational Research Investigators (original) (raw)
Related papers
The CTSA as an Exemplar Framework for Developing Multidisciplinary Translational Teams
Clinical and Translational Science, 2012
Th e need for multidisciplinary teams in translational science Team-based models are increasingly used to pursue the technological challenges of "big science" in the postgenomic era. 1 Trend analyses of peer-reviewed scientifi c publications have concluded that biological science advancements are increasingly the product of multi-investigator studies, team science is more oft en cited than the work of an individual researcher, and their work has higher scientific impact. 2-4 The greater impact of multidisciplinary science is attributed to innovation engendered by discipline diversity, 5 and, as a result, the formation of teams in science has become widespread. 6 Although this analysis has been derived from basic biological and physical sciences, it follows that a team approach is also an appropriate organizational form in translational science due to the breadth and complexity of the T1-T4 spectrum. 7-10 As a result, there is considerable interest in exploiting the potential of the nascent fi eld of the Science of Team Science to facilitate translational research. One framework within which this development can occur is the Clinical and Translational Sciences Awards (CTSA), although other academic structures may serve a similar function. 11-13 Development of team science in translational research Th e NIH has published a fi eld guide for collaboration and team science to advance development of scientifi c teams, 14 but this experience may be context-dependent; the best strategies for academic health centers (AHCs) have yet to be determined, and may vary by the specifi c context of individual institutions. Applying lessons from multidisciplinary team-based structures from basic science and industry to academic translational science is inherently complex for several reasons. First, little is known about the optimum way to defi ne, structure, organize, and lead translational research teams. 15,16 Although team development processes for the product-driven business community are established, how teams can be developed within an academic environment that still satisfy the academic needs for peer recognition and individual advancement is not intuitive. Moreover, the most eff ective ways to train and develop the membership of translational teams have yet to be determined, as are the necessary skill sets for team participation or leadership. 7,17,18 In this CTS Special Report, we review considerations of design and support of multidisciplinary teams through integration of literature review and our experience with developing a series of multidisciplinary research teams at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB). We have identifi ed key dimensions for the design and support of MTTs and provide case illustrations developed within the CTSA environment. We discuss the opportunities and challenges in the design and support of MTTs and the value of CTSA structure to teams. Th is information will simultaneously drive the development of training curricula for CTSA-affi liated faculty and inform educational competencies for CTSA KL2 programs. Multidisciplinary Translational Teams (MTTs): A Novel Collaborative Approach to Translational Science Unique requirements of an MTT Academic missions include knowledge generation and education, yet MTTs in AHCs must embrace product-like translational goals to develop or apply a device, diagnostic, therapeutic, or intervention to improve human health. Hence, MTTs represent a unique, hybrid form of team organization. We surveyed organizational team types from business and management literature to inform our implementation of MTT support strategies (an annotated bibliography is available as a Supporting Information online).
Clinical and translational science, 2015
There is growing consensus about the factors critical for development and productivity of multidisciplinary teams, but few studies have evaluated their longitudinal changes. We present a longitudinal study of 10 multidisciplinary translational teams (MTTs), based on team process and outcome measures, evaluated before and after 3 years of CTSA collaboration. Using a mixed methods approach, an expert panel of five judges (familiar with the progress of the teams) independently rated team performance based on four process and four outcome measures, and achieved a rating consensus. Although all teams made progress in translational domains, other process and outcome measures were highly variable. The trajectory profiles identified four categories of team performance. Objective bibliometric analysis of CTSA-supported MTTs with positive growth in process scores showed that these teams tended to have enhanced scientific outcomes and published in new scientific domains, indicating the conduct...
Journal of Translational Medicine and Epidemiology, 2013
The Science-of-Team-Science (SciTS) has become an important area of study as collaborative research becomes more normative throughout science inquiry and especially in medical and healthcare sectors. Team science aims for higher and collaborative levels of inquiry that operate within economies of knowledge similar to transdisciplinarity that strive to synthesize knowledge and innovate as a result of newly developed and hybridized methods of approach. This newly becoming and normalizing mode of science will require professionals to be aware of and embrace the shifting realities which have been the consequence of this new economy of knowledge. The next century of inquiry will require new generations of translational professionals that are keenly aware of their role as part of the translational process no matter what role they presently play in the continuum of bench to bedside to storefront healthcare. This paper reviews the SciTS landscape and theories of transdisciplinarity. It also provides insights about the shifting paradigms currently occurring in the discourse and identifies challenges for translational professionals.
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
Introduction: A recent literature review revealed no studies that explored teams that used an explicit theoretical framework for multiteam systems in academic settings, such as the increasingly important multi-institutional cross-disciplinary translational team (MCTT) form. We conducted an exploratory 30-interview grounded theory study over two rounds to analyze participants’ experiences from three universities who assembled an MCTT in order to pursue a complex grant proposal related to research on post-acute sequelae of COVID-19, also called “long COVID.” This article considers activities beginning with preliminary discussions among principal investigators through grant writing and submission, and completion of reviews by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, which resulted in the proposal not being scored. Methods: There were two stages to this interview study with MCTT members: pre-submission, and post-decision. Round one focused on the process of developing s...
Project development teams: a novel mechanism for accelerating translational research
Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 2015
The trend in conducting successful biomedical research is shifting from individual academic labs to coordinated collaborative research teams. Teams of experienced investigators with a wide variety of expertise are now critical for developing and maintaining a successful, productive research program. However, assembling a team whose members have the right expertise requires a great deal of time and many resources. To assist investigators seeking such resources, the Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute (Indiana CTSI) created the Project Development Teams (PDTs) program to support translational research on and across the Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, Indiana University, Purdue University, and University of Notre Dame campuses. PDTs are multidisciplinary committees of seasoned researchers who assist investigators, at any stage of research, in transforming ideas/hypotheses into well-designed translational research projects. The teams help investigato...
Academic Medicine, 2010
The creation of the Clinical Translational Science Awards for academic health sciences campuses in 2006 was implicitly accompanied by a call for a new paradigm of faculty development and mentoring to train the next generation of researchers and leaders in this new approach to research. Effective mentoring is critical to help early career investigators become successful, independent researchers, and a new approach to mentoring is vital to recruit, advance, and retain fellows and junior faculty engaged in clinical and translational research. However, in addition to the many rewards of mentoring, there are numerous substantive barriers to effective mentoring. These barriers include a lack of training in how to be a mentor, lack of time and structural and financial support for mentoring, and competing personal, administrative and clinical demands.
Assessing and Evaluating Multidisciplinary Translational Teams
Evaluation & the Health Professions, 2014
A case report illustrates how multidisciplinary translational teams can be assessed using outcome, process, and developmental types of evaluation using a mixed-methods approach. Types of evaluation appropriate for teams are considered in relation to relevant research questions and assessment methods. Logic models are applied to scientific projects and team development to inform choices between methods within a mixed-methods design. Use of an expert panel is reviewed, culminating in consensus ratings of 11 multidisciplinary teams and a final evaluation within a team-type taxonomy. Based on team maturation and scientific progress, teams were designated as (a) early in development, (b) traditional, (c) process focused, or (d) exemplary. Lessons learned from data reduction, use of mixed methods, and use of expert panels are explored.
The present study investigate to what extent basic-clinical collaboration and involvement in translational research improve performance of researchers, in the particular setting of hospitals affiliated with the Spanish National Health System (NHS). We used a combination of quantitative science indicators and perception-based data obtained through a survey of researchers working at NHS hospitals. Although collaborating with clinical researchers and health care practitioners may increase productivity of basic researchers working in clinical settings, the extent to which they are able to contribute to translational research is the factor that allows them to make a qualitative leap in their scientific production in highly ranked international scientific journals. Our results challenge the arguments by some authors that translational projects have more difficulties than basic proposals to be granted by funding agencies and to be published in high-impact journals. Although they are not conclusive, our results point towards the existence of a positive relationship between leadership and involvement in translational research. Basic-clinical collaboration and translational research should be an incentive for researchers as they are likely to favour their performance. Hospitals will benefit from encouraging researchers and health care practitioners to collaborate in the framework of translational projects, as a way to improve not only individual, but institutional research performance. Spanish hospitals should contribute to overcome obstacles to translational research, through the full integration of basic researchers within the hospital setting and the definition of a research career path within the NHS.