Project development teams: a novel mechanism for accelerating translational research (original) (raw)
Related papers
Clinical and Translational Science, 2015
Multiinstitutional research collaborations now form the most rapid and productive project execution structures in the health sciences. Effective adoption of a multidisciplinary team research approach is widely accepted as one mechanism enabling rapid translation of new discoveries into interventions in human health. Although the impact of successful team-based approaches facilitating innovation has been well-documented, its utility for training a new generation of scientists has not been thoroughly investigated. We describe the characteristics of how multidisciplinary translational teams (MTTs) promote career development of translational research scholars through competency building, interprofessional integration, and team-based mentoring approaches. Exploratory longitudinal and outcome assessments from our experience show that MTT membership had a positive effect on the development of translational research competencies, as determined by a self-report survey of 32 scholars. We also observed that all trainees produced a large number of collaborative publications that appeared to be associated with their CTSA association and participation with MTTs. We conclude that the MTT model provides a unique training environment for translational and team-based learning activities, for investigators at early stages of career development. Clin Trans Sci 2015; Volume #: 1-9
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).
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.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Morehouse School of Medicine (SOM) works to achieve its vision of advancing health equity through conducting transformational, translation science (Tx). Tx describes our translational research continuum, symbolizing a method and scientific philosophy that intentionally promotes and supports convergence of interdisciplinary approaches and scientists to stimulate exponential advances for the health of diverse communities. Morehouse SOM actualizes Tx through multidisciplinary translational teams (MDTTs). We chronicle the identification of MDTTs by documenting formation, composition, functioning, successes, failures, and sustainability. Data and information were collected through key informant interviews, review of research documents, workshops, and community events. Our scan identified 16 teams that meet our Morehouse SOM definition of an MDTT. These team science workgroups cross basic science, clinical, and public health academic departments, and include community partners and student...
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...
Clinical and Translational Science, 2010
Th e recognition that basic discoveries are frequently not translated to human applications 1 and that the process is unnecessarily slow 2 provides the rationale underpinning the current emphasis on translational research. It is apparent that an enormously broad scope of research is required for such translation. At the University of Rochester Medical Center, all externally-sponsored research projects are identifi ed in a biennial Research Resource Inventory and the principal investigators are asked to classify the project as basic science (preclinical) or clinical. Investigators also classify the clinical research studies as T1 translation: "Applying basic science results to develop new diagnostic or therapeutic procedures in patients with specifi c health concerns;" T2 translation: "Testing the safety and effi cacy of drugs and devices in specifi c patient groups;" or T3 translation "Testing drugs, devices, or other interventions in community settings to establish eff ectiveness and effi ciency. " In 2009, investigators classifi ed 1,243 sponsored research projects as 41% basic and 59% clinical. Of the clinical research projects, 39% were classifi ed as T1, 30% as T2, and 19% as T3, highlighting a broad scope of research requiring support by the University of Rochester
The Current Trend of the Translational Research Paradigm
Cureus
The translational research paradigm is a process of discovering basic science concepts and applying the knowledge in clinical practice, aiming to improve patient care. The stages involved in the paradigm form a complex network of shared knowledge amongst research collaborators, including patients. This nature of the paradigm allows those involved to work together effectively. However, the translational research paradigm is often overlooked by many scientists, educators, and research institutions. Hence, a large amount of comprehensive and hugely invested research projects fail to make a scientific impact. We aim to outline and describe this paradigm in order to aid in the successful translation of effective research.
The Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Consortium and the Translational Research Model
The American Journal of Bioethics, 2008
The shift from isolated researchers working in their individual laboratories to diverse research teams working in collaboration towards a common goal is a fundamental element of the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) (http://www.ctsaweb.org/). What is often misunderstood, however, is the depth and breadth of the translational paradigm. The NIH Roadmap discusses two basic steps of translation. First, basic science research must be translated to humans (the so-called T1 translation), and then secondarily translated into clinical practice (T2 translation) (http://nihroadmap.nih.gov/). Further work has demonstrated that in fact this second phase of translation includes two separate steps, first knowledge from T1 translational studies must be translated to patients (T2), and then we must translate our knowledge into actual clinical practice (T3 translation) (Westfall et al. 2007). Closer scrutiny, however, reveals more complexity and the need for many levels of translation. In this essay, I will briefly outline some of the myriad levels of translation necessary, and provide some examples to illustrate why further work is needed at these levels. Further, I will briefly describe the CTSA Consortium and discuss how this new model of research is attempting to address some of these needs.
The CTSA Consortium's Catalog of Assets for Translational and Clinical Health Research (CATCHR)
Clinical and Translational Science, 2014
The 61 CTSA Consortium sites are home to valuable programs and infrastructure supporting translational science and all are charged with ensuring that such investments translate quickly to improved clinical care. Catalog of Assets for Translational and Clinical Health Research (CATCHR) is the Consortium's effort to collect and make available information on programs and resources to maximize efficiency and facilitate collaborations. By capturing information on a broad range of assets supporting the entire clinical and translational research spectrum, CATCHR aims to provide the necessary infrastructure and processes to establish and maintain an open-access, searchable database of consortium resources to support multisite clinical and translational research studies. Data are collected using rigorous, defined methods, with the resulting information made visible through an integrated, searchable Web-based tool. Additional easy-to-use Web tools assist resource owners in validating and updating resource information over time. In this paper, we discuss the design and scope of the project, data collection methods, current results, and future plans for development and sustainability. With increasing pressure on research programs to avoid redundancy, CATCHR aims to make available information on programs and core facilities to maximize efficient use of resources.