Advancement of multidisciplinary education and research in translational sciences: MERITS program development at Duke University.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Freel SA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6799111 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Advancement of multidisciplinary education and research in translational sciences: MERITS program development at Duke University.
Freel Stephanie A SA Fish Laura J LJ Mirman Benjamin B Sudan Ranjan R Devi Gayathri R GR
Journal of clinical and translational science 20180201 1
<h4>Introduction</h4>The Duke Multidisciplinary Education and Research in Translational Sciences Program provides educational resources for faculty and trainees in translational research.<h4>Methods</h4>To aid in program development, we assessed perceptions of translational science through focus groups targeting different career stages.<h4>Results</h4>In total, 3 essential themes emerged: collaboration, movement toward application, and public health impact. Facilitators and barriers varied among ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:The development of translational clinical research protocols is complex. To assist investigators, we developed a structured supportive guidance process (Navigation) to expedite protocol development to the standards of good clinical practice (GCP), focusing on research ethics and integrity. Navigation consists of experienced research coordinators leading investigators through a concerted multistep protocol development process from concept initiation to submission of the final protocol. To assess the effectiveness of Navigation, we collect data on the experience of investigators, the intensity of support required for protocol development, IRB review outcomes, and protocol start and completion dates. One hundred forty-four protocols underwent Navigation and achieved IRB approval since the program began in 2007, including 37 led by trainee investigators, 26 led by MDs, 9 by MD/PhDs, 57 by PhDs, and 12 by investigators with other credentials (e.g., RN, MPH). In every year, more than 50% of Navigated protocols were approved by the IRB within 30 days. For trainees who had more than one protocol navigated, the intensity of Navigation support required decreased over time. Navigation can increase access to translational studies for basic scientists, facilitate GCP training for investigators, and accelerate development and approval of protocols of high ethical and scientific quality.
| S-EPMC4074027 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research implemented the "Studio" Program in 2007 to bring together experts to provide free, structured, project-specific feedback for medical researchers. Studios are a series of integrated, dynamic, and interactive roundtable discussions that bring relevant research experts from diverse academic disciplines together to focus on a specific research project at a specific stage. Vanderbilt's Clinical and Translational Science Award supports the program, which is designed to improve the quality and impact of biomedical research. In this article, the authors describe the program's design, and they provide an evaluation of its first four years.After an investigator completes a brief online Studio application, a Studio "manager" reviews the request, assembles a panel of three to six experts (research faculty from multiple disciplines), and circulates the pre-review materials electronically. Investigators can request one of seven Studio formats: hypothesis generation, study design, grant review, implementation, analysis and interpretation, manuscript review, or translation. A Studio moderator leads each Studio session, managing the time (90 minutes) and discussion to optimize the usefulness of the session for the investigator.Feedback from the 157 Studio sessions in the first four years has been overwhelmingly positive. Investigators have indicated that their Studios have improved the quality of their science (99%; 121/122 responses), and experts have reported that the Studios have been a valuable use of their time (98%; 398/406 responses).
| S-EPMC3406254 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Biology education research (BER) is a growing field, as evidenced by the increasing number of publications in CBE-Life Sciences Education ( LSE) and expanding participation at the Society for the Advancement of Biology Education Research (SABER) annual meetings. To facilitate an introspective and reflective discussion on how research within LSE and at SABER has matured, we conducted a content analysis of LSE research articles ( n = 339, from 2002 to 2015) and SABER abstracts ( n = 652, from 2011 to 2015) to examine three related intraresearch parameters: research questions, study contexts, and methodologies. Qualitative data analysis took a combination of deductive and inductive approaches, followed by statistical analyses to determine the correlations among different parameters. We identified existing research questions, study contexts, and methodologies in LSE articles and SABER abstracts and then compared and contrasted these parameters between the two data sources. LSE articles were most commonly guided by descriptive research questions, whereas SABER abstracts were most commonly guided by causal research questions. Research published in LSE and presented at SABER both prioritize undergraduate classrooms as the study context and quantitative methodologies. In this paper, we examine these research trends longitudinally and discuss implications for the future of BER as a scholarly field.
| S-EPMC6757219 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Collecting and managing data for clinical and translational research presents significant challenges for clinical and translational researchers, many of whom lack needed access to data management expertise, methods, and tools. At many institutions, funding constraints result in differential levels of research informatics support among investigators. In addition, the lack of widely shared models and ontologies for clinical research informatics and health information technology hampers the accurate assessment of investigators' needs and complicates the efficient allocation of crucial resources for research projects, ultimately affecting the quality and reliability of research. In this paper, we present a model for providing flexible, cost-efficient institutional support for clinical and translational research data management and informatics, the research management team, and describe our initial experiences with deploying this model at our institution.
| S-EPMC3531876 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeAlthough essential for development of ocular therapeutics, the quality and quantity of human donor eyes for research have been on the decline. To streamline procurement protocols, provide better medical documentation of tissue, and improve freshness and number of eyes, a pilot cooperative program was undertaken between the Duke University Eye Center and Miracles In Sight Eye Bank.MethodsFor research eye donors who expire at Duke University Hospital, age restrictions to procurement were lifted, access to donors' electronic medical records was granted to researchers, and eye tissue was delivered directly to scientists. The number of eye pairs received per month and the time from death to arrival in the laboratory were documented, and independent-samples t-tests were used to compare the number of paired eyes and the death-to-laboratory time before and after implementation of the program. A cost analysis of the program was also conducted.ResultsImplementation of the program decreased the time from death to arrival in the laboratory from an average of 22.1 ± 1.5 h (n = 22) to 11.6 ± 0.8 h (n = 75) for a pair of eyes (P < 0.0001). Moreover, the number of whole eye pairs increased from 1.57 ± 0.32 to 3.26 ± 0.27 donors per month (P = 0.0019). Cost analysis indicates that our program is financially viable and sustainable for the eye bank.ConclusionsThe Duke-Miracles In Sight Program implemented a number of operational changes that resulted in improved quantity and quality of ocular tissue to researchers. Such a model appears feasible for adoption between other eye centers and eye banks.
| S-EPMC4827310 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The introduction of emtricitabine/tenofovir diphosphate (FTC/TDF) as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention has raised questions regarding which clinicians will serve as prescribers and how providers will be educated about this HIV prevention strategy. We piloted an HIV Prevention Education Program called PrEP University (PrEP U) to address knowledge gaps in HIV prevention among medical trainees. We examined PrEP awareness and assessed learning as a result of the program, measuring knowledge before and after the lectures with an anonymous 5-question multiple choice test. A total of 198 learners participated in PrEP University, which included 127 first year medical students, and post-graduate trainees in internal medicine (n = 23), family medicine (n = 16), OBGYN (n = 13) and pharmacy (n = 19). Prior to PrEP U, 27% of all participants were not aware of PrEP and an additional 8% were unsure if they had heard of it. Knowledge increased significantly after the education program among trainees in OBGYN (2.3 vs 3.8, p < 0.001), pharmacy (1.4 vs 2.5, p = 0.012) and school of medicine (3.3 vs 4.4, p < 0.001), with a trend seen in family medicine (2.7 vs. 3.7, p = 0.067) and internal medicine (2.7 vs 3.4, p = 0.068). Overall, an HIV Prevention Education Program was successfully administered to nearly 200 participants and resulted in improved knowledge of HIV prevention and PrEP across. Pharmacists and OBGYN physicians are two groups with an expanding role in the use of PrEP. Similar programs at other medical schools should be implemented to ensure that future physicians and pharmacists are comfortable with PrEP prescription.
| S-EPMC8595182 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn 1985 medical schools were integrated into the Ministry of Health, and the Ministry of Health and Medical Education was created in Iran. Under this infrastructure education, research and service provision are unified, and it is expected that collaboration between researchers and decision makers become easier in such an integrated context.The question here is how the researchers behavior in the biggest medical university of the country towards collaboration is, i.e. how much do decision makers participate in different stages of research? Which factors affect it?MethodologyThe samples under study were all Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS) completed research projects that had gotten grants in 2004 and were over by the time this study was done. Two questionnaires were designed for this study: i) the research checklist which was filled for 301 projects, ii) the researcher's questionnaire, which was sent to principle investigators, 208 of which were collected. Multiple linear regression analysis was used for evaluating the potential factors affecting individuals 'collaboration score'.ResultsOnly 2.2 percent of TUMS' projects initiated in 2004 have had collaboration as a joint PI or co-investigator from non-academic organizations. The principle investigators mean collaboration score was 2.09, where 6 was the total score. So the collaboration score obtained was 35%. The 'type of research' had significant association with the collaboration score which is shown in the linear regression; collaboration was seen more in clinical (p = 0.007) and health system researches (p = 0.001) as compared to basic research.ConclusionThe present study shows that not many individuals collaborated as co-investigators from outside the university. This finding shows that research policy makers need to introduce interventions in this field. And assessment of barriers to collaboration and its facilitating factors should be considered in order to make it actually happen.
| S-EPMC2679006 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesMulti-institutional research increases the generalizability of research findings. However, little is known about characteristics of collaborations across institutions in health sciences education research. Using a systematic review process, the authors describe characteristics of published, peer-reviewed multi-institutional health sciences education research to inform educators who are considering such projects.MethodsTwo medical librarians searched MEDLINE, the Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), EMBASE, and CINAHL databases for English-language studies published between 2004 and 2013 using keyword terms related to multi-institutional systems and health sciences education. Teams of two authors reviewed each study and resolved coding discrepancies through consensus. Collected data points included funding, research network involvement, author characteristics, learner characteristics, and research methods. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.ResultsOne hundred eighteen of 310 articles met inclusion criteria. Sixty-three (53%) studies received external and/or internal financial support (87% listed external funding, 37% listed internal funding). Forty-five funded studies involved graduate medical education programs. Twenty (17%) studies involved a research or education network. Eighty-five (89%) publications listed an author with a master's degree or doctoral degree. Ninety-two (78%) studies were descriptive, whereas 26 studies (22%) were experimental. The reported study outcomes were changes in student attitude (38%; n=44), knowledge (26%; n=31), or skill assessment (23%; n=27), as well as patient outcomes (9%; n=11).ConclusionsMulti-institutional descriptive studies reporting knowledge or attitude outcomes are highly published. Our findings indicate that funding resources are not essential to successfully undertake multi-institutional projects. Funded studies were more likely to originate from graduate medical or nursing programs.
| S-EPMC5624422 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveGout patient self-management knowledge and adherence to treatment regimens are poor. Our objective was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a multidisciplinary team-based pilot program for the education and monitoring of gout patients.MethodsSubjects completed a gout self-management knowledge exam, along with gout flare history and compliance questionnaires, at enrollment and at 6 and 12 months. Each exam was followed by a nursing educational intervention via a structured gout curriculum. Structured monthly follow-up calls from pharmacists emphasized adherence to management programs. Primary outcomes were subject and provider program evaluation questionnaires at 6 and 12 months, program retention rate and success in reaching patients via monthly calls.ResultsOverall, 40/45 subjects remained in the study at 12 months. At 12 months, on a scale of 1 (most) to 5 (least), ratings of 3 or better were given by 84.6% of subjects evaluating the usefulness of the overall program in understanding and managing their gout, 81.0% of subjects evaluating the helpfulness of the nursing education program, and 50.0% of subjects evaluating the helpfulness of the calls from the pharmacists. Knowledge exam questions that were most frequently answered incorrectly on repeat testing concerned bridge therapy, the possibility of being flare-free, and the genetic component of gout.ConclusionsOur multidisciplinary program of gout patient education and monitoring demonstrates feasibility and acceptability. We identified variability in patient preference for components of the program and persistent patient knowledge gaps.
| S-EPMC5837038 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We developed a summer research experience program within a freestanding comprehensive cancer center to cultivate undergraduate students with an interest in and an aptitude for quantitative sciences focused on oncology. This unconventional location for an undergraduate program is an ideal setting for interdisciplinary training in the intersection of oncology, statistics, and epidemiology. This paper describes the development and implementation of a hands-on research experience program in this unique environment. Core components of the program include faculty-mentored projects, instructional programs to improve research skills and domain knowledge, and professional development activities. We discuss key considerations such as effective partnership between research and administrative units, recruiting students, and identifying faculty mentors with quantitative projects. We describe evaluation approaches and discuss post-program outcomes and lessons learned. In its initial two years, the program successfully improved students' perception of competence gained in research skills and statistical knowledge across several knowledge domains. The majority of students also went on to pursue graduate degrees in a quantitative field or work in oncology-centric academic research roles. Our research-based training model can be adapted by a variety of organizations motivated to develop a summer research experience program in quantitative sciences for undergraduate students.
| S-EPMC9199014 | biostudies-literature