Opportunities for strengthening CTSA evaluation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Patel T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6803463 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Opportunities for strengthening CTSA evaluation.
Patel Tanha T Rainwater Julie J Trochim William M WM Elworth Julie T JT Scholl Linda L Dave Gaurav G
Journal of clinical and translational science 20190601 2-3
The purpose of the article is to describe the progress of the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Program to address the evaluation-related recommendations made by the 2013 Institute of Medicine's review of the CTSA Program and guidelines published in CTS Journal the same year (Trochim et al., Clinical and Translational Science 2013; 6(4): 303-309). We utilize data from a 2018 national survey of evaluators administered to all 64 CTSA hubs and a content analysis of the role of evaluat ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionIn order to tackle the challenge of efficiently meeting clinical research accrual goals, many Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) recipients have developed recruitment support mechanisms and resources to help investigators successfully recruit study participants. Disseminating recruitment best practices and developing collaborations between institutions can help strengthen recruitment capabilities and methodologies currently utilized by researchers.MethodsTo discover what recruitment resources and mechanisms CTSAs are using, the CTSA Recruitment and Retention working group developed an electronic survey, which was distributed to CTSAs between May and July 2019. The survey contained over 50 multiple choice and short answer questions, with 40 of the 64 CTSA institutions completing the survey. Institutions reported on registries, feasibility assessment tools, clinical trial listings, experience recruiting special populations, program operations and evaluation, workforce education, social media use, and other recruitment resources.ResultsAll respondents currently utilize some form of a volunteer registry; over 80% of the CTSAs provide investigators with recruitment consultations, feasibility assessments, study listings, and electronic health record (EHR) utilization; 73% assist with study materials; 47% offer social media assistance. Many institutions reported success in recruiting patients and healthy volunteers, but difficulty in recruiting special populations such as non-English-speaking persons and rural populations. Additional recruitment tools included use of the EHR to facilitate recruitment, use of registries, and use of social media to engage participants.ConclusionsAreas of opportunity or growth include the development of innovative solutions in the areas of social media advertising, identification of participants from special populations, and research volunteer engagement.
| S-EPMC8057486 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This short report identifies enablers and barriers to the uptake of provider-initiated testing and counselling for HIV (PITC) in Namibia and identifies key opportunities for strengthening this vital aspect of the national HIV response. We explored this through facility mapping, register reviews and qualitative methods including focus group discussions and in-depth interviews. Four health facilities (clinics and hospitals) in two regions were included in the study. We identified that PITC in Namibia was largely delivered by lay counsellors operating in designated rapid testing rooms located in health facilities and found a large number of missed opportunities for HIV testing through this model. Nurses did not see it as an integral part of their role, were not aware of HIV testing and counselling policy, felt inadequately trained and supported, and experienced staffing shortages. Institutional issues also acted as barriers to nurses performing or initiating discussions about PITC. Wider dissemination and implementation of policy, increasing privacy of consultation spaces and community sensitisation are simple measures that represent opportunities for strengthening this response and ensuring that symptomatic individuals who are unaware of their HIV status do not fall through the net.
| S-EPMC4440621 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundInjuries are a leading cause of death and disability for Alaska Native (AN) people. Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) is supporting the development of a burn care system that includes a partnership between Alaska Native Medical Center (ANMC) in Anchorage, AK and UW Medicine Regional Burn Center at Harborview Medical Center (HMC) in Seattle, WA. We aimed to better understand the experiences of AN people with burn injuries across the care continuum to aid development of culturally appropriate care regionalization.MethodsWe performed focus groups with twelve AN people with burn injury and their caregivers. A multidisciplinary team of burn care providers, qualitative research experts, AN care coordinator, and AN cultural liaison led focus groups to elicit experiences across the burn care continuum. Transcripts were analyzed using a phenomenological approach and inductive coding to understand how AN people and families navigated the medical and community systems for burn care and areas for improvement.ResultsThree themes were identified: 1-Challenges with local burn care in remote communities including limited first aid, triage, pain management, and wound care, as well as long-distance transport to definitive care; 2-Divergence between cultural values and medical practices that generated mistrust in the medical system, isolation from their support systems, and recovery goals that were not aligned with their needs; 3-Difficulty accessing emotional health support and a survivor community that could empower their resilience.ConclusionParticipants reported modifiable barriers to culturally competent treatment for burn injuries among AN people. The findings can inform initiatives that leverage existing resources, including expansion of the Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) telementoring program, promulgation of the Phoenix Society Survivors Offering Assistance in Recovery (SOAR) to AK, coordination of regionalized care to reduce time away from AK and provide more comfortable community reintegration, and define rehabilitation goals in terms that align with personal goals and subsistence lifestyle skills. Long-distance transport times are non-modifiable, but better pre-hospital care could be achieved by harnessing existing telehealth services and adapting principles of prolonged field care to allow for triage, initial care, and resuscitation in remote environments.
| S-EPMC10652576 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Consortium, about 60 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-supported CTSA hubs at academic health care institutions nationwide, is charged with improving the clinical and translational research enterprise. Together with the NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), the Consortium implemented Common Metrics and a shared performance improvement framework.MethodsInitial implementation across hubs was assessed using quantitative and qualitative methods over a 19-month period. The primary outcome was implementation of three Common Metrics and the performance improvement framework. Challenges and facilitators were elicited.ResultsAmong 59 hubs with data, all began implementing Common Metrics, but about one-third had completed all activities for three metrics within the study period. The vast majority of hubs computed metric results and undertook activities to understand performance. Differences in completion appeared in developing and carrying out performance improvement plans. Seven key factors affected progress: hub size and resources, hub prior experience with performance management, alignment of local context with needs of the Common Metrics implementation, hub authority in the local institutional structure, hub engagement (including CTSA Principal Investigator involvement), stakeholder engagement, and attending training and coaching.ConclusionsImplementing Common Metrics and performance improvement in a large network of research-focused organizations proved feasible but required substantial time and resources. Considerable heterogeneity across hubs in data systems, existing processes and personnel, organizational structures, and local priorities of home institutions created disparate experiences across hubs. Future metric-based performance management initiatives across heterogeneous local contexts should anticipate and account for these types of differences.
| S-EPMC8057371 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo respond to increased public and programmatic demand to address underenrollment of clinical translational research studies, the authors examined participant recruitment practices at Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) sites and make recommendations for performance metrics and accountability.MethodThe CTSA Recruitment and Retention taskforce in 2010 invited representatives at 46 CTSAs to complete an online 48-question survey querying accrual and recruitment outcomes, practices, evaluation methods, policies, and perceived gaps in related knowledge/practice. Descriptive statistical and thematic analyses were conducted.ResultsForty-six respondents representing 44 CTSAs completed the survey. Recruitment conducted by study teams was the most common practice reported (78%-91%, by study type); 39% reported their institution offered recruitment services to investigators. Respondents valued study feasibility assessment as a successful practice (39%); desired additional resources included feasibility assessments (49%) and participant registries (44%). None reported their institution systematically required justification of feasibility; some indicated relevant information was considered prior to institutional review board (IRB) review (30%) or contract approval (22%). All respondents' IRBs tracked study progress, but only 10% of respondents could report outcome data for timely accrual. Few reported written policies addressing poor accrual or provided data to support recruitment practice effectiveness.ConclusionsMany CTSAs lack the necessary frame work to support study accrual. Recom men dations to enhance accrual include articulating institutional expectations and policy for routine recruitment plan ning; providing recruitment expertise to inform feasibility assessment and recruit ment planning; and developing interdepartmental coordination and integrated informatics infrastructure to drive the conduct, evaluation, and improvement of recruitment practices.
| S-EPMC4116452 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe Great CTSA Team Science Contest (GTSC) was developed to discover how Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hubs promote and support team science [1]. The purpose of this study was a secondary qualitative analysis of the GTSC submissions to better understand the diversity of team science initiatives across the CTSA consortium.MethodsSecondary qualitative analysis of the GTSC data addressed the following research questions, which defined the top-level coding: (1) What CTSA component sponsored it? (2) Who was the team doing the work? (3) Who were the intended beneficiaries? (4) What was the intended outcome? (5) What strategies did they use? (6) What translational science (TS) stage was addressed? (7) How do they align with the NCATS team science strategic goals? (8) How do the CTSA's team science efforts align with the National Academies Research Council (NRC) recommendations for enhancing the effectiveness of team science?ResultsThe GTSC received 170 submissions from 45 unique CTSA hubs. Qualitative analysis revealed a great variety of team science strategies for virtually all team science stakeholders. In addition to strategies to promote team science, results show successful examples that focus on outcomes and illustrate ways of measuring success.ConclusionsThe GTSC shows that the CTSA consortium is involved in an extremely diverse array of team science activities, which align well with both the NRC recommendations for enhancing the effectiveness of team science and the NCATS strategic goals for team science. Future research should evaluate the efficacy of team science strategies.
| S-EPMC8411266 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Mutations in the CTSA gene, that encodes the protective protein/cathepsin A or PPCA, lead to the secondary deficiency of ?-galactosidase (GLB1) and neuraminidase 1 (NEU1), causing the lysosomal storage disorder galactosialidosis (GS). Few clinical cases of GS have been reported in the literature, the majority of them belonging to the juvenile/adult group of patients.The correct nomenclature of mutations for this gene is discussed through the analysis of the three PPCA/CTSA isoforms available in the GenBank database. Phenotype-genotype correlation has been assessed by computational analysis and review of previously reported single amino acid substitutions.We report the clinical and mutational analyses of four cases with the rare infantile form of GS. We identified three novel nucleotide changes, two of them resulting in the missense mutations, c.347A>G (p.His116Arg), c.775T>C (p.Cys259Arg), and the third, c.1216C>T, resulting in the p.Gln406* stop codon, a type of mutation identified for the first time in GS. An Italian founder effect of the c.114delG mutation can be suggested according to the origin of the only three patients carrying this mutation reported here and in the literature.In early reports mutations nomenclature was selected according to all CTSA isoforms (three different isoforms), thus generating a lot of confusion. In order to assist physicians in the interpretation of detected mutations, we mark the correct nomenclature for CTSA mutations. The complexity of pathology caused by the multifunctions of CTSA, and the very low numbers of mutations (only 23 overall) in relation to the length of the CTSA gene are discussed.In addition, the in silico functional predictions of all reported missense mutations allowed us to closely predict the early infantile, late infantile and juvenile phenotypes, also disclosing different degrees of severity in the juvenile phenotype.
| S-EPMC3737020 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We measured contracts final negotiation (FN) and full execution (FE) times using shared definitions in a prospective observational study of management of contracts for clinical trials at 29 CTSA institutions. Median FN and FE times were reached in 39 and 91 days, respectively; mean times for FN and FE were 55 and 103 days, respectively. Individual site medians ranged from 3 to 116 days for FN and 34 to 197 days for FE. The use of master agreements (MAs) and previously negotiated terms (PNTs) was associated with significant reduction of FN times by a mean of 33 days (p < 0) and 22 days (p < 0.001), respectively. PNTs, but not MAs, were associated with significantly reduced FE time (22 days, p < 0.007). Gap analysis revealed a gap of 22 days between contracts negotiation and Institutional Review Board (IRB) review and intervals of 33 days (contracts) and 48 days (IRB review) during which the process steps were being conducted alone, suggesting a potential benefit with parallel processing. These baseline data support a plan to investigate root causes of prolonged study start-up time by examining causes of variation and outliers.
| S-EPMC3740442 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo prioritise and refine a set of evidence-informed statements into advice messages to promote vegetable liking in early childhood, and to determine applicability for dissemination of advice to relevant audiences.DesignA nominal group technique (NGT) workshop and a Delphi survey were conducted to prioritise and achieve consensus (≥70 % agreement) on thirty evidence-informed maternal (perinatal and lactation stage), infant (complementary feeding stage) and early years (family diet stage) vegetable-related advice messages. Messages were validated via triangulation analysis against the strength of evidence from an Umbrella review of strategies to increase children's vegetable liking, and gaps in advice from a Desktop review of vegetable feeding advice.SettingAustralia.ParticipantsA purposeful sample of key stakeholders (NGT workshop, n 8 experts; Delphi survey, n 23 end users).ResultsParticipant consensus identified the most highly ranked priority messages associated with the strategies of: 'in-utero exposure' (perinatal and lactation, n 56 points) and 'vegetable variety' (complementary feeding, n 97 points; family diet, n 139 points). Triangulation revealed two strategies ('repeated exposure' and 'variety') and their associated advice messages suitable for policy and practice, twelve for research and four for food industry.ConclusionsSupported by national and state feeding guideline documents and resources, the advice messages relating to 'repeated exposure' and 'variety' to increase vegetable liking can be communicated to families and caregivers by healthcare practitioners. The food industry provides a vehicle for advice promotion and product development. Further research, where stronger evidence is needed, could further inform strategies for policy and practice, and food industry application.
| S-EPMC9991732 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionResearch opportunities associated with the proliferation of the electronic health record (EHR), big data initiatives, and innovative approaches to trial design can present challenges for obtaining and documenting informed consent. Broad-scale informed consent (a term used herein to describe institutional models, rather than the Common Rule's strict regulatory definition for "broad consent") may facilitate the use of existing data and samples and speed the pace of research by minimizing barriers to consent. We explored the use of broad-scale informed consent within the Clinical Translational Science Award (CTSA) Program Network.MethodsWe surveyed CTSA Hubs concerning policies, practices, experiences, and needs within three domains of broad-scale informed consent: (1) participant recontact; (2) biospecimens; and (3) clinical data sharing.ResultsOf 61 CTSA Hubs surveyed, 37 (61%) indicated ongoing work related to at least 1 domain of broad-scale informed consent; 18 Hubs (30%) reported work in all 3 domains. The EHR predominated as the implementation system across all three domains. Research and IT leadership and the Institutional Review Board were most commonly endorsed as institutional drivers, while systems/technical issues and impact on clinical workflow were the most commonly reported barriers.ConclusionsWhile survey results indicate considerable variability in the implementation of broad-scale informed consent across the CTSA consortium, it is clear that all CTSA Hubs are actively considering policy and process related to these concepts. Next steps cluster within three areas: training and workforce development, streamlined policies and templates, and implementation strategies that facilitate integration into clinical workflow.
| S-EPMC6813518 | biostudies-literature