Dataset Information

Health Sciences Libraries Advancing Collaborative Clinical Research Data Management in Universities.

ABSTRACT: Medical libraries need to actively review their service models and explore partnerships with other campus entities to provide better-coordinated clinical research management services to faculty and researchers. TRAIL (Translational Research and Information Lab), a five-partner initiative at the University of Washington (UW), explores how best to leverage existing expertise and space to deliver clinical research data management (CRDM) services and emerging technology support to clinical researchers at UW and collaborating institutions in the Pacific Northwest.The initiative offers 14 services and a technology-enhanced innovation lab located in the Health Sciences Library (HSL) to support the University of Washington clinical and research enterprise. Sharing of staff and resources merges library and non-library workflows, better coordinating data and innovation services to clinical researchers. Librarians have adopted new roles in CRDM, such as providing user support and training for UW's Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) instance.TRAIL staff are quickly adapting to changing workflows and shared services, including teaching classes on tools used to manage clinical research data. Researcher interest in TRAIL has sparked new collaborative initiatives and service offerings. Marketing and promotion will be important for raising researchers' awareness of available services.Medical librarians are developing new skills by supporting and teaching CRDM. Clinical and data librarians better understand the information needs of clinical and translational researchers by being involved in the earlier stages of the research cycle and identifying technologies that can improve healthcare outcomes. At health sciences libraries, leveraging existing resources and bringing services together is central to how university medical librarians will operate in the future.

SUBMITTER: Bardyn TP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6124496 | biostudies-other | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Health Sciences Libraries Advancing Collaborative Clinical Research Data Management in Universities.

Bardyn Tania P TP Patridge Emily F EF Moore Michael T MT Koh Jane J JJ

Journal of escience librarianship 20180620 2

<h4>Purpose</h4>Medical libraries need to actively review their service models and explore partnerships with other campus entities to provide better-coordinated clinical research management services to faculty and researchers. TRAIL (Translational Research and Information Lab), a five-partner initiative at the University of Washington (UW), explores how best to leverage existing expertise and space to deliver clinical research data management (CRDM) services and emerging technology support to cl ...[more]

PMID: 30197832

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose Today's clinical trial partnerships frequently join multi-disciplinary investigators and stakeholders, from different countries and cultures, to conduct research with a broad array of goals. This diversity, while a strength, can also foster divergent views about priorities and what constitutes success, thereby posing challenges for management, operations, and evaluation. As a sponsor and partner in such collaborations, we seek to assist and support their development and implementation of sound research strategies, to optimize their efficiency, sustainability, and public health impact. This report describes our efforts using an adaptation of the well-established Kaplan-Norton strategy management paradigm, in our clinical trials setting. We share findings from our first test of the utility and acceptance of this approach for evaluating and managing research strategies in a collaborative clinical research partnership. Results Findings from pilot studies and our first implementation in an ongoing clinical research partnership in Liberia, provide initial support for our hypothesis that an adapted version of the Kaplan-Norton strategy management model can have use in this setting. With leadership from within the partnership, analysis artifacts were gathered, and assessments made using standardized tools. Practical feasibility, resonance of the findings with partners, and convergence with other empirical assessments lend initial support for the view that this approach holds promise for obtaining meaningful, useable results for assessing and improving clinical research management. Conclusions and Implications Engaged leadership, thoughtful timing to align with partnership planning cycles, support for the process, and an eye towards the collaboration's long-term goals appear important for developing model understanding and practice. Skepticism about evaluations, and unease at exposing weaknesses, may hinder the effort. Acceptance of findings and associated opportunities for improvement by group leadership, support a growing sense of validity. Next steps aim to test the approach in other partnerships, streamline the methodology for greater ease of use, and seek possible correlations of strategy management assessments with performance evaluation. There is hardly a better example than the COVID-19 pandemic, to spotlight the need for efficient and effective clinical research partnerships to address global health challenges. While heartened by the collaborative spirit driving the effort so far, we cannot let our enthusiasm lull us into thinking that nobility of purpose or an abundance of good will is sufficient. Careful monitoring and adjustment of clinical research strategy in response to changes (e.g., demographics, pathogen evolution, research acceptance, political and cultural environments) are vital to making the needed adjustments that can guide these programs toward successful outcomes. We hope that our work can raise awareness about the importance, relevance, and feasibility of sound strategy management in clinical research partnerships, especially during this time when there is so much at stake.

Project description:Increasing recognition of the complexity of environmental problems and the need to understand social processes and human values is leading environmental management agencies in many nations, including the USA, to integrate more research from the social sciences through the inclusion of social scientists on interdisciplinary teams. For this study we conducted focus groups at three research laboratories within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Research and Development to better understand how inclusion of social sciences influenced the research process and outcomes, and the barriers to and facilitators of integration. The focus groups identified effects on the research process including improved problem framing, the introduction of new methodologies, and greater stakeholder and public inclusion, while research outcomes included the inclusion or refinement of social and environmental perspectives and systems thinking, increased translatability of research, and new partnerships. Barriers identified included lack of familiarity with social sciences which affected perceptions of social sciences and organizational capacity to absorb and apply social science expertise. Facilitators included receptivity of team members, intentional communication strategies, and project structures and organizational commitment that support interdisciplinary work. Finding a key barrier to be lack of clarity about the different roles social sciences play in translational research, we present a conceptual model defining the roles and contributions of social scientists that clarifies the distinction between "integration" of social sciences in research and "application" of skills and knowledge from the social sciences which play distinct but equally important roles in translational research approaches and solutions-driven research. These insights on the ways social sciences contribute to translational research efforts advance integration of social and natural sciences in environmental science research, particularly in applied contexts.

Project description:Over the past 50 years the diversity of higher education faculty in the mathematical, physical, computer, and engineering sciences (MPCES) has advanced very little at 4-year universities in the United States. This is despite laws and policies such as affirmative action, interventions by universities, and enormous financial investment by federal agencies to diversify science, technology, mathematics, and engineering (STEM) career pathways into academia. Data comparing the fraction of underrepresented minority (URM) postdoctoral scholars to the fraction of faculty at these institutions offer a straightforward empirical explanation for this state of affairs. URM postdoc appointments lag significantly behind progress in terms of both undergraduate and Ph.D.-level STEM student populations. Indeed, URM postdoc appointments lag well-behind faculty diversity itself in the MPCES fields, most of which draw their faculty heavily from the postdoctoral ranks, particularly at research-intensive (R1) universities. Thus, a sea-change in how postdocs are recruited, how their careers are developed, and how they are identified as potential faculty is required in order to diversify the nation's faculty, and particularly the R1 MPCES professoriate. Our research shows that both Ph.D. students and postdocs benefit from intentional structure at various levels of their respective "apprentice" experiences, a factor that we believe has been neglected. Several key structural approaches are highly effective in these regards: (1) A collaborative approach in which leading research universities collectively identify outstanding URM candidates; (2) Faculty engagement in recruiting and supporting these postdocs; (3) Inter-institutional exchange programs to heighten the visibility and broaden the professional experiences of these postdocs; (4) Community-building activities that create a sense of belonging and encourage continuing in academia for each cohort; and (5) Continuing research based on outcomes and new experimental approaches. The California Alliance, consisting of UC Berkeley, UCLA, Caltech, and Stanford, has been engaged in such a program for almost a decade now, with most of the California Alliance URM postdocs now in tenure track positions or on the path toward careers as faculty at research intensive (R1) institutions. If this approach was brought to scale by involving the top 25 or so URM Ph.D.-producing R1 institutions in the MPCES fields, about 40% of the national URM postdoctoral population in these fields could be affected. Although this impact would fall short of bringing URM MPCES faculty ranks up to full representation of the United States population as a whole, it would vastly improve the outlook for URM students and their aspirations to take on leadership roles as scientists and engineers.

Dataset Information

Health Sciences Libraries Advancing Collaborative Clinical Research Data Management in Universities.

Publications

Health Sciences Libraries Advancing Collaborative Clinical Research Data Management in Universities.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets