Search

Abstract Background: Social Network Analysis is a method of analyzing coauthorship networks or relationships through graph theory. Institutional Development Award (IDeA) Networks for Clinical and Translational Research (IDeA-CTR) was designed to expand the capability for clinical and translational research to enhance National Institutes of Health funding. Methods: All publications from a cohort of clinical and translational scientists in Oklahoma were collected through a PubMed search for 2014 through 2021 in October 2022. For this study’s bibliometric portion, we pulled the citations from iCite in November of 2022. Results: There were 2,391 articles published in 1,019 journals. The number of papers published by year increased from 56 in 2014 to 448 in 2021. The network had an average of 6.4 authors per paper, with this increasing by year from 5.3 in 2014 to 6.9 in 2021. The average journal impact factor for the overall network was 7.19, with a range from 0.08 to 202.73. The Oklahoma Shared Clinical and Translational Resources (OSCTR) network is a small world network with relatively weak ties. Conclusions: This study provides an overview of coauthorship in an IDeA-CTR collaboration. We show the growth and structure of coauthorship in OSCTR, highlighting the importance of understanding and fostering collaboration within research networks.

The UC San Diego Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center (DISC) launched in 2020 to provide dissemination and implementation science (DIS) training, technical assistance, community engagement, and research advancement. DISC developed a program-wide logic model to inform a process evaluation of member engagement and impact related to DISC services. The DISC Logic Model (DLM) served as the framework for a process evaluation capturing quantitative and qualitative information about scientific activities, outputs, and outcomes. The evaluation involved a multimethod approach with surveys, attendance tracking, feedback forms, documentation of grant outcomes, and promotions metrics (e.g., Twitter engagement). There were 540 DISC Members at the end of year 2 of the DISC. Engagement in the DISC was high with nearly all members endorsing at least one scientific activity. Technical assistance offerings such as DISC Journal Club and consultation were most frequently used. The most common scientific outputs were grant submission (65, 39%), formal mentoring for career award (40, 24%), and paper submission (34, 21%). The DLM facilitated a comprehensive process evaluation of our center. Actionable steps include prioritizing technical assistance, strengthening networking opportunities, identifying streamlined approaches to facilitate DIS grant writing through writing workshops, as well as “office hours” or organized writing leagues.

There are numerous examples of translational science innovations addressing challenges in the translational process, accelerating progress along the translational spectrum, and generating solutions relevant to a wide range of human health needs. Examining these successes through an education lens can identify core principles and effective practices that lead to successful translational outcomes. The National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) is identifying and teaching these core principles and practices to a broad audience via online courses in translational science which teach from case studies of NCATS-led or supported research initiatives. In this paper, we share our approach to the design of these courses and offer a detailed description of our initial course, which focused on a preclinical drug discovery and development project spanning academic and government settings. Course participants were from a variety of career stages and institutions. Participants rated the course high in overall value to them and in providing a unique window into the translational science process. We share our model for course development as well as initial findings from the course evaluation with the goal of continuing to stimulate development of novel education activities teaching foundational principles in translational science to a broad audience.

IntroductionThe purpose of this paper is to describe the formation, operation, and evaluation of a Community Engagement Advisory Board (CEAB) that serves as a resource of the University of Illinois at Chicago’s (UIC) Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences (CCTS).MethodsCurrent CEAB roles and functions, operating procedures for research consultations and program evaluation strategies were described. Investigators receiving a consultation from 2009 to 2017 (n=91, response rate 78%) were surveyed via an online survey immediately after the consultation and at 12-month follow-up.ResultsOverall, CEAB members were viewed as having sufficient information (92%) and expertise (79%) to provide consultation. Satisfaction levels with the specific consultation received and the overall consultation service were high. The majority of investigators indicated that they would come back to the CEAB for a future consultation, if needed, and would recommend a consultation to others (93% and 96%, respectively). At 12-months, 87% of respondents indicated they had implemented at least some of the recommendations received and 93% said that the consultation influenced their subsequent research.ConclusionsData from recent annual evaluations highlight the benefits of CEAB for consulting investigators. Our model can be used to inform the development of future CEAB boards.