Researcher Views of Barriers to Clinical and Translational Research in a Statewide Program.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Evaluation & the Health Professions Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-08 DOI:10.1177/01632787231167942
Judy A Kimberly, Stephen Kogut, John F Stevenson, Jacquelyn Fede, Anthony R Hayward, Meghan E Tenca
{"title":"Researcher Views of Barriers to Clinical and Translational Research in a Statewide Program.","authors":"Judy A Kimberly, Stephen Kogut, John F Stevenson, Jacquelyn Fede, Anthony R Hayward, Meghan E Tenca","doi":"10.1177/01632787231167942","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Tracking and Evaluation Core of Rhode Island Advance-CTR conducted an online needs assessment survey at the program's inception in 2016 and again in 2021. Now dealing with well-established support systems provided by the grant, we were particularly interested in how the perceived needs of the research community in Rhode Island might have changed over five years. Specifically, what barriers have been reduced or eliminated and which have persisted or increased? How do those barriers vary by demographic status and what implications do those differences have for the CTR? An online survey was completed by 199 researchers, who reported the extent to which they perceived the lack of access to a range of research supports as a barrier to conducting research at their institution. Overall, researchers indicated statistically significant changes from 2016 to 2021 such that a lack of <i>pilot project funding</i> and <i>proposal development support</i> had decreased as barriers, while <i>space for research</i>, and <i>advice on commercial development</i>, had increased. Statistically significant differences in the salience of particular barriers by some demographic variables were also noted and the results of this study suggest Centers for Clinical and Translational Research can have salutary effects on the research paradigm within their partnering institutions in a relatively short time.</p>","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":" ","pages":"344-352"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10560312/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01632787231167942","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Tracking and Evaluation Core of Rhode Island Advance-CTR conducted an online needs assessment survey at the program's inception in 2016 and again in 2021. Now dealing with well-established support systems provided by the grant, we were particularly interested in how the perceived needs of the research community in Rhode Island might have changed over five years. Specifically, what barriers have been reduced or eliminated and which have persisted or increased? How do those barriers vary by demographic status and what implications do those differences have for the CTR? An online survey was completed by 199 researchers, who reported the extent to which they perceived the lack of access to a range of research supports as a barrier to conducting research at their institution. Overall, researchers indicated statistically significant changes from 2016 to 2021 such that a lack of pilot project funding and proposal development support had decreased as barriers, while space for research, and advice on commercial development, had increased. Statistically significant differences in the salience of particular barriers by some demographic variables were also noted and the results of this study suggest Centers for Clinical and Translational Research can have salutary effects on the research paradigm within their partnering institutions in a relatively short time.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
研究人员对全州项目中临床和转化研究障碍的看法。
罗德岛Advance CTR的跟踪和评估核心在2016年项目启动时和2021年再次进行了在线需求评估调查。现在,在处理这笔赠款提供的完善的支持系统时,我们特别感兴趣的是,罗德岛州研究界的感知需求在五年内可能会发生什么变化。具体而言,哪些障碍已经减少或消除,哪些障碍持续存在或增加?这些障碍如何因人口状况而变化?这些差异对CTR有什么影响?199名研究人员完成了一项在线调查,他们报告了他们在多大程度上认为缺乏一系列研究支持是在他们的机构进行研究的障碍。总体而言,研究人员表示,从2016年到2021年,统计上发生了显著变化,即缺乏试点项目资金和提案开发支持的情况随着障碍的减少而减少,而研究空间和商业开发建议的增加。还注意到一些人口统计学变量在特定障碍的显著性方面存在统计学上的显著差异,这项研究的结果表明,临床和转化研究中心可以在相对较短的时间内对其合作机构内的研究范式产生有益影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Evaluation & the Health Professions is a peer-reviewed, quarterly journal that provides health-related professionals with state-of-the-art methodological, measurement, and statistical tools for conceptualizing the etiology of health promotion and problems, and developing, implementing, and evaluating health programs, teaching and training services, and products that pertain to a myriad of health dimensions. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Average time from submission to first decision: 31 days
期刊最新文献
Analyzing the Effects of a Repeated Reading Intervention on Reading Fluency With Generalized Linear Mixed Models. Evaluation of a Parenting Program for Mothers With a Borderline Personality Disorder: A Multiple Baseline Single-Case Experimental Design Study. Single-Case Study of the Feasibility of Parent Training and Change in Parenting in Comparison to Baseline, in Adolescents With a Major Depressive Disorder. Using Generalized Linear Mixed Models in the Analysis of Count and Rate Data in Single-case Eperimental Designs: A Step-by-step Tutorial. Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of the Low Back Activity Confidence Scale (LoBACS).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1