scholarly journals The Northwest Participant and Clinical Interactions Network: Increasing opportunities for patients to participate in research across the Northwestern United States

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 94-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura-Mae Baldwin ◽  
Laurie Hassell ◽  
Cindi Laukes ◽  
Michelle Doyle ◽  
Anne Reedy ◽  
...  

IntroductionThe Institute of Translational Health Sciences (ITHS) promotes and supports translational research collaboration between clinicians, communities, and investigators across the five-state Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho (WWAMI) region. The ITHS has developed a collaborative regional clinical research network, the Northwest Participant & Clinical Interactions Network (NW PCI), involving 12 diverse clinical health systems and academic institutions.MethodsThis descriptive article details NW PCI’s development, infrastructure and governance, tools, characteristics, and initial outcomes.ResultsRegional NW PCI sites are conducting largely industry-sponsored studies; they are interested in including more grant-funded research. Regional NW PCI sites had over 1,240 open studies involving over 6700 patients in 2016. NW PCI trials are largely industry-sponsored; NW PCI sites are interested in including more grant-funded research. In its first three years, the NW PCI Coordinating Center facilitated regional sites’ participation in 34 new grant and contract applications across diverse topics.ConclusionThe NW PCI model supports the goals of the developing CTSA Trial Innovation Network by increasing access to cutting-edge research across the Northwestern U.S., by supporting investigators seeking diverse populations, including those with rare diseases, for their research studies, and by providing settings to test implementation and dissemination of effective interventions.

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hakimeh Hazrati ◽  
Shoaleh Bigdeli ◽  
Seyed Kamran Soltani Arabshahi ◽  
Vahideh Zarea Gavgani ◽  
Nafiseh Vahed

Abstract Background Analyzing the previous research literature in the field of clinical teaching has potential to show the trend and future direction of this field. This study aimed to visualize the co-authorship networks and scientific map of research outputs of clinical teaching and medical education by Social Network Analysis (SNA). Methods We Identified 1229 publications on clinical teaching through a systematic search strategy in the Scopus (Elsevier), Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics) and Medline (NCBI/NLM) through PubMed from the year 1980 to 2018.The Ravar PreMap, Netdraw, UCINet and VOSviewer software were used for data visualization and analysis. Results Based on the findings of study the network of clinical teaching was weak in term of cohesion and the density in the co-authorship networks of authors (clustering coefficient (CC): 0.749, density: 0.0238) and collaboration of countries (CC: 0.655, density: 0.176). In regard to centrality measures; the most influential authors in the co-authorship network was Rosenbaum ME, from the USA (0.048). More, the USA, the UK, Canada, Australia and the Netherlands have central role in collaboration countries network and has the vertex co-authorship with other that participated in publishing articles in clinical teaching. Analysis of background and affiliation of authors showed that co-authorship between clinical researchers in medicine filed is weak. Nineteen subject clusters were identified in the clinical teaching research network, seven of which were related to the expected competencies of clinical teaching and three related to clinical teaching skills. Conclusions In order to improve the cohesion of the authorship network of clinical teaching, it is essential to improve research collaboration and co-authorship between new researchers and those who have better closeness or geodisk path with others, especially those with the clinical background. To reach to a dense and powerful topology in the knowledge network of this field encouraging policies to be made for international and national collaboration between clinicians and clinical teaching specialists. In addition, humanitarian and clinical reasoning need to be considered in clinical teaching as of new direction in the field from thematic aspects.


Author(s):  
Jae Lee ◽  
Jung Sung ◽  
Daniel Sarpong ◽  
Jimmy Efird ◽  
Paul Tchounwou ◽  
...  

Purpose: While the intellectual and scientific rationale for research collaboration has been articulated, a paucity of information is available on a strategic approach to facilitate the collaboration within a research network designed to reduce health disparities. This study aimed to (1) develop a conceptual model to facilitate collaboration among biostatisticians in a research network; (2) describe collaborative engagement performed by the Network’s Data Coordinating Center (DCC); and (3) discuss potential challenges and opportunities in engaging the collaboration. Methods: Key components of the strategic approach will be developed through a systematic literature review. The Network’s initiatives for the biostatistical collaboration will be described in the areas of infrastructure, expertise and knowledge management and experiential lessons will be discussed. Results: Components of the strategic approach model included three Ps (people, processes and programs) which were integrated into expert management, infrastructure management and knowledge management, respectively. Ongoing initiatives for collaboration with non-DCC biostatisticians included both web-based and face-to-face interaction approaches: Network’s biostatistical capacities and needs assessment, webinar statistical seminars, mobile statistical workshop and clinics, adjunct appointment program, one-on-one consulting, and on-site workshop. The outreach program, as a face-to-face interaction approach, especially resulted in a useful tool for expertise management and needs assessment as well as knowledge exchange. Conclusions: Although fostering a partnered research culture, sustaining senior management commitment and ongoing monitoring are a challenge for this collaborative engagement, the proposed strategies centrally performed by the DCC may be useful in accelerating the pace and enhancing the quality of the scientific outcomes within a multidisciplinary clinical and translational research network.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. e1269-e1279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raja Dhar ◽  
Sheetu Singh ◽  
Deepak Talwar ◽  
Murali Mohan ◽  
Surya Kant Tripathi ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (S1) ◽  
pp. 19-19
Author(s):  
Timothy De Ver Dye ◽  
Thomas Fogg ◽  
Margaret Demment ◽  
José Pérez-Ramos ◽  
Scott McIntosh ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The objective of this partnership was to create a global network of clinical and public health researchers and communities conducting technology-assisted research in noncommunicable disease. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The University of Rochester’s Clinical and Translational Science Institute (CTSI) has successfully leveraged the informatics core’s capacity into an emerging network of organizations that focus on technology and health in settings outside of the mainland United States. The CTSI coordinated with another NIH-funded infrastructure program [the RCMI Translational Research Network (RTRN)] to identify partner institutions interested in technology and health. RTRN identified the University of Puerto Rico and the University of Hawaii, both of which serve as hubs for common research interests in technology and health throughout the Caribbean and the Pacific. This network was formalized as the CDC’s Coordinating Center for its Global and Territorial Health Research Network (the “Global Network”), with additional US partners (Yale, University of Illinois at Chicago, University of North Caroline Chapel Hill, and the University of South Florida) within a wider scope of the CDC’s Prevention Research Centers (PRC) program. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Through combining 2 main NIH-funded research infrastructure networks (CTSA and RTRN), with a large CDC-funded PRC, the University of Rochester’s Informatics Core was successful in establishing a new productive global health network throughout Latin America and the Caribbean, and in the Pacific, garnering additional research support from NIH Fogarty and other programs. The resulting network not only supports locally-important research in technology and health on compelling health issues (eg, diabetes, ZIka, participation in research), but also facilitates community engagement through local partnerships and the cores of the involved networks. In addition, much of the information and communications technology (ICT)-related research and learnings from the Global Network activity is immediately applicable to populations in the United States, served by the various collaborative networks. In total, while new, the Global Network supports a wide range of projects and engagements throughout the world that expand local informatics capacity and use of technology in the research process and to address global health problems, further enhancing the CTSI’s informatics core to serve the needs of its own constituency and promote research engagement with technology within this population. Local research collaborative projects reinforce the utility of the network and its resources, evidenced by tools, publications, partnerships, and conference presentations that have arisen. Lessons to date from this Global Network collaboration include: specific global research projects provide opportunities for partnership building and meaningful collaboration, team science is of central importance in distributing the work of the network, synergy is multidirectional with expertise and need flowing in all directions, and project team members in all locales learned and contributed substantially in ways that carried into their other responsibilities. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The overall partnership has created opportunity for South-South collaboration, for adaptation of projects among locales, and has helped boost reputational value for all partners involved. Implications for other CTSA awardees include: global collaboration can serve core research and technical needs for the CTSA itself and its local partners, CTSA status can be leveraged to access resources to support local research, and collaboration in other federally-funded research networks helps expand the insight, scope, and potential for new research.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (s1) ◽  
pp. 130-130
Author(s):  
Paul Estabrooks ◽  
LaKaija Johnson ◽  
Jolene Rohde ◽  
Carol Geary ◽  
Lani Zimmerman ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: To complete a needs assessment and action planning process that engaged clinical and translational research network members in identifying needs through survey feedback, characterizing the needs in small group sessions, and developing recommendations for action at the network’s annual scientific meeting. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The project included (1) a survey of 357 members across partner institutions from the Great Plains IDeA CTR Network, (2) 6 - 90 minute brainstorming sessions to characterize needs identified through survey assessment, and (3) 6 - 60 minute sessions to develop recommendations for network improvement based on the characterization activity. Approximately 75 members participated in the characterization and recommendation sessions. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Seven areas of need from the survey were identified based upon the frequency of identification by network members (support to move research across the translational spectrum, database design and management, data access and sharing, data analysis, recruitment and retention of subjects, support for members who have submitted grants but were repeatedly unsuccessful, mentoring). Members indicated which characterization sessions they were interested in attending and based on the enrollment numbers needs related to unsuccessful grant submitters and mentoring were combined as were needs related to database design and data access-sharing. Sessions resulted in 8 inter-related recommendations for network action that included to (1) develop GP-CTR directory/registry of clinicians, researchers, system partners, that can be used to identify people that want to be involved in research partnerships or mentoring, (2) create a GP CTR Navigators Program to will provide support to network members throughout the collaborative research and grant preparation process, (3) identify and disseminate information about assets (funding, databases/registries) that exist amongst network partners that can be leveraged by member, (4) develop a searchable repository of evidence-based interventions for T3/T4 efforts, (5) review GP CTR supported professional development, and technological resource offerings and identify potential gaps, (6) facilitate opportunities for peer support/networking, (7) provide guidance to GP CTR network institutions looking to adopt policies that will support translational research collaboration, and (8) identify potential barriers to GP CTR network engagement (i.e., infrastructure, communication, marketing). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This process allowed for a wide range of network members to contribute to actionable recommendations for CTR leadership to move into action and improve the scientific network’s ability to conduct clinical and translational research.


2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent Schubert R Malbas

Collaboration forms an integral aspect of global research endeavors, where co-authorship derived from bibliographic records provides the building block for mapping research collaboration networks. Bibliometric techniques and social network analysis tools were applied to measure the scope and depth of collaboration in biomedical research in Southeast Asia during the period 2005-2009. In particular, centrality scores and draw network maps were calculated for both country and institutional levels of aggregation. In the field of biomedical research, Thailand and Singapore are the most productive and collaborative countries in Southeast Asia during the period studied. Using network analysis, there was strong correlation of research productivity by a country or institution with the number of collaboration and its group influence, and weak correlation with maximal data flow within the research network. There were specific clusters of connected institutions in subnetworks for neoplasm, diabetes, and tuberculosis research. Given the observed frequency of regional collaboration in Southeast Asia, in comparison to foreign collaboration, it is argued that increasing the number of collaborations within Southeast Asia will help advance the region’s efforts on domestic and regional health issues.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document