OBJECTIVE: We examine the concept of translational research from the perspective of evaluators charged with assessing translational efforts. One of the major tasks for evaluators involved in translational research is to help assess efforts that aim to reduce the time it takes to move research to practice and health impacts. Another is to assess efforts that are intended to increase the rate and volume of translation. METHODS: We offer an alternative to the dominant contemporary tendency to define translational research in terms of a series of discrete "phases." RESULTS: We contend that this phased approach has been confusing and that it is insufficient as a basis for evaluation. Instead, we argue for the identification of key operational and measurable markers along a generalized process pathway from research to practice. CONCLUSIONS: This model provides a foundation for the evaluation of interventions designed to improve translational research and the integration of these findings into a field of translational studies.
OBJECTIVE: We examine the concept of translational research from the perspective of evaluators charged with assessing translational efforts. One of the major tasks for evaluators involved in translational research is to help assess efforts that aim to reduce the time it takes to move research to practice and health impacts. Another is to assess efforts that are intended to increase the rate and volume of translation. METHODS: We offer an alternative to the dominant contemporary tendency to define translational research in terms of a series of discrete "phases." RESULTS: We contend that this phased approach has been confusing and that it is insufficient as a basis for evaluation. Instead, we argue for the identification of key operational and measurable markers along a generalized process pathway from research to practice. CONCLUSIONS: This model provides a foundation for the evaluation of interventions designed to improve translational research and the integration of these findings into a field of translational studies.
Authors: David M Dilts; Alan B Sandler; Steven K Cheng; Joshua S Crites; Lori B Ferranti; Amy Y Wu; Shanda Finnigan; Steven Friedman; Margaret Mooney; Jeffrey Abrams Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-03-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Despina G Contopoulos-Ioannidis; George A Alexiou; Theodore C Gouvias; John P A Ioannidis Journal: Science Date: 2008-09-05 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Doris McGartland Rubio; Ellie E Schoenbaum; Linda S Lee; David E Schteingart; Paul R Marantz; Karl E Anderson; Lauren Dewey Platt; Adriana Baez; Karin Esposito Journal: Acad Med Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 6.893
Authors: Nancy S Sung; William F Crowley; Myron Genel; Patricia Salber; Lewis Sandy; Louis M Sherwood; Stephen B Johnson; Veronica Catanese; Hugh Tilson; Kenneth Getz; Elaine L Larson; David Scheinberg; E Albert Reece; Harold Slavkin; Adrian Dobs; Jack Grebb; Rick A Martinez; Allan Korn; David Rimoin Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-03-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Muin J Khoury; Marta Gwinn; Paula W Yoon; Nicole Dowling; Cynthia A Moore; Linda Bradley Journal: Genet Med Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Doris M Rubio; Georgeanna F W B Robinson; Victoria A Gilliam; Brian A Primack; Galen E Switzer; Deborah L Seltzer; Wishwa N Kapoor Journal: Clin Transl Sci Date: 2014-07-25 Impact factor: 4.689
Authors: Richard Spoth; Louise A Rohrbach; Mark Greenberg; Philip Leaf; C Hendricks Brown; Abigail Fagan; Richard F Catalano; Mary Ann Pentz; Zili Sloboda; J David Hawkins Journal: Prev Sci Date: 2013-08
Authors: Lucas Persoon; Stefan van Hoof; Frank van der Kruijssen; Patrick Granton; Andrea Sanchez Rivero; Harold Beunk; Ludwig Dubois; Jan-Willem Doosje; Frank Verhaegen Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2018-10-11 Impact factor: 3.039