PURPOSE: Although the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has made extensive investments in educational programs related to clinical and translational science (CTS), there has been no systematic investigation of the number and characteristics of PhD programs providing training to future leaders in CTS. The authors undertook to determine the number of institutions that, having had received NIH-funded Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs), currently had or were developing PhD programs in CTS; to examine differences between programs developed before and after CTSA funding; and to provide detailed characteristics of new programs. METHOD: In 2012, CTS program leaders at the 60 CTSA-funded institutions completed a cross-sectional survey focusing on four key domains related to PhD programs in CTS: program development and oversight; students; curriculum and research; and milestones. RESULTS: Twenty-two institutions had fully developed PhD programs in CTS, and 268 students were earning PhDs in this new field; 13 institutions were planning PhD programs. New programs were more likely to have fully developed PhD competencies and more likely to include students in medical school, students working only on their PhD, students working on a first doctoral degree, and students working in T1 translational research. They were less likely to include physicians and students working in clinical or T2 research. CONCLUSIONS: Although CTS PhD programs have similarities, they also vary in their characteristics and management of students. This may be due to diversity in translational science itself or to the relative infancy of CTS as a discipline.
PURPOSE: Although the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has made extensive investments in educational programs related to clinical and translational science (CTS), there has been no systematic investigation of the number and characteristics of PhD programs providing training to future leaders in CTS. The authors undertook to determine the number of institutions that, having had received NIH-funded Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs), currently had or were developing PhD programs in CTS; to examine differences between programs developed before and after CTSA funding; and to provide detailed characteristics of new programs. METHOD: In 2012, CTS program leaders at the 60 CTSA-funded institutions completed a cross-sectional survey focusing on four key domains related to PhD programs in CTS: program development and oversight; students; curriculum and research; and milestones. RESULTS: Twenty-two institutions had fully developed PhD programs in CTS, and 268 students were earning PhDs in this new field; 13 institutions were planning PhD programs. New programs were more likely to have fully developed PhD competencies and more likely to include students in medical school, students working only on their PhD, students working on a first doctoral degree, and students working in T1 translational research. They were less likely to include physicians and students working in clinical or T2 research. CONCLUSIONS: Although CTS PhD programs have similarities, they also vary in their characteristics and management of students. This may be due to diversity in translational science itself or to the relative infancy of CTS as a discipline.
Authors: Steven E Reis; Lars Berglund; Gordon R Bernard; Robert M Califf; Garret A Fitzgerald; Peter C Johnson Journal: Acad Med Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 6.893
Authors: Georgeanna F W B Robinson; Charity G Moore; Kathleen M McTigue; Doris M Rubio; Wishwa N Kapoor Journal: Clin Transl Sci Date: 2015-08-29 Impact factor: 4.689