Challenges facing translational research organizations in China: a qualitative multiple case study

Abstract

BackgroundTranslational medicine is attracting much attention worldwide and many translational research organizations (TROs) have been established. In China, translational medicine has developed rapidly, but faces many challenges. This study was aimed at exploring these challenges faced by emerging TROs in China.MethodA qualitative, multiple case study approach was used to assess the challenges faced by TROs in China. Data were collected between May and August 2012.ResultsEight cases were identified. Overall, four themes that characterized TROs in China emerged from analyses: 1. objectives, organizer, and funding resources, 2. participating partners and research teams, 3. management, and 4. achievements. All TROs had objectives related to translating basic discovery to clinic treatment and cultivating translational researchers. In terms of organizer and funding resources, 7 out of 8 TROs were launched only by universities and/or hospitals, and funded mostly through research grants. As for participating partners and multidisciplinary research teams, all but one of the TROs only involved biomedical research institutions who were interested in translational research, and characterized as clinical research centers; 7 out of 8 TROs involved only researchers from biomedicine and clinical disciplines and none involved disciplines related to education, ethnicity, and sociology, or engaged the community. Current management of the TROs were generally nested within the traditional research management paradigms, and failed to adapt to the tenets of translational research. Half of the TROs were at developmental stages defined as infrastructure construction and recruitment of translational researchers.ConclusionsTROs in China face the challenge of attracting sustainable funding sources, widening multidisciplinary cooperation, cultivating multi-disciplinary translational researchers and adapting current research management to translational research. Greater emphasis should be placed on increasing multidisciplinary cooperation, and innovating in education programs to cultivate of translational researchers. Efforts should be made to reform research management in TROs, and establish sustainable funding resources.

Optimising Translational Research Opportunities: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis of Basic and Clinician Scientists' Perspectives of Factors Which Enable or Hinder Translational Research

“…Viewing translational research as a circular or iterative process, was seen to facilitate translational research practices by encouraging reciprocal interactions between the lab and the clinic. This was thought to promote a collaborative research environment, which in turn attracted basic and clinician scientists who wanted to collaborate (this is elaborated upon further in the theme ‘interdisciplinary collaboration’) [ 34 , 41 , 52 , 57 ]. A case study of eight translational research organisations (TRO) in China elaborates on this point.…”

“…In this study, TROs were established primarily by biomedical organisations. This limited the potential for TROs to address intractable problems because key disciplines required for successful translation, such as public health, health policy, social sciences, community engagement, had not been included [ 57 ].…”

“…For other scientists, it was no great surprise that basic and clinician scientists were divided given they were educated within different faculties, with differing foundations, management approaches, and hierarchical systems but were then expected to come together to undertake translational research [ 52 , 57 ]. In contrast, a UK study which interviewed basic and clinician scientists working in cancer genetics found no clear division between clinical practice and research [ 36 ].…”

“…Interdisciplinary collaboration between basic and clinician scientists, but also with other professional groups, was perceived by scientists to facilitate translational research practices [ 37 , 38 , 40 , 48 , 52 , 56 , 57 ], by providing opportunities for knowledge exchange [ 37 , 52 ], offering distinct forms of expertise [ 48 , 56 ], and creating a working environment which encouraged communication and co-operation between different scientists [ 38 ]. Collaboration was seen as being best achieved through multi-disciplinary teams, working throughout the entire research process [ 40 , 52 ], or through ‘team science’–a field of inquiry to understand and enhance processes which facilitate or inhibit collaboration of researchers across different fields and organisations [ 37 , 48 ].…”

Contract Research Organizations (CROs) in China: integrating Chinese research and development capabilities for global drug innovation

“…However, foreign pharmaceutical firms always had huge difficulties to get access to these hospitals and to initiate clinical research simultaneously at different locations [20]. On the contrary, Chinese CROs always had good relationships with the local hospitals.…”