Critical Appraisal of Translational Research Models for Suitability in Performance Assessment of Cancer Centers

Rajan, Abinaya; Sullivan, Richard; Bakker, Suzanne

doi:10.1634/theoncologist.2012-0216

Cited by 23 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A systematic literature review followed to identify and critically appraise translational research models most suitable for performance assessment of CCC’s [9]. The result was a list of 59 excellence criteria covering inputs, processes and outputs of basic, translational and clinical research & clinical care.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing excellence in translational cancer research: a consensus based framework

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIt takes several years on average to translate basic research findings into clinical research and eventually deliver patient benefits. An expert-based excellence assessment can help improve this process by: identifying high performing Comprehensive Cancer Centres; best practices in translational cancer research; improving the quality and efficiency of the translational cancer research process. This can help build networks of excellent Centres by aiding focused partnerships. In this paper we report on a consensus building exercise that was undertaken to construct an excellence assessment framework for translational cancer research in Europe.MethodsWe used mixed methods to reach consensus: a systematic review of existing translational research models critically appraised for suitability in performance assessment of Cancer Centres; a survey among European stakeholders (researchers, clinicians, patient representatives and managers) to score a list of potential excellence criteria, a focus group with selected representatives of survey participants to review and rescore the excellence criteria; an expert group meeting to refine the list; an open validation round with stakeholders and a critical review of the emerging framework by an independent body: a committee formed by the European Academy of Cancer Sciences.ResultsThe resulting excellence assessment framework has 18 criteria categorized in 6 themes. Each criterion has a number of questions/sub-criteria. Stakeholders favoured using qualitative excellence criteria to evaluate the translational research “process” rather than quantitative criteria or judging only the outputs. Examples of criteria include checking if the Centre has mechanisms that can be rated as excellent for: involvement of basic researchers and clinicians in translational research (quality of supervision and incentives provided to clinicians to do a PhD in translational research) and well designed clinical trials based on ground-breaking concepts (innovative patient stratification, substantial fraction of phase I/II trials, investigator-initiated trials). Critically, the framework supports reduced bureaucracy by building on existing European evaluation systems.ConclusionsThe excellence framework is the product of an intense stakeholder consensus building exercise. It will be piloted during an expert peer review/site visit of at least three European Comprehensive Cancer Centres. The findings regarding content, governance and implementation can have relevance for other clinical and research fields.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing excellence in translational cancer research: a consensus based framework

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, quality improvement and process flow modeling are needed to identify improvement areas that can reduce delays in moving initiatives forward through translational stages [78,79]. As well, assumptions made within systems science models are supported by traditional (i.e., reductionist) research.…”

Section: Original Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translating research into prevention of high-risk behaviors in the presence of complex systems: definitions and systems frameworks

Lich

Frerichs

Fishbein

et al. 2016

Behav. Med. Pract. Policy Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To impact population health, it is critical to collaborate across disciplinary and practice-based silos and integrate resources, experiences, and knowledge to exert positive change. Complex systems shape both the prevention outcomes researchers, practitioners, and policymakers seek to impact and how research is translated and can either impede or support movement from basic scientific discovery to impactful and scaled-up prevention practice. Systems science methods can be used to facilitate designing translation support that is grounded in a richer understanding of the many interacting forces affecting prevention outcomes across contexts. In this paper, we illustrate how one systems science method, system dynamics, could be used to advance research, practice, and policy initiatives in each stage of translation from discovery to translation of innovation into global communities (T0-T5), with tobacco prevention as an example. System dynamics can be applied to each translational stage to integrate disciplinary knowledge and document testable hypotheses to inform translation research and practice.

show abstract

“…In general, evaluating the impact of scientific research involves describing the influence of research outputs in terms of the value and benefit to those for whom the research is targeted. Most models of translational research frame the progression of knowledge traversing multiple phases along the research to health impact continuum (Rajan, Sullivan, Bakker, & van Harten, 2012; Trochim, Kane, Graham, & Pincus, 2011). One segment of this continuum is the advancement of knowledge from clinical trials research to clinical practice.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling the dissemination and uptake of clinical trials results

Rosas

Cope

Kagan

2013

Research Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A select set of highly-cited publications from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials Networks was used to illustrate the integration of time interval and citation data, modeling the progression, dissemination, and uptake of primary research findings. Following a process marker approach, the pace of initial utilization of this research was measured as the time from trial conceptualization, development and implementation, through results dissemination and uptake. Compared to earlier studies of clinical research, findings suggest that select HIV/AIDS trial results are disseminated and utilized relatively rapidly. Time-based modeling of publication results as they meet specific citation milestones enabled the observation of points at which study results were present in the literature summarizing the evidence in the field. Evaluating the pace of clinical research, results dissemination, and knowledge uptake in synthesized literature can help establish realistic expectations for the time course of clinical trials research and their relative impact towards influencing clinical practice.

show abstract

Critical Appraisal of Translational Research Models for Suitability in Performance Assessment of Cancer Centers

Cited by 23 publications

References 24 publications

Assessing excellence in translational cancer research: a consensus based framework

Assessing excellence in translational cancer research: a consensus based framework

Translating research into prevention of high-risk behaviors in the presence of complex systems: definitions and systems frameworks

Modeling the dissemination and uptake of clinical trials results

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About