OBJECTIVES/GOALS: METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Utilized novel TS evaluation methods and tools: - Translational Science Case Study protocol adapted to examine translational support service practices, barriers and facilitators influencing translational movement. - Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM) Checklist elements for translational/research impact analysis. Triangulated diverse data sources: - Primary data: semi-structured interviews with translational service stakeholders. - Secondary data: service’s applications, reports, and publications; public stories/news related to their research support; scientific publications; organizational/policy documents; and interviews with research stakeholders featured in published sources. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Translational challenges include: complexity and constant change of health data; lack of data/informatics literacy amongst researchers; limited appreciation and funding for research data services; silos of functionality and data related to biomedical informatics. Translational facilitators are: the UMN CTSA support; available infrastructure and knowledge base; researchers as the best promoters for services; multidisciplinary collaborations with research/community/healthcare teams; best practice approaches; and learning by doing. The translational/research support service contributes to community and public health, clinical/medical benefits, data literacy, catalyzing data-rich research, and health equity. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The evaluation case study provides evidence and lessons learned related to translational benefits, challenges, and facilitators of a successful translational research support service integrating best informatics practices in clinical research and contributing to health equity improvement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Volkov et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: