Search

For researchers, policymakers, and practitioners facing a new field, undertaking a systematic review can typically present a challenge due to the enormous number of relevant papers. A scoping review is a method suggested for addressing this dilemma; however, scoping reviews present their own challenges. This paper introduces the 'scoping meta-review' (SMR) for expanding current methodologies and is based on our experiences in mapping the field of consumer engagement in healthcare. During this process, we developed the novel SMR method. An SMR combines aspects of a scoping review and a meta-review to establish an evidence-based map of a field. Similar to a scoping review, an SMR offers a practical and flexible methodology. However, unlike in a traditional scoping review, only systematic reviews are included. Stages of the SMR include: undertaking a preliminary nonsystematic review; building a search strategy; interrogating academic literature databases; classifying and excluding studies based on titles and abstracts; saving the refined database of references; revising the search strategy; selecting and reviewing the full text papers; and thematically analyzing the selected texts and writing the report. The main benefit of an SMR is to map a new field based on high-level evidence provided by systematic reviews. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is growing appreciation that process improvement holds promise for improving quality and efficiency across the translational research continuum but frameworks for such programs are not often described. The purpose of this paper is to present a framework and case examples of a Research Process Improvement Program implemented at Tufts CTSI. To promote research process improvement, we developed online training seminars, workshops, and in-person consultation models to describe core process improvement principles and methods, demonstrate the use of improvement tools, and illustrate the application of these methods in case examples. We implemented these methods, as well as relational coordination theory, with junior researchers, pilot funding awardees, our CTRC, and CTSI resource and service providers. The program focuses on capacity building to address common process problems and quality gaps that threaten the efficient, timely and successful completion of clinical and translational studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) promote the conduct of research in real-world settings by engaging primary care clinicians as champion research collaborators. Card studies are brief surveys administered to patients or clinicians at the point of care. The objective of this paper is to describe the design and evaluation of a card study methodology that the WWAMI Region Practice and Research Network (WPRN) used to develop research partnerships across multiple member sites. Methods: We used a collaborative model to develop, implement and disseminate the results of a network-wide card study to assess patient preferences for weight loss in primary care. After the card study data collection was completed, we conducted individual and focus group interviews and a brief survey of participating practice champions. Results: Increased research engagement and personal and professional developments were the primary motivators for participating in the development of the card study. Increasing research activity at practices and learning information about patients were motivators for implementing the study. Their participation resulted in champions reporting increased confidence in collaborating on research projects as well as the development of new clinical services for patients. Discussion: This collaborative model positively influenced research capacity in the WPRN and may be a useful strategy for helping PBRNs conducted translational research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research sought to better understand how clinical and translational research is defined and perceived by community service providers. In addition, the research sought to elicit how the perspectives of service providers may hinder or facilitate collaborative research efforts. The study employed a qualitative methodology, focus groups. A nonprobability sampling strategy was used to recruit participants from three neighborhoods in the Tufts University's catchment area. Focus group findings add to the nascent body of literature on how community partners view clinical and translational research and researchers. Findings indicate that cultural disconnects, between researchers and community partners exist, as does mistrust, all of which serve as potential barriers to community research partnerships. This paper suggests rethinking the business of community engagement in researcher, particularly as it relates to building research capacity to approach, engage, and partner with communities. Clin Trans Sci 2012; Volume 5: 329-332 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper outlines a number of innovations that we have recently implemented in the Research Methodology Course at the University of Michigan's School of Public Health. Consistent with the goals of evidence-based medicine, evidence-based public health, intrinsic motivation, and phase 4 (T4) translational research, we have placed the emphasis on enhancing the students' desire to learn-and more specifically on their desire to learn rigorous methods for conducting useful research that delivers practical benefits in a straightforward manner. A dozen innovations, along with some preliminary outcomes, are outlined in detail. Clin Trans Sci 2010; Volume 3: 309-311 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]