The Rockefeller Team Science Leadership training program: Curriculum, standardized assessment of competencies, and impact of returning assessments.

The ability to effectively lead an interdisciplinary translational team is a crucial component of team science success. Most KL2 Clinical Scholars have been members of scientific teams, but few have been team science leaders. There is a dearth of literature and outcome measures of effective Team Science Leadership in clinical and translational research. We focused our curriculum to emphasize Team Science Leadership, developed a list of Team Science Leadership competencies for translational investigators using a modified Delphi method, and incorporated the competencies into a quantitative evaluation survey. The survey is completed on entry and annually thereafter by the Scholar; the Scholar's primary mentor and senior staff who educate and interact with the Scholar rate the Scholar at the end of each year. The program leaders and mentor review the results with each Scholar. The survey scales had high internal consistency and good factor structure. Overall ratings by mentors and senior staff were generally high, but ratings by Scholars tended to be lower, offering opportunities for discussion and career planning. Scholars rated the process favorably. A Team Science Leadership curriculum and periodic survey of attained competencies can inform individual career development and guide team science curriculum development.

Informed consent: Old and new challenges in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

In this paper, we address how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted informed consent for clinical research through examining experiences within Clinical and Translation Science Award (CTSA) institutions. We begin with a brief overview of informed consent and the challenges that existed prior to COVID-19. Then, we discuss how informed consent processes were modified or changed to address the pandemic, consider what lessons were learned, and present research and policy steps to prepare for future research and public health crises. The experiences and challenges for CTSA institutions offer an important perspective for examining what we have learned about informed consent and determining the next steps for improving the consent process.

The Rockefeller University Clinical Scholars (KL2) Program 2006-2016.

INTRODUCTION AND METHODS: The Rockefeller Clinical Scholars (KL2) Program began in 1976 and transitioned into a 3-year Master's degree program in 2006 when Rockefeller joined the NIH Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program. The program consists of ~15 trainees supported by the CTSA KL2 award and University funds. It is designed to provide an optimal environment for junior translational investigators to develop team science and leadership skills by designing and performing a human subjects protocol under the supervision of a distinguished senior investigator mentor and a team of content expert educators. This is complemented by a tutorial focused on important translational skills. RESULTS: Since 2006, 40 Clinical Scholars have graduated from the programs and gone on to careers in academia (72%), government service (5%), industry (15%), and private medical practice (3%); two (5%) remain in training programs. 39/40 remain in translational research careers with 23 NIH awards totaling $23 million, foundation and philanthropic support of $20.3 million, and foreign government and foundation support of $6 million. They have made wide ranging scientific discoveries and have endeavored to translate those discoveries into improved human health. CONCLUSION: The Rockefeller Clinical Scholars (KL2) program provides one model for translational science training.

The Rockefeller University Navigation Program: a structured multidisciplinary protocol development and educational program to advance translational research.

The development of translational clinical research protocols is complex. To assist investigators, we developed a structured supportive guidance process (Navigation) to expedite protocol development to the standards of good clinical practice (GCP), focusing on research ethics and integrity. Navigation consists of experienced research coordinators leading investigators through a concerted multistep protocol development process from concept initiation to submission of the final protocol. To assess the effectiveness of Navigation, we collect data on the experience of investigators, the intensity of support required for protocol development, IRB review outcomes, and protocol start and completion dates. One hundred forty-four protocols underwent Navigation and achieved IRB approval since the program began in 2007, including 37 led by trainee investigators, 26 led by MDs, 9 by MD/PhDs, 57 by PhDs, and 12 by investigators with other credentials (e.g., RN, MPH). In every year, more than 50% of Navigated protocols were approved by the IRB within 30 days. For trainees who had more than one protocol navigated, the intensity of Navigation support required decreased over time. Navigation can increase access to translational studies for basic scientists, facilitate GCP training for investigators, and accelerate development and approval of protocols of high ethical and scientific quality.

The critical need for academic health centers to assess the training, support, and career development requirements of clinical research coordinators: recommendations from the Clinical and Translational Science Award Research Coordinator Taskforce.

Clinical Research Coordinators (CRCs) are a vital component of the clinical research enterprise providing a pivotal role in human subject protection through the numerous activities and responsibilities assigned to them. In 2006, the National Institutes of Health's National Center for Research resources (NCRR) implemented the Clinical and Translational Science Awards program (CTSA) to advance biomedical research. As a part of this endeavor, many workgroups were formed among the Consortium to support translational research. The Research Coordinator Taskforce was created as part of the Regulatory Knowledge group of the Clinical Research Innovation Key Function Committee, and focuses on enhancing CTSA capabilities to provide support and training for CRCs. In the spring of 2008, this taskforce conducted two surveys of the then 24 CTSA Consortium members to better understand the current expectations and responsibilities of research coordinators in addition to the mechanism for providing education, training, and support in order for CRCs to successfully meet the study responsibilities placed upon them. The results of these surveys are summarized in this article and provide context to the recommendations of the Research Coordinator Taskforce for institutional considerations, approaches, and best practices for providing education, training, and support the expanding role of CRCs in fulfilling their responsibilities delegated to them by investigators.

Female sexual dysfunction: definitions, causes, and treatment.

Only recently has there been some focus on female sexual function. Due to increasing knowledge regarding male sexual dysfunction and increasing focus on women's health care issues, female sexual dysfunction and its relationship to quality of life is slowly attracting the attention of health care professionals and women in general. Health care professionals in urologic, gynecologic, and family practice offices and clinics are in key roles to identify females experiencing sexual dysfunction. Sexual identity is shaped throughout our life. It depends on religious and cultural beliefs and is strongly related to early sexual experiences.