Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Developing Common Metrics for the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs): Lessons Learned.
Rubio, Doris M; Blank, Arthur E; Dozier, Ann; Hites, Lisle; Gilliam, Victoria A; Hunt, Joe; Rainwater, Julie; Trochim, William M.
Afiliación
  • Rubio DM; Data Center, Center for Research on Health Care, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
  • Blank AE; Department of Family and Social Medicine, Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA.
  • Dozier A; Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, USA.
  • Hites L; Department of Health Care Organization and Policy, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
  • Gilliam VA; Data Center, Center for Research on Health Care, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
  • Hunt J; Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
  • Rainwater J; Clinical and Translational Science Center, University of California Davis, Sacramento, California, USA.
  • Trochim WM; Department of Policy Analysis and Management, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA.
Clin Transl Sci ; 8(5): 451-9, 2015 Oct.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26073891
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Roadmap for Medical Research initiative, funded by the NIH Common Fund and offered through the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program, developed more than 60 unique models for achieving the NIH goal of accelerating discoveries toward better public health. The variety of these models enabled participating academic centers to experiment with different approaches to fit their research environment. A central challenge related to the diversity of approaches is the ability to determine the success and contribution of each model. This paper describes the effort by the Evaluation Key Function Committee to develop and test a methodology for identifying a set of common metrics to assess the efficiency of clinical research processes and for pilot testing these processes for collecting and analyzing metrics. The project involved more than one-fourth of all CTSAs and resulted in useful information regarding the challenges in developing common metrics, the complexity and costs of acquiring data for the metrics, and limitations on the utility of the metrics in assessing clinical research performance. The results of this process led to the identification of lessons learned and recommendations for development and use of common metrics to evaluate the CTSA effort.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Proyectos de Investigación / Apoyo a la Investigación como Asunto / Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto / Investigación Biomédica Traslacional Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Evaluation_studies / Guideline / Prognostic_studies Límite: Humans País/Región como asunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: Clin Transl Sci Año: 2015 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Proyectos de Investigación / Apoyo a la Investigación como Asunto / Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto / Investigación Biomédica Traslacional Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Evaluation_studies / Guideline / Prognostic_studies Límite: Humans País/Región como asunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: Clin Transl Sci Año: 2015 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos