The role of quantitative modeling and simulation in translational science

2020 ◽  
pp. 633-655
Author(s):  
Venkatesh Pilla Reddy ◽  
Andy Z.X. Zhu
Keyword(s):  
Modeling And Simulation ◽  
Quantitative Modeling ◽  
Translational Science

scholarly journals Inflammation and Atherosclerosis

Cells ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 1197
Author(s):  
Klaus Ley
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Animal Models ◽  
Basic Science ◽  
Translational Science ◽  
Special Issue

This 11-chapter Special Issue of Cells spans the gamut from basic science in mechanistic animal models to translational science to outcomes of clinical trials, all focused on the role of inflammation in atherosclerosis [...]

The Role and Limitations of Modeling and Simulation in Systems Design

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason M. Aughenbaugh ◽  
Christiaan J. J. Paredis
Keyword(s):  
Modeling And Simulation ◽  
Systems Engineering ◽  
Design Method ◽  
Systems Design ◽  
Emergent Behavior ◽  
Research Directions ◽  
Decomposition Approach ◽  
System Decomposition ◽  
Complex Design

To design today’s complex, multi-disciplinary systems, designers need a design method that allows them to systematically decompose a complex design problem into simpler sub-problems. Systems engineering provides such a framework. In an iterative, hierarchical fashion systems are decomposed into subsystems and requirements are allocated to these subsystems based on estimates of their attributes. In this paper, we investigate the role and limitations of modeling and simulation in this process of system decomposition and requirements flowdown. We first identify different levels of complexity in the estimation of system attributes, ranging from simple aggregation to complex emergent behavior. We also identify the main obstacles to the systems engineering decomposition approach: identifying coupling at the appropriate level of abstraction and characterizing and processing uncertainty. The main contributions of this paper are to identify these short-comings, present the role of modeling and simulation in overcoming these shortcomings, and discuss research directions for addressing these issues and expanding the role of modeling and simulation in the future.

scholarly journals Exploring the potential role of community engagement in evaluating clinical and translational science grant proposals

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 139-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey W. Treem ◽  
Margaret Schneider ◽  
Robynn L. Zender ◽  
Dara H. Sorkin
Keyword(s):  
Community Engagement ◽  
Potential Role ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Translational Science ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Grant Proposals ◽  
Stage Process ◽  
Stage 1 ◽  
The University

IntroductionThis study explored the effects of integrating community members into the evaluation of clinical and translational science grants.MethodsThe University of California, Irvine Institute for Clinical and Translational Sciences (ICTS) engaged 21 community reviewers alongside scientific reviewers in a 2-stage process of evaluating research proposals. In Stage 1 reviewers scored proposals, and during Stage 2 two study sections convened: one a mix of community reviewers and scientific reviewers, and one only engaging scientific reviewers. In total, 4 studies were discussed by both study sections.ResultsComparisons of reviews revealed little difference between ratings of community reviewers and those of scientific reviewers, and that community reviewers largely refrained from critiquing scientific or technical aspects of proposals.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that involving community reviewers early in the grant cycle, and exposing them to the entirety of the review process, can bolster community engagement without compromising the rigor of grant evaluations.

scholarly journals Opportunities for strengthening CTSA evaluation

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 59-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tanha Patel ◽  
Julie Rainwater ◽  
William M. Trochim ◽  
Julie T. Elworth ◽  
Linda Scholl ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
National Level ◽  
Translational Science ◽  
Multiple Stakeholders ◽  
Significant Interest ◽  
Program Funding ◽  
The Common ◽  
Collaborative Evaluation ◽  
Funding Opportunity ◽  
Existing Data

AbstractThe purpose of the article is to describe the progress of the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Program to address the evaluation-related recommendations made by the 2013 Institute of Medicine’s review of the CTSA Program and guidelines published in CTS Journal the same year (Trochim et al., Clinical and Translational Science 2013; 6(4): 303–309). We utilize data from a 2018 national survey of evaluators administered to all 64 CTSA hubs and a content analysis of the role of evaluation in the CTSA Program Funding Opportunity Announcements to document progress. We present four new opportunities for further strengthening CTSA evaluation efforts: (1) continue to build the collaborative evaluation infrastructure at local and national levels; (2) make better use of existing data; (3) strengthen and augment the common metrics initiative; and (4) pursue internal and external opportunities to evaluate the CTSA program at the national level. This article will be of significant interest to the funders of the CTSA Program and the multiple stakeholders in the larger consortium and will promote dialog from the broad range of CTSA stakeholders about further strengthening the CTSA Program’s evaluation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document