scholarly journals Building capacity for dissemination and implementation to maximize research impact in a CTSA: The University of Wisconsin story

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Quanbeck ◽  
Jane Mahoney ◽  
Kim Kies ◽  
Kate Judge ◽  
Maureen Smith
Keyword(s):  
Community Engagement ◽  
Translational Research ◽  
Stakeholder Engagement ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Relationship Building ◽  
Dissemination And Implementation ◽  
Building Capacity ◽  
University Of Wisconsin ◽  
The University ◽  
The Impact

AbstractWe report results of an 8-year process of stakeholder engagement aimed at building capacity in Dissemination and Implementation (D&I) research at the University of Wisconsin as part of the National Institutes of Health’s Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA). Starting in 2008, annual individual interviews were held with leaders of the Wisconsin CTSA’s community engagement core for strategic planning purposes. Interviews were followed by annual planning meetings that employed a facilitated group decision-making process aimed at identifying and prioritizing gaps in the translational research spectrum. In 2011, the stakeholder engagement process identified D&I as a primary gap limiting overall impact of the institution’s research across the translational spectrum. Since that time, our CTSA has created an array of D&I resources falling into four broad categories: (1) relationship building with D&I partners, (2) D&I skill building, (3) translational research resources, and (4) resources to support D&I activities. Our systematic process of stakeholder engagement has increased the impact of research by providing D&I resources to meet investigator and community needs. CTSAs could engage with leaders of their community engagement cores, which are common to all CTSAs, to adapt or adopt these resources to build D&I capacity.

Library Impact Research Report: Understanding and Communicating Research Impact: The Needs of STEM and Health Sciences Faculty and Postdoctoral Researchers

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Negeen Aghassibake ◽  
Lynly Beard ◽  
Jackie Belanger ◽  
Diana Louden ◽  
Robin Chin Roemer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Impact ◽  
Health Sciences ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Research Report ◽  
Library Impact ◽  
The University ◽  
Postdoctoral Researchers ◽  
Impact Framework ◽  
The Impact

As part of ARL’s Research Library Impact Framework initiative, the University of Washington (UW) Libraries explored UW faculty and postdoctoral researcher needs for understanding and communicating the impact of their work, with a focus on researchers in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) and health sciences fields. The project was designed to understand the challenges researchers face in this area, identify how participants in these fields define and measure impact, and explore their priorities for research-impact support. The project team conducted a survey and follow-up interviews to investigate these questions. This research report presents the project team’s methodology, findings, and recommendations for future research.

scholarly journals Increasing research mentor training among biomedical researchers at Clinical and Translational Science Award hubs: The impact of the facilitator training initiative

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 118-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenna Rogers ◽  
Christine A. Sorkness ◽  
Kimberly Spencer ◽  
Christine Pfund
Keyword(s):  
Workforce Development ◽  
Dissemination And Implementation ◽  
Translational Science ◽  
Mentor Training ◽  
Facilitator Training ◽  
University Of Wisconsin ◽  
Development Interventions ◽  
High Satisfaction ◽  
Research Mentor ◽  
The Impact

As part of their mission, Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hubs are charged with developing, testing, and disseminating evidence-based practices to other CTSA hubs. Over the past 7 years, the University of Wisconsin-Madison has answered this charge by implementing the facilitator training (FT) initiative for research mentors. Three elements to advance training across the CTSA hubs have been critical: (1) using an FT model to empower others to build research mentor training at their local institutions; (2) tracking implementation of training events across the CTSA hubs over time; and (3) partnering with implementation sites to build local capacity and evaluate the effectiveness and quality of training. Here we report that facilitators have been trained at 75% of CTSA hubs. These facilitators report high satisfaction with the training and increased confidence in their ability to implement mentor training, and plan to implement local mentor training. These findings demonstrate that the FT initiative can serve as a model for dissemination and implementation of other workforce development interventions across the CTSA hubs.

scholarly journals Baraboo Reads

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Treasa Bane
Keyword(s):  
High School ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
School Library ◽  
Public Library ◽  
Community Action ◽  
Small Communities ◽  
Anti Semitism ◽  
University Of Wisconsin ◽  
The University ◽  
The Impact

After an incident of anti-Semitism occurring at the Baraboo (WI) High School, the Baraboo community initiated a Community Action Plan. Baraboo Reads, a collaborative effort between the University of Wisconsin-Platteville Baraboo Sauk County campus, Baraboo Public Library, Baraboo High School library, and middle school library, became a part of that action plan. As an academic librarian, I was involved in the planning, budgeting, and selection for Baraboo Reads. The Baraboo Reads was a complacent failure, but there is much to be learned about the impact of these types of incidents on small communities and how larger efforts toward inclusivity can be learned from such failures.

scholarly journals Engagement science: The core of dissemination, implementation, and translational research science

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 216-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Meissner ◽  
Linda B. Cottler ◽  
Milton “Mickey” Eder ◽  
J. Lloyd Michener
Keyword(s):  
Translational Research ◽  
Stakeholder Engagement ◽  
Service Research ◽  
Dissemination And Implementation ◽  
Research Prioritization ◽  
Individual Health ◽  
Engagement Strategies ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Implementation And Dissemination ◽  
Research Questions

AbstractStakeholder engagement is acknowledged as central to dissemination and implementation (D&I) of research that generates and answers new clinical and health service research questions. There is both benefit and risk in conducting stakeholder engagement. Done wrong, it can damage trust and adversely impact study results, outcomes, and reputations. Done correctly with sensitivity, inclusion, and respect, it can significantly facilitate improvements in research prioritization, communication, design, recruitment strategies, and ultimately provide results useful to improve population and individual health. There is a recognized science of stakeholder engagement, but a general lack of knowledge that matches its strategies and approaches to particular populations of interest based on history and characteristics. This article reviews stakeholder engagement, provides several examples of its application across the range of translational research, and recommends that Clinical Translational Science Awards, with their unique geographical, systems, and historical characteristics, actively participate in deepening our understanding of stakeholder engagement science and methods within implementation and dissemination research. These recommendations include (a) development of an inventory of successful stakeholder engagement strategies; (b) coordination and intentionally testing a variety of stakeholder engagement strategies; (c) tool kit development; and (d) identification of fundamental motivators and logic models for stakeholder engagement to help align stakeholders and researchers.

scholarly journals 3133 Building Capacity for Community Engaged Research: Penn State University’s Faculty Fellowship Program

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (s1) ◽  
pp. 84-85
Author(s):  
Martha Ellen Wadsworth ◽  
Jennifer L. Kraschnewski ◽  
Gina M. Brelsford ◽  
Deepa L. Sekhar
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Community Engagement ◽  
Translational Research ◽  
Neonatal Intensive Care ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Engaged Scholarship ◽  
Fellowship Program ◽  
Penn State ◽  
Community Engaged Scholarship ◽  
The University

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: To build capacity for community engaged, translational research in faculty across the university. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Each year, the Community Engagement Research Core (CERC) of the Penn State CTSI invites applications for one to two Community Engagement Faculty Fellowships. Applicant teams are comprised of a junior or mid-level investigator seeking to expand their work into the CEnR arena under the mentorship of a senior investigator with expertise in community engaged scholarship. The fellow must develop a plan for the mentoring year, including a timeline, activities to be undertaken together, knowledge to be acquired, deliverables, and a budget. The funding supports two course releases or the clinical equivalent for the fellow, and a small budget to support the mentor’s research program. Proposals are evaluated using NIH scientific merit criteria. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We are in our second year of the fellowship program. Two highly qualified fellows are currently working with established community-based mentors. The 2017-2018 fellowship team showcases how an effective mentor-fellow partnership can help move a fellow’s work along the translational spectrum. By working with her mentor, our first fellow’s research has expanded from basic discovery science in a university hospital to development of a neonatal intensive care unit intervention to be employed with parents in the community. The 2018-2019 scholar, who utilized the community engagement research core (CERC) of the PSU CTSI in preparation of a PCORI grant, has since received the PCORI award and is working with her mentor to bring her innovative mental health screenings to the public schools. We are currently evaluating applications for the third year of the program, and please to have engaged applicants from across several Penn State campuses and disciplines. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The fellowship is enjoying early success in terms of fellow productivity, expanding translational research expertise, and fueling interest across the Penn State campuses in community engagement research. Future work will focus on sustainability planning for this type of program, metrics for tracking success, and plans for integrating fellows into a growing community of engaged scholars at the university.

Implantation perturbed angular correlation experiments in iron after inelastic proton scattering

1969 ◽  
Vol 311 (1504) ◽  
pp. 111-118 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Perturbed Angular Correlation ◽  
Hyperfine Interactions ◽  
Transient Field ◽  
Correlation Pattern ◽  
University Of Wisconsin ◽  
Iron Metal ◽  
Average Hyperfine Field ◽  
Inelastic Proton Scattering ◽  
The University ◽  
The Impact

Hyperfine interactions in iron metal have been studied by the standard IMPACT technique, populating the 0.847 MeV, 10.4 ps state of 56 Fe and the 1.408 MeV, 1.42 ps state of 54 Fe via the ( p, p' ) nuclear reaction. Several experiments on 56 Fe were performed independently at the University of Wisconsin Tandem Van de Graaff accelerator laboratory and at the Rutgers-Bell facility. In all cases, the experiments yielded shifts of less than 0.005 rad in the correlation pattern. The low results imply that the average hyperfine field in iron implanted into iron is less than 175 kG during the first 10 ps after implantation. The results are discussed in terms of possible radiation damage and transient field effects, and microscopic details of the IMPACT process are considered.

scholarly journals 4449 Building Capacity in the Flint Community in the Midst of the Ongoing Water Crisis

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (s1) ◽  
pp. 82-82
Author(s):  
Athena S. McKay ◽  
Adam Paberzs ◽  
Patricia Piechowski ◽  
Donald Vereen ◽  
Susan Woolford
Keyword(s):  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Michigan State University ◽  
Translational Science ◽  
State University ◽  
University Of Michigan ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Building Capacity ◽  
Partnership Development ◽  
The University ◽  
The Impact

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Examining the impact of the Building Capacity for Research and Action (BCRA) Award created by the Community Engagement (CE) Program at the Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research (MICHR)--a Clinical & Translational Science Award (CTSA) site at the University of Michigan--in partnership with Community Based Organization Partners (CBOP). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The BCRA is a funding mechanism that supports new community-engaged research (CEnR) partnerships and projects that address community-identified health needs in Flint, Michigan. BCRA projects are required to be Flint-based and inclusive of both community and academic partners. A study section consisting of 10 MICHR-affiliated faculty and community partners reviewed proposals and made funding decisions. Funded teams were trained on Institutional Review Board (IRB) and reporting requirements by CE staff. MICHR provides support to BCRA-funded teams through monthly email correspondence with the CE Flint connector, budget review, mediation, regulatory assurance of IRB and the National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS) requirements, coordinating six-month and final reporting, and hosting an annual stakeholder meet and greet. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: In 2017, the BCRA Award submitted its first request for proposals. It received 20 applications in 2018, and selected eight awardees, providing them with a total of $60,000 in funding. Four received $5,000 for partnership development and another four received $10,000 for their research projects. The BCRA Award received 16 applications in 2019, expanding its academic pool to include the University of Chicago, U-M Flint, Michigan State University, and Michigan State University-Flint in addition to the University of Michigan. Five recipients were selected and received a total of $45,000 in funding. One was awarded $5,000 for partnership development and another four were awarded $10,000 for their research projects. MICHR has invested over $100,000 in Flint through this mechanism, which was renewed in 2019. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Each awardee presented at the annual stakeholder meet and greet. They showcased their projects with a brief overview and spoke about their expectations, lessons learned, partnership strengths and challenges, translational issues, and proposed next steps for subsequent grants, publications.

scholarly journals 4455 Advancing the Science of Community Engagement with Human-Centered Design

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (s1) ◽  
pp. 77-78
Author(s):  
Jordan Poll ◽  
Ayse Buyktur ◽  
Aalap Doshi ◽  
Linde Huang ◽  
Tricia Piechowski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Community Engagement ◽  
Translational Research ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Human Centered Design ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Program Manager ◽  
Partnership Formation ◽  
Communication Program ◽  
Rich Data ◽  
The Impact

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To describe how the Community Engagement (CE) Program at the Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research (MICHR), a Clinical & Translational Science Award (CTSA) site at the University of Michigan, is adopting human-centered design (HCD) to advance the science of community engagement in translational research and CE’s programmatic efforts. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The MICHR CE Program supports academic-community partnerships to transform translational research across the state of Michigan. As the team aims to better engage partners to help guide the direction of their work, CE is collaborating with MICHR’s Design and Innovation Core to incorporate human-centered design (HCD). HCD is an approach that prioritizes the needs, values, and perspectives of direct users during the creation of a new product or service. The MICHR team created interactive HCD activities for two statewide retreats to elicit feedback from community and academic members on ways to enhance community-engaged research (CEnR). Retreat participants worked on a variety of problems, such as barriers to partnering and defining impact for CEnR. These activities generated authentic, contextual, and multi-view data captured in various artifacts for systematic analysis. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: In the first retreat, a HCD activity had participants reflect on their own barriers to partnering in research and potential solutions. In the second retreat, an HCD activity facilitated participants interviewing each other on their views of the impact in CEnR. Results from the first activity identified a set of common barriers to CEnR, some related to partnership formation, communication, and partner equity, among others. These led the CE Program to specific programmatic efforts, such as designing a statewide partnership platform, hiring a communication program manager, and sponsoring community partners to join national conferences. The second retreat activity produced rich data to identify overlaps between different perspectives to inform how impact can be defined and measured in CEnR. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: HCD activities provide means to include community and academic members in the science of CEnR. They allow systematic ways to gather information directly from the diverse set of current or prospective partners of community engagement programs about their needs, experiences, and values, which can be translated to programmatic innovation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document