scholarly journals Clinical and Translational Science Award T32/TL1 Training Programs: Program Goals and Mentorship Practices

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-32
Author(s):  
Fátima Sancheznieto ◽  
Christine A. Sorkness ◽  
Jacqueline Attia ◽  
Kathryn Buettner ◽  
David Edelman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Training Programs ◽  
Translational Science

scholarly journals The Rockefeller University Clinical Scholars (KL2) program 2006–2016

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (5) ◽  
pp. 285-291 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah J. Schlesinger ◽  
Michelle Romanick ◽  
Jonathan N. Tobin ◽  
Donna Brassil ◽  
Rhonda G. Kost ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Practice ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Leadership Skills ◽  
Team Science ◽  
Translational Science ◽  
Government Service ◽  
Content Expert ◽  
Foreign Government ◽  
Science Training

Introduction and MethodsThe Rockefeller Clinical Scholars (KL2) program began in 1976 and transitioned into a 3-year Master’s degree program in 2006 when Rockefeller joined the National Institute of Health Clinical and Translational Science Award program. The program consists of ∼15 trainees supported by the Clinical and Translational Science Award 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.ResultsSince 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%); 2 (5%) remain in training programs; 39/40 remain in translational research careers with 23 National Institute of Health 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.ConclusionThe Rockefeller Clinical Scholars (KL2) program provides one model for translational science training.

scholarly journals Advancement of multidisciplinary education and research in translational sciences: MERITS program development at Duke University

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-62
Author(s):  
Stephanie A. Freel ◽  
Laura J. Fish ◽  
Benjamin Mirman ◽  
Ranjan Sudan ◽  
Gayathri R. Devi
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Program Development ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Health Impact ◽  
Career Stages ◽  
Translational Science ◽  
Multidisciplinary Education ◽  
Duke University ◽  
Facilitators And Barriers

IntroductionThe Duke Multidisciplinary Education and Research in Translational Sciences Program provides educational resources for faculty and trainees in translational research.MethodsTo aid in program development, we assessed perceptions of translational science through focus groups targeting different career stages.ResultsIn total, 3 essential themes emerged: collaboration, movement toward application, and public health impact. Facilitators and barriers varied among groups.ConclusionTraining programs must provide specific strategies for collaboration and selectively accelerating discoveries to therapies.

scholarly journals An exploratory study of Clinical and Translational Science Award community-engaged research training programs

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 110-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda Ziegahn ◽  
Lucinda Nevarez ◽  
Thelma Hurd ◽  
Jill Evans ◽  
Yvonne Joosten ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Training Program ◽  
Capacity Building ◽  
Exploratory Study ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Research Training ◽  
Systems Change ◽  
Translational Science ◽  
Community Engaged Research

BackgroundThe Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) institutions are increasing development of training programs in community-engaged research (CEnR) to support translational science.MethodsThis study sampled posters at CTSA national meetings to identify CEnR training approaches, topics, and outcomes.ResultsQualitative analysis of 30 posters revealed training topics and outcomes focused primarily on CEnR capacity building, overcoming barriers, systems change, and sustainability.ConclusionFurther research should focus on development and results of CTSA CEnR training program metrics.

scholarly journals 2178 Drug development core facilitates institutional collaboration and translational science innovation

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (S1) ◽  
pp. 10-11
Author(s):  
Gene Morse ◽  
Igor Puzanov ◽  
Andrei Gudkov ◽  
Robin DiFrancesco ◽  
William Jusko ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Drug Development ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Translational Science ◽  
Regulatory Review ◽  
Ongoing Research ◽  
New Drug ◽  
Grant Applications ◽  
Research Mentoring ◽  
New Drug Development ◽  
Local Companies

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Drug development is a common research pursuit for basic and clinical scientists that interfaces diagnostic/therapeutic challenges with funding agencies, pharmaceutical industry, regulatory systems, and education. The University at Buffalo Clinical and Translational Science Institute (CTSI) has implemented a Drug Development Core (DDC) with goals that foster team science and collaboration, optimize laboratory use, and networks investigators. Our goals are to foster collaborations within the region and with other CTSAs. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The DDC met with 300 potential investigators from 14 departments and several local companies. There were 35 portal requests from 15 departments and 7 companies; 8 were from training programs. For 28 requests, a reviewer provided consultation, while 7 required discussions and review of data. DDC assisted with 15 grant applications (outcomes pending), 10 industry-related new drug development requests and 1 regulatory review. Curriculum reviews noted overlap and gaps. Cross-institute opportunities for M.D.-Ph.D. research mentoring were identified. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The DDC met with 300 potential investigators from 14 departments and several local companies. There were 35 portal requests from 15 departments and 7 companies; 8 were from training programs. For 28 requests, a reviewer provided consultation, while 7 required discussions and review of data. DDC assisted with 15 grant applications (outcomes pending), 10 industry-related new drug development requests and 1 regulatory review. Curriculum reviews noted overlap and gaps. Cross-institute opportunities for M.D.-Ph.D. research mentoring were identified. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The CTSI DDC was well received by investigators. The request process fosters collaboration among researchers with similar interests and identifies core laboratory resources that add innovation to ongoing research, funding applications, education, and interinstitutional planning.

Identification and Remediation of At-Risk Student Clinicians in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-31
Author(s):  
Martha Wilder Wilson ◽  
Elizabeth Zylla-Jones
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Professional Services ◽  
Speech Language Pathology ◽  
High Quality ◽  
The Public ◽  
Language Pathology ◽  
Remediation Plan ◽  
University Training ◽  
At Risk Student

Abstract The goal of university training programs is to educate speech-language pathology and audiology students to become competent and independent practitioners, with the ability to provide high quality and professional services to the public. This article describes the behaviors of “at-risk” student clinicians, so they may be identified early in their practica and remediation may be implemented. The importance of establishing a student at-risk protocol is discussed as well as a remediation plan for these students. This article summarized the Auburn University Speech and Hearing Clinic’s Student At-Risk Protocol, which may serve as a model for university training programs. The challenges of implementing such a protocol are also discussed.

A Proposal to Establish Standardized Learning Outcomes for Resonance Across Graduate Programs in Speech-Language Pathology

2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-26
Author(s):  
Helen M. Sharp ◽  
Mary O'Gara
Keyword(s):  
Learning Outcomes ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Graduate Training ◽  
Graduate Programs ◽  
Core Knowledge ◽  
Speech Language Pathology ◽  
Entry Level ◽  
The Public ◽  
Language Pathology ◽  
Graduate Training Programs

The Council for Clinical Certification in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology (CCFC) sets accreditation standards and these standards list broad domains of knowledge with specific coverage of “the appropriate etiologies, characteristics, anatomical/physiological, acoustic, psychological, developmental, and linguistic and cultural correlates” and assessment, intervention, and methods of prevention for each domain” (CCFC, 2013, “Standard IV-C”). One domain in the 2014 standards is “voice and resonance.” Studies of graduate training programs suggest that fewer programs require coursework in cleft palate, the course in which resonance was traditionally taught. The purpose of this paper is to propose a standardized learning outcomes specific to resonance that would achieve the minimum knowledge required for all entry-level professionals in speech-language pathology. Graduate programs and faculty should retain flexibility and creativity in how these learning outcomes are achieved. Shared learning objectives across programs would serve programs, faculty, students, accreditation site visitors, and the public in assuring that a consistent, minimum core knowledge is achieved across graduate training programs. Proficiency in the management of individuals with resonance disorders would require additional knowledge and skills.

Ethics Gets Emphasis in Some Training Programs

2006 ◽  
Vol 37 (12) ◽  
pp. 66
Author(s):  
SHERRY BOSCHERT
Keyword(s):  
Training Programs
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document