Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:03:15.562Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

150 Envisioning a Multi-Site Translational Studio to Promote Scientific Integrity and Ethical Innovation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 April 2024

Emma Tumilty
Affiliation:
Department of Bioethics and Health Humanities & Institute for Translational Sciences, University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB)
Elise Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Bioethics and Health Humanities & Institute for Translational Sciences, University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB)
Alison Zill
Affiliation:
John Sealy School of Medicine, UTMB Victoria McNamara, Institute for Translational Sciences, University of Texas Medical Branch
Veronica Ajewole
Affiliation:
Department of Pharmacology and Practice, Texas Southern University
Omonike A. Olaleye
Affiliation:
Department of Pharmacology and Practice, Texas Southern University
Ivy Poon
Affiliation:
Department of Pharmacology and Practice, Texas Southern University
Mary Short
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Psychology, College of Human Sciences and Humanities, University of Houston Clear Lake
Kathy Vincent
Affiliation:
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Texas Medical Branch
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The goal of this study is to develop a multi-centered Translational Studio model that can help in the development of quality translational studies using resources from four different institutional partners (University of Texas Medical Branch, Texas Southern University, University of Houston Clear Lake and Houston Methodist). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We conducted two rounds of four Futures Workshops for a total participation of 28 stakeholders from four different partners. Future Workshops were used to critique, envision, and articulate novel “futures” that can be achieved at least partly through design practices (Muller, 2002). In the first round of workshops, we asked participants about their institutions’ strengths, weaknesses, resources and investigator needs regarding the Studio. In the second round we asked about different studio models, pros and cons of each model and guiding principles for a studio. Alongside a pragmatic content analysis, multi-stage deductive and inductive qualitative analyses were used to understand people’s views on the future of a multi-institutional Clinical Trials Studio. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The first-round workshops’ analysis described peoples’ goals for what the studio should be. The future desired studio was described as guide, matchmaker, initiator and advocate. The second-round workshops’ analysis discussed the pros and cons of a variety of possible models including, centralized, decentralized, and topic-specific (and allowed other suggestions) while also describing principles for the guidance of a studio. Here the analysis showed people wanted certain characteristics for the studio (i.e. effective, efficient, locally-responsive, consistent, etc.). They also prescribed four principles that a studio should be guided by: non-hierarchical partnership, user-centeredness, respect/collegiality, and sharing. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The future workshops were useful in developing a shared multi-institutional Clinical Trials Studio model that is planned to be deployed in 2025. Participants valued a studio that was both directly supportive to participants and played a role in creating or advocating for institutional resources and policy for research.

Type
Education, Career Development and Workforce Development
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. The Association for Clinical and Translational Science