This paper is part of the Environmental Scan of Adaptive Capacity and Preparedness of Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hubs, illuminating challenges, practices, and lessons learned related to CTSA hubs’ efforts of engaging community partners to reduce the spread of the virus, address barriers to COVID-19 testing, identify treatments to improve health outcomes, and advance community participation in research. CTSA researchers, staff, and community partners collaborated to develop evidence-based, inclusive, accessible, and culturally appropriate strategies and resources helping community members stay healthy, informed, and connected during the pandemic. CTSA institutions have used various mechanisms to advance co-learning and co-sharing of knowledge, resources, tools, and experiences between academic professionals, patients, community partners, and other stakeholders. Forward-looking and adaptive decision-making structures are those that prioritize sustained relationships, mutual trust and commitment, ongoing communication, proactive identification of community concerns and needs, shared goals and decision making, as well as ample appreciation of community members and their contributions to translational research. There is a strong need for further community-engaged research and workforce training on how to build our collective and individual adaptive capacity to sustain and improve processes and outcomes of engagement with and by communities—in all aspects of translational science.

Expanded access (EA) provides a pathway for the clinical use of investigational products (drugs, biologics, and medical devices) for patients who are without satisfactory therapeutic options and for whom a clinical trial is not available. Academic medical centers (AMCs) are likely to encounter EA requests, but it is unknown what support is available at these institutions for physicians seeking EA for patients. Methods: A landscape assessment was conducted at AMCs, focused on those within the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) consortium. Results: Forty-seven responses were evaluated including 42 CTSA hubs. The large majority (43 of 47 respondents) reported using single-patient EA, while 37 reported multi-patient industry sponsored EA and 37 reported multi-patient investigator-initiated EA. Only half reported central tracking of EA requests. Support was available at 89% of sites for single-patient EA but less often for multi-patient EA. Types of support varied and were focused largely on the initial submission to the FDA. Conclusion: Use of and support for EA is widespread at AMCs, with support focused on single-patient requests. Gaps in support are common for activities after initial submission, such as FDA reporting and data collection.

People with lived experience of incarceration have higher rates of morbidity and mortality compared to people without history of incarceration. Research conducted unethically in prisons and jails led to increased scrutiny of research to ensure the needs of those studied are protected. One consequence of increased restrictions on research with criminal-legal involved populations is reluctance to engage in research evaluations of healthcare for people who are incarcerated and people who have lived experience of incarceration. Ethical research can be done in partnership with people with lived experience of incarceration and other key stakeholders and should be encouraged. In this article, we describe how stakeholder engagement can be accomplished in this setting, and further, how such engagement leads to impactful research that can be disseminated and implemented across disciplines and communities. The goal is to build trust across the spectrum of people who work, live in, or are impacted by the criminal-legal system, with the purpose of moving toward health equity.

COVID-19 reinforced the need for effective leadership and administration within Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program hubs in response to a public health crisis. The speed, scale, and persistent evolution of the pandemic forced CTSA hubs to act quickly and remain nimble. The switch to virtual environments paired with supporting program operations, while ensuring the safety and well-being of their team, highlight the critical support role provided by leadership and administration. The pandemic also illustrated the value of emergency planning in supporting organizations’ ability to quickly pivot and adapt. Lessons learned from the pandemic and from other cases of adaptive capacity and preparedness can aid program hubs in promoting and sustaining the overall capabilities of their organizations to prepare for future events.

The COVID-19 pandemic had an immediate impact on the lives and work of early-career researchers. We leveraged a cluster-randomized trial and compared survey data collected over two timepoints to explore whether these impacts persisted. Although more than a year had passed, 74% of participants reported that their research was affected in multiple ways in both 2020 and 2021. These data suggest that the effects of the pandemic on early-career researchers may be prolonged. Our findings additionally serve as an impetus to identify and implement solutions to early-career challenges that undoubtedly existed before the pandemic, but which COVID-19 brought into the spotlight.

Racially and ethnically minoritized populations have been historically excluded and underrepresented in research. This paper will describe best practices in multicultural and multilingual awareness-raising strategies used by the Recruitment Innovation Center to increase minoritized enrollment into clinical trials. The Passive Immunity Trial for Our Nation will be used as a primary example to highlight real-world application of these methods to raise awareness, engage community partners, and recruit diverse study participants.

Persistent barriers exist to engage rural providers in research and training. Provider shortages exacerbate these challenges, leading to a scarcity of time and limiting motivation to participate in research. We present application of an innovative engagement model to increase rural primary care provider participation in research. Using our Community Engagement and Research Core, we demonstrate that fundamental principles of training and expertise, attention to efficiency and multitasking, and commitment to community are important for addressing provider recruitment barriers. We encourage other Clinical and Translational Science Centers to provide similar services to their local investigators to enhance provider engagement in research.

Research education and training in Translational Science develops and sustains a workforce to efficiently advance studies designed to improve human health. We evaluated the effectiveness of a Translational Science Training (TST) TL1 Program. Participants had significantly better publications/year, citations/year, h-index, and m-quotient than nonparticipants. Female and male participants, and participants from underrepresented and well-represented backgrounds, performed similarly on all bibliometric assessments. Finally, TST/TL1 Program participants outperformed students from other PhD programs at our institution. This analysis suggests that the TST/TL1 Program has been effective for participants, including those who are female and from underrepresented backgrounds.

As the COVID-19 pandemic took hold in the USA in early 2020, it became clear that knowledge of the prevalence of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among asymptomatic individuals could inform public health policy decisions and provide insight into the impact of the infection on vulnerable populations. Two Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Hubs and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) set forth to conduct a national seroprevalence survey to assess the infection’s rate of spread. This partnership was able to quickly design and launch the project by leveraging established research capacities, prior experiences in large-scale, multisite studies and a highly skilled workforce of CTSA hubs and unique experimental capabilities at the NIH to conduct a diverse prospective, longitudinal observational cohort of 11,382 participants who provided biospecimens and participant-reported health and behavior data. The study was completed in 16 months and benefitted from transdisciplinary teamwork, information technology innovations, multimodal communication strategies, and scientific partnership for rigor in design and analytic methods. The lessons learned by the rapid implementation and dissemination of this national study is valuable in guiding future multisite projects as well as preparation for other public health emergencies and pandemics.

A crucial reckoning was initiated when the COVID-19 pandemic began to expose and intensify long-standing racial/ethnic health inequities, all while various sectors of society pursued racial justice reform. As a result, there has been a contextual shift towards broader recognition of systemic racism, and not race, as the shared foundational driver of both societal maladies. This confluence of issues is of particular relevance to Black populations disproportionately affected by the pandemic and racial injustice. In response, institutions have initiated diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts as a way forward. This article considers how the dual pandemic climate of COVID-19-related health inequities and the racial justice movement could exacerbate the “time and effort tax” on Black faculty to engage in DEI efforts in academia and biomedicine. We discuss the impact of this “tax” on career advancement and well-being, and introduce an operational framework for considering the interconnected influence of systemic racism, the dual pandemics, and DEI work on the experience of Black faculty. If not meaningfully addressed, the “time and effort tax” could contribute to Black and other underrepresented minority faculty leaving academia and biomedicine – consequently, the very diversity, equity, and inclusion work meant to increase representation could decrease it.

Effective stakeholder engagement increases research relevance and utility. Though published principles of community-based participatory research and patient-centered outcomes research offer guidance, few resources offer effective techniques to engage stakeholders and translate their engagement into improvements in research process and outcomes. The Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute (Indiana CTSI) is home to Research Jam (RJ), an interdisciplinary team of researchers, project management professionals, and design experts, that employs human-centered design (HCD) to engage stakeholders in the research process. Establishing HCD services at the Indiana CTSI has allowed for accessible and innovative stakeholder-engaged research. RJ offers services for stakeholder-informed study design, measurement, implementation, and dissemination. RJ’s services are in demand to address research barriers pertaining to a diverse array of health topics and stakeholder groups. As a result, the RJ team has grown significantly with both institutional and extramural support. Researchers involved in RJ projects report that working with RJ helped them learn how to better engage with stakeholders in research and changed the way they approach working with stakeholders. RJ can serve as a potential model for effectively engaging stakeholders through HCD to improve translational research.

Structural racism in the USA has roots that extend deep into healthcare and medical research, and it remains a key driver of illness and early death for Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC). Furthermore, the persistence of racism within academic medicine compels an interrogation of education and research within this context. In the spirit of this interrogation, this article highlights a unique model of community-engaged education that integrates cultural humility. As an individual and institutional stance, cultural humility denotes lifelong learning and self-critique, the mitigation of power imbalances, and accountability. The integration of cultural humility emphasizes that when space is created for BIPOC communities to lead the way, education regarding healthcare and research can be effectively reimagined. Demonstrating this effectiveness, six community partners led the development and implementation of a five-module Structural Racism in Healthcare and Research course. Using a cohort model approach, the pilot course enrolled 12 community members and 12 researchers. The curriculum covered topics such as history of racism in healthcare and research, and introduced participants to a cultural resilience framework. Evaluation results demonstrated a significant increase in participants’ knowledge and ability to identify and take action to address inequities related to racism in healthcare and research.

Little has been published on the demographic composition of the clinical and translational science research workforce within the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Program despite the well-documented need for greater diversity in the biomedical research workforce. Analyses of workforce demographic reveal that women and members of underrepresented groups remain persistently underrepresented in the CTSA hub and training components principal investigators. In contrast, in the CTSA Program career development and training programs, females have greater representation as participants, and non-Whites were better represented in training programs.