Preparing clinicians to be site investigators in multicenter clinical trials: A training program at an academic medical center

Clinical trials are essential in the translation of biomedical discoveries to new clinical interventions and therapeutics. Successful multisite clinical trials require qualified site investigators with an understanding of the full spectrum of processes and requirements from trial identification through closeout. New site investigators may be deterred by competing demands on their time, the complexity of administrative and regulatory processes for trial initiation and conduct, and limited access to experienced mentor networks. We established a Clinical Trialist Training Program (CTTP) and complimentary Clinical Trials Bootcamp at our institution to address these barriers and increase the number of local site investigators enabled to lead successful clinical trials. An initial cohort of four CTTP scholars received salary support with protected time, didactic training, assistance with study identification and start-up navigation, and quarterly progress meetings. By the end of the 12-month program, this initial cohort identified 33 new trials, utilized feasibility assessments, and reported being on target to sustain their protected time from new clinical trials. Bootcamp attendees demonstrated increased knowledge of resources, offices, and processes associated with clinical trial conduct. Our results support providing compensated protected time, training, and access to experienced clinical research professionals to enable clinicians to become successful site investigators

DataSheet1_Supporting clinical research professionals through educational innovations.PDF

Clinical Research Professionals (CRPs) are essential members of the Clinical and Translational Research Workforce. Many academic medical institutions struggle to recruit and retain these vital team members. One strategy to increase job satisfaction and promote the retention of CRPs is through educational initiatives that provide training and professional development. The South Carolina Clinical and Translational Research (SCTR) Institute Workforce Development (WD) team at the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) developed several trainings as part of our larger educational portfolio for CRPs. In 2022 WD implemented a digital badge micro-credential for SCTR’s Core Clinical Research Training (CCRT) course in collaboration with institution-wide education and technology offices. Beginning in January 2023, individuals were able to earn the CCRT Certified Digital Badge upon successful completion of the CCRT course.</p

Learning health system benefits: Development and initial validation of a framework

Abstract Introduction Implementation of research findings in clinical practice often is not realized or only partially achieved, and if so, with a significant delay. Learning health systems (LHSs) hold promise to overcome this problem by embedding clinical research and evidence‐based best practices into care delivery, enabling innovation and continuous improvement. Implementing an LHS is a complex process that requires participation and resources of a wide range of stakeholders, including healthcare leaders, clinical providers, patients and families, payers, and researchers. Engaging these stakeholders requires communicating clear, tangible value propositions. Existing models identify broad categories of benefits but do not explicate the full range of benefits or ways they can manifest in different organizations. Methods To develop such a framework, a working group with representatives from six Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hubs reviewed existing literature on LHS characteristics, models, and goals; solicited expert input; and applied the framework to their local LHS experiences. Results The Framework of LHS Benefits includes six categories of benefits (quality, safety, equity, patient satisfaction, reputation, and value) relevant for a range of stakeholders and defines key concepts within each benefit. Applying the framework to five LHS case examples indicated preliminary face validity across varied LHS approaches and revealed three dimensions in which the framework is relevant: defining goals of individual LHS projects, facilitating collaboration based on shared values, and establishing guiding tenets of an LHS program or mission. Conclusion The framework can be used to communicate the value of an LHS to different stakeholders across varied contexts and purposes, and to identify future organizational priorities. Further validation will contribute to the framework's evolution and support its potential to inform the development of tools to evaluate LHS impact