287 Do translational stage or research experience affect funding applicant views on engaging interest holders?
Objectives/Goals: Engaging interest holders in research is increasingly common, and guidelines include creating engagement plans. A detailed plan may be especially helpful when researchers perceive engagement as difficult or less relevant. We tested whether a study’s translational stage or an invest...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Cambridge University Press
2025-04-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Clinical and Translational Science |
| Online Access: | https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2059866124009245/type/journal_article |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Objectives/Goals: Engaging interest holders in research is increasingly common, and guidelines include creating engagement plans. A detailed plan may be especially helpful when researchers perceive engagement as difficult or less relevant. We tested whether a study’s translational stage or an investigator’s years of research experience affect their perceptions. Methods/Study Population: Since 2019, the Tufts Clinical and Translational Science Institute Pilot Studies Program required applicants to submit plans to engage interest holders. Applicants in three cohorts responded to a survey about this requirement, including perceived difficulty developing an engagement plan, perceived relevance of engagement, and self-reported years of research experience (≤5, 6–10, and ≥10 years). Two raters assigned translational stage(s) of proposed studies: T0 (basic science), T.5 (pre-clinical to initial human studies), and T1 through T4. Separate analyses were conducted when multistage studies were coded as the earliest vs. latest stage and for individual stage vs. groups of stages (T0/T.5/T1 vs. T2/T3/T4). The Fisher’s exact statistical test was used to assess associations between variables. Results/Anticipated Results: Analyses included 67 participants. Developing an engagement plan was perceived as more difficult for studies at earlier translational stages when those studies were coded as the earliest applicable stage. This significant association held both when stages were grouped as T0/T.5/T1 and T2/T3/T4 (P = .03) and when analyzed as a single stage (P = .01); however, when studies were coded as the latest applicable stage, there were no significant associations. Similarly, when multistage studies were coded as the earliest applicable stage, engagement was perceived as less relevant for early-stage studies when grouped (P = .04), but not for individual stages or when studies were coded as the latest applicable stage. No significant association between years of research experience and perceived difficulty was identified. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Results show that investigators conducting early-stage research perceive more difficulty engaging interest holders, aligning with prior qualitative studies. These investigators may need more evidence of the value added to early-stage studies, targeted and practical training, and funder requirements to establish a culture of engagement. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2059-8661 |