TY - JOUR
T1 - A landscape assessment of CTSA evaluators and their work in the CTSA consortium, 2021 survey findings
AU - Hoyo, Verónica
AU - Nehl, Eric
AU - Dozier, Ann
AU - Harvey, Jillian
AU - Kane, Cathleen
AU - Perry, Anna
AU - Samuels, Elias
AU - Schmidt, Susanne
AU - Hunt, Joe
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Association for Clinical and Translational Science.
PY - 2024/4/25
Y1 - 2024/4/25
N2 - This article presents a landscape assessment of the findings from the 2021 Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Evaluators Survey. This survey was the most recent iteration of a well established, national, peer-led systematic snapshot of the CTSA evaluators, their skillsets, listed evaluation resources, preferred methods, and identified best practices. Three questions guided our study: who are the CTSA evaluators, what competencies do they share and how is their work used within hubs. We describe our survey process (logistics of development, deployment, and differences in historical context with prior instruments); and present its main findings. We provide specific recommendations for evaluation practice in two main categories (National vs Group-level) including, among others, the need for a national, strategic plan for evaluation as well as enhanced mentoring and training of the next generation of evaluators. Although based on the challenges and opportunities currently within the CTSA Consortium, takeaways from this study constitute important lessons with potential for application in other large evaluation consortia. To our knowledge, this is the first time 2021 survey findings are disseminated widely, to increase transparency of the CTSA evaluators' work and to motivate conversations within hub and beyond, as to how best to leverage existent evaluative capacity.
AB - This article presents a landscape assessment of the findings from the 2021 Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Evaluators Survey. This survey was the most recent iteration of a well established, national, peer-led systematic snapshot of the CTSA evaluators, their skillsets, listed evaluation resources, preferred methods, and identified best practices. Three questions guided our study: who are the CTSA evaluators, what competencies do they share and how is their work used within hubs. We describe our survey process (logistics of development, deployment, and differences in historical context with prior instruments); and present its main findings. We provide specific recommendations for evaluation practice in two main categories (National vs Group-level) including, among others, the need for a national, strategic plan for evaluation as well as enhanced mentoring and training of the next generation of evaluators. Although based on the challenges and opportunities currently within the CTSA Consortium, takeaways from this study constitute important lessons with potential for application in other large evaluation consortia. To our knowledge, this is the first time 2021 survey findings are disseminated widely, to increase transparency of the CTSA evaluators' work and to motivate conversations within hub and beyond, as to how best to leverage existent evaluative capacity.
KW - Continuous improvement
KW - CTSA
KW - evaluation
KW - NCATS
KW - survey
KW - translational science
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85191797596&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85191797596&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1017/cts.2024.526
DO - 10.1017/cts.2024.526
M3 - Article
C2 - 38745877
AN - SCOPUS:85191797596
SN - 2059-8661
VL - 8
JO - Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
JF - Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
IS - 1
M1 - e79
ER -