What are the biggest challenges in evaluating translational research?

A lack of sufficient knowledge of the translational process, its relevance, and its goal also contributes to confusion among the parties involved. Miscommunication is one of the key challenges. Translational research seeks to transfer knowledge from fundamental science to clinical research to the practical application of knowledge in public health

Just to stir the debate: In the majority of the cases scientific discoveries are solutions looking for a real world problem. The best Scientists are driven by curiosity. Some of the most important discoveries for mankind (for instance, penicillin ) were accidental. The concept of translational research was created by someone who never did scientific research.

The key to effective translational research is a realistic workplan. Often, the goal is well-defined: for example, a specific product - a vaccine, a diagnostic tool, a treatment algorithm, etc. - but what happens after the end goal is reached is not. Getting to the end goal may require multiple different tasks: breaking these down into smaller concrete deliverables with budgets, realistic timelines and backup plans in case of failure is essential. But equally essential is defining what you will do once (if) you achieve your goal. That means working out who or what are your potential regulators, users, payers, alternatives or competitors? How will you produce and distribute it? Many projects succeed technically, but fail this last stage.

Ditch the one-size-fits-all approach; translational research requires a spectrum of metrics! From concept to community impact, where metrics extend beyond citations to real-world health outcomes and policy shifts. These metrics require a lot of indicators capturing - short-term outputs - long-term societal benefits all the while navigating the collaborative web that weaves together years of interdisciplinary efforts.

Translational research is time consuming and because of this there is need to measure success so as to know the viability of the research producing result to either help with decision making.

The complexity of translational research, which involves moving scientific discoveries into practical applications for real-world impact, requires the collaboration and cooperation of diverse stakeholders. These stakeholders may include scientists, clinicians, industry partners, policymakers, and the public. Effectively engaging and aligning these diverse groups with varying interests, priorities, and perspectives demands strategic communication, transparent dialogue, and a shared vision. Achieving consensus on evaluation criteria, goals, and methodologies becomes intricate when stakeholders bring different expectations to the table.

Different specialists use different language, depending on their areas of expertise and their value thinking/interests/priorities. Take the time to engage the different dialects of the specialisations in your stakeholder cohort. This will help you to choose methodologies and communications that are meaningful for stakeholders. Don't be afraid to research/invest time in understanding these differences. It is extremely powerful for resourcing, collaboration, and research impact.

In the evaluation of translational research, a critical challenge lies in engaging and aligning diverse stakeholders, including researchers, funders, practitioners, policymakers, patients, and the public. It is essential to involve stakeholders in the evaluation's design, implementation, and dissemination to ensure the relevance, credibility, and usability of results.

It's recommended to undergo a stakeholder mapping activity to identify key influencers and decision-makers. Tailor engagement strategies based on the interests and influence of different stakeholders to maximize collaboration and alignment.

Stakeholder need to be involved from the planning process and updated, aligned as they would have diversified experience, understanding and they would take interest and give time if the project is of relevance, it would be important to engage, involve and align them towards a common purpose.

In my experience of adapting various forms of communication in my local context, the widest gap appears from a lack of understanding of the culture, customs and thinking of the space/language one is translating into. This trend is also noticeable when international companies try to scale their businesses in markets without sufficient market study. Just because a specific term, phase or even business solution works in a specific market, does not guarantee it will work in a country with totally different societal cues than what you are used to.

The dynamic nature of scientific, technological, and societal landscapes requires constant adjustments in research approaches and methodologies. As translational research aims to bridge the gap between scientific discovery and practical application, its evaluation must be attuned to evolving contextual factors and societal demands. Researchers face the challenge of navigating diverse and rapidly changing environments, necessitating flexibility in methodologies to ensure the relevance and effectiveness of translational outcomes.

I'd recommend the following to address this challenge: 1. Adopting agile project management methodologies that allow flexibility and quick adjustments to changing circumstances. 2. Implementing systems for continuous environmental scanning.

To address the challenge of adapting to changing contexts and needs in translational research, a prospective approach involves embedding flexibility and adaptability into research processes. Researchers and stakeholders should anticipate evolving scientific, technological, and societal contexts. This means regularly assessing research goals, adjusting strategies, and staying updated on emerging trends. Promoting a culture of innovation and collaboration enables effective responses to changing circumstances, ensuring that translational research remains relevant and impactful in an ever-evolving landscape.

Just trying to impose a dialogue !!! Evaluating translational research poses the challenge of adapting to evolving contexts and user needs. Flexibility in evaluations is crucial, allowing adjustments to new data, methods, or ethical considerations. Sensitivity to social, cultural impacts, and potential risks is vital, ensuring responsible and effective research translation.

Turn: 1. statistics into strategies 2. findings into forward momentum Numbers tell tales. In evaluating translational research, weave data into stories that resonate with the audience!

Let's consider the development of COVID-19 vaccines. Translational research played a crucial role in rapidly creating vaccines, but effectively communicating their efficacy, safety, and importance to various groups posed a challenge. Disseminating complex data about vaccine trials, potential side effects, and the necessity of vaccination to different demographics, policymakers, and healthcare professionals required clear and accessible communication. This challenge highlighted the critical need for effective dissemination of scientific findings to ensure widespread understanding and acceptance of crucial public health interventions.

It's extremely important to communicate results and because of the nature of translational research it may be wise to work with a professional science communicator.

The diverse data and intricacies involved in translational research make it difficult to communicate findings effectively. For example, while extensive papers help researchers, a medical breakthrough may require simplified infographics for public understanding. Broader reach is ensured by customizing dissemination tactics, such as the use of webinars or podcasts. As demonstrated by community health programs, ongoing feedback integration enhances communication impact assessment and increases the efficacy of future dissemination.

If you haven't got good stakeholder buy-in (identifying a research niche with significant ROI - so the work is needed) and you don't have focus, you will have trouble. You are then trying to create a story from abstract ideas and data. Then observers opinions will determine the narrative (and they will be varied and often counter to your aim) and there will be no value to the work done.

Translational research typically involves a significant time and resource commitment. Typically, the timeline from discovery to implementation (bench to bedside) can be a barrier, and the need for substantial funding to support clinical trials and other efforts can pose challenges. Furthermore, due to these extended timelines, research teams typically undergo changes, and the economic, research, and technological landscape evolves. This evolution could alter the significance of a translational research effort over time, thereby adding complexities to the evaluation process.

I think this article so far misses the important ethical issues involved in translational research. There are often grey areas in this research that can be challenging to navigate particularly for new and early career researchers.

Key learning: Throughout this transformative process, I've discovered that the power of our communication lies not just in what we say but how we say it. It's in the art of making complexity accessible, in turning uncertainty into curiosity, and in weaving a narrative that resonates across diverse audiences.

Impact Assessment: Measuring the reach and effectiveness of communication efforts. Ethical Communication: Upholding ethical standards and participant confidentiality. Professional Collaboration: Partnering with science communication experts. Adaptive Learning: Continuously updating communication methods. Accessibility Compliance: Ensuring communications are accessible to all, including those with disabilities. Ongoing Dialogue: Maintaining post-publication discussions for clarity and engagement.

Otro aspecto que me gustaría destacar, tanto en el contexto de la investigación traslacional como en el de la básica, es que debemos ser conscientes de que un éxito no tiene por qué ser necesariamente favorable, ya que un resultado negativo también supone un avance en dicho estudio, teniendo la misma importancia a la hora de su difusión en la comunidad investigadora ya que esto hace que la investigación avance de forma más rápida y efectiva, evitando que otros compa?eros repitan los mismos protocolos sin obtener resultados positivos. Esto permite ahorrar tiempo y recursos económicos a la vez que asegura un avance más rápido en investigación, lo que supone poder tener soluciones efectivas para la sociedad.