A snapshot of translational research funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH): A case study using behavioral and social science research awards and Clinical and Translational Science Awards funded publications.

Xueying Han,Brian L Zuckerman,Sharon R Williams,Sergi Lozano

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0196545

Xueying Han, Brian L Zuckerman + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0196545

Copy DOI

Journal: PloS one	Publication Date: May 9, 2018
Citations: 11	License type: CC BY 4.0

Affiliation: Office of Science and Technology Policy

Abstract

The translation of biomedical research from basic knowledge to application has been a priority at the National Institute of Health (NIH) for many years. Tracking the progress of scientific research and knowledge through the translational process is difficult due to variation in the definition of translational research as well as the identification of benchmarks for the spread and application of biomedical research; quantitatively tracking this process is even more difficult. Using a simple and reproducible method to assess whether publications are translational, we examined NIH R01 behavioral and social science research (BSSR) awards funded between 2008 and 2014 to determine whether there are differences in the percent of translational research publications produced by basic and applied research awards. We also assessed the percent of translational research publications produced by the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) program to evaluate whether targeted translational research awards result in increased translational research. We found that 3.9% of publications produced by basic research awards were translational; that the percent of translational research publications produced by applied research awards is approximately double that of basic research awards (7.4%); and that targeted translational research awards from the CTSA program produced the highest percentage of translational research publications (13.4%). In addition, we assessed differences in time to first publication, time to first citation, and publication quality by award type (basic vs. applied), and whether an award (or publication) is translational.

Highlights

Using a simple and reproducible method to assess whether publications are translational, we examined National Institutes of Health (NIH) R01 behavioral and social science research (BSSR) awards funded between 2008 and 2014 to determine whether there are differences in the percent of translational research publications produced by basic and applied research awards
We acknowledge that this study focuses only on NIH grants awarded within the behavioral and social science research field and that our results may not be applicable to all research areas
That the U.S National Library of Medicine (NLM) has been indexing publication types by trained MEDLINE indexers since 1991 and no publication type is assigned by a computer algorithm

Summary

Introduction

According to NCATS, the translational research spectrum is better defined as an interconnected network where each stage can inform and learn from other stages In this framework, basic research is not part of the translational research spectrum but is informed by other stages in the network. Despite numerous conceptualizations of the translational research continuum, there remains no clear consensus on which framework best conveys the process of translating basic science research to healthcare practices [10, 11]. It is commonly agreed on, that translational research bridges the gap ‘from bench to bedside’ and is both important and essential to improve public health. The push for increased translational research stems from ever-present political pressure for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to demonstrate that billions of tax-payer dollars are not wasted annually and that NIH-funded research produces tangible societal benefits [12,13,14]

Methods

Results

Conclusion