Medicine and health innovations both continually reinvent themselves, resulting in humans living longer and healthier lives thanks, in part, to the success of experimental medicine. In simple terms, basic medical research, translational research, bench science, and applied research support and aid the advancement of knowledge in the medical field. Clinical research is an essential component of medical research; basic scientific research focuses on genetics, and preclinical research includes animal models. Together, the impactful work of scientists and researchers may result in discovering the causes and cures of a variety of life-threatening conditions and diseases.
Understanding the Research Framework
Effective communication of evidence-based research often requires modern approaches, continuous training, and robust organizational value of research-informed practices. The choice to select, accept, and employ change is most often a process than an instantaneous act. Further, diffusing a research discovery among practitioners, the public, and organizations likely occur in stages. However, in clinical areas of translational research, such as medicine, a significant gap exists between discovery generated through research and application of the knowledge. Following is a four-phase approach to translation and dissemination of clinical research findings into action along with the key measures for developing the capacity to progress through these stages.
Discovery. In the first phase, scientists investigate determinants of behavior, diseases, and health. They also appraise the efficiency of current interventions and health services to question and expand prevailing theoretical perspectives and scientific methods. Many disciplines such as health services research, behavioral sciences, academic research, environmental health, and Biostatistics contribute to the discovery phase. During this stage, the construction and experimentation of behavioral science theories include the testing of an organizational innovation or intervention in precisely defined settings which often provide a foundation for ensuing phases.
Translation. During phase two, researchers synthesize, convert, and reconfigure investigation findings into relevant data for a target audience or population. The emphasis often shifts from generalizations under real world conditions to that of vital importance. Understanding context often creates tension between replication and reinvention, which contends that program changes are crucial when dealing with replications occurring in new settings. Incorporating new programs in the translation phase includes understanding the valuable resources of existing knowledge structures in developing a generalizable and valid intervention. The goal is determining what works and how to select key interventions with proven effectiveness.
Dissemination. At this point, researchers assess their resources and priorities to define the long-term viability of the innovation. The objective of phase three is communicating translated research findings to populations in relevant and meaningful ways, with a focus on the beginning of enduring change. Untargeted forms of passive dissemination usually result in rejection of policy or program, making robust and active methods critical, including presenting credible sources of information and quality scientific evidence. The longer-term objective of this phase is institutionalizing and maintaining the discovery in settings that integrate the innovation into a social system’s routine practice.
Change. The ultimate intention of a research innovation is promoting health indicators that enhance the quality of life, and in this final phase, researchers strive to improve well-being through program adoption, long-term behavior modification, policy appropriation, organizational change, and environmental transformation. Metrics assess traditional as well as more intermediate endpoints such as changes in governmental policies or organizational capacity. However, because adopting organizations are multifaceted, complex, and contextual, measures of change should identify and consolidate these features.
Collecting knowledge for the public’s benefit entails researchers to recognize the practical applications of their conclusions. It also requires identifying collaborations and building partnerships to address the complexities associated with moving projects through the four phases. Follow Bruce Eaton PhD for up-to-date information on the newest scientific breakthroughs.
Moving Between the Phases
Successfully moving from one phase to the next for many scientists is a daunting task. The application and adoption of innovations into policy and practice depend on proven tactics, strategies, and processes and is the heart of where clinical research can make significant contributions. Generating metrics for evaluating outcomes includes determining appropriate indicators of quality control and accuracy for implementation. For instance, the discovery should motivate change and interpret the results that adopting organizations should reasonably expect. Perhaps most importantly, a feedback loop facilitates sharing the development phases of the process to make improvements in the overall process.
Following the Future of Clinical Research
Scientists, researchers, and leaders embrace the idea that achieving better health can only be accomplished with the scientific and reliable knowledge. Accordingly, decades of support by private and governmental sources have created an excellent framework of knowledge across all disciplines for scientific breakthroughs. However, years may pass before the adoption of new knowledge into communities or clinical applications. However, even in a season of escalating tension on research resources, scientists must continue to satisfy the implicit obligation to the public of utilizing the billions of dollars invested in basic science to yield clear and tangible benefits.