STINT: Strengths and Barriers in Translational Research at OHSU
26
STINT: Strengths and Barriers in Translational Research at OHSU A Practical Example of Strengths Assessment Using Mixed Methods
description
STINT: Strengths and Barriers in Translational Research at OHSU. A Practical Example of Strengths Assessment Using Mixed Methods. RFA: Identify your strengths!. Strategic Planning: What is OCTRI’s Vision?. Roadmap: What are our strengths?. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of STINT: Strengths and Barriers in Translational Research at OHSU
STINT: Strengths and Barriers in Translational Research at OHSUA Practical Example of Strengths Assessment Using Mixed Methods
RFA:
Identify your
strengths!
Strategic Planning: What is OCTRI’s Vision?
Roadmap: What are our strengt
hs?
I was going to send out another survey, then I remembered the response rate to the last one.
Why do a mixed methods study?
Three Methodological Components
Integration of quantitative data from institutional data sources
Funding Data IRB Data Translational Research
Classification OCTRI Investigator Data
Three Methodological Components
Qualitative Interviews of OHSU Translational Researchers
51 researchers & administrators interviewed
Three Methodological Components
Snowball sampling and referral network map
141 investigators received referrals247 total referrals made
Interview Themes
“If you had $100 million for
translational research, how
would you spend it?”
Translational Research Definition
Strengths, Barriers Current vs. Emerging
Scientific Disciplines
Research Processes
Resources
Organizational Culture
OCTRI
Referrals
Analysis of Institutional Data
Data*Interviewe
dReferred, Not Interviewed
All Investigators in Database
Funding $ 9,145,491 $ 7,364,916 $ 3,116,546 Total Count 51 90 1416
OCTRI Participation N %
OCTRI Faculty 3 6%
OCTRI Project PI 36 71%
Mentor or Scholar 21 41%
PI or Co-I on Pilot Project 23 45%
*not real data
Interviews coded using Dedoose.
High Prevalence
Mid to High Prevalence
Mid Prevalence
Mid to Low Prevalence
Topic Prevalence Definition Narrative Quotes Theme 1
Sub-Code 1
Terminology example "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.” “Duis enim est, ornare quis adipiscing vel, adipiscing tristique libero. Vivamus id pharetra justo. Pellentesque pellentesque ornare pretium.”
Sub-Code 2
Terminology example “Cras sit amet imperdiet risus.” “Proin elementum dignissim lobortis. Suspendisse pharetra risus ut ligula ultricies porttitor.”
Sub-Code 3
Terminology example “Sed hendrerit mattis nibh ac euismod. Duis condimentum, risus eget convallis porttitor, lectus purus adipiscing nisi, vel aliquet ante nisl ut libero.” “Nulla semper nulla in nisi iaculis pretium. Nullam ut metus iaculis.”
Theme 2
Sub-Code 1
Terminology example “Aenean ac augue eu nisi porttitor semper. Duis varius ornare eleifend.” “Pellentesque consequat risus eget aliquam tristique. Nulla vitae felis fermentum, tempor felis nec, vulputate lectus. Quisque in imperdiet lectus, non euismod elit.”
Sub-Code 2
Terminology example “Suspendisse eleifend urna sit amet consectetur lobortis. Fusce in orci vel tellus venenatis consectetur ac accumsan nibh.”
Code excerpts were organized by topic and prevalence.
No Story in the Original Network Graph
Tell a story…
Mixed Methods Analysis
Community & Policy Research
Translational?
Story #1
Translation Most Often Defined as Bench to Bedside
All Referrals for Interviewees Referrals to Community Interviewees
Circle size represents funding amount.
2 community & policy researchers from our initial sample received no referrals from other translational researchers.
Funding By Research TypeData* Preclinical Clinical Community &
Policy
Funding $ 7,002,000 $ 7,962,000 $ 11,070,000
Total Count 22 18 7
Community & Policy Research is well-funded
*not real data
Department “B”
Connected?
Story #2
Department H
Department G
Department F
Department E
Department D
Department C
Department B
Department A
46910
1833
4665
Department H
Department G
Department F
Department E
Department D
Department C
Department B
Department A
Total Investigators in De-partmentCount of Investigators Referred to
Department B Received Many ReferralsDepartments with 20% or more of total investigators receiving referrals
Topic Prevalence
Examples Narrative Quotes
Department B
Praesent porttitor elit nibh, sed tempus felis tristique sagitti
“If you look at OHSU and try to figure out what it’s good at and sets it apart, it’s really Department B.”
“People at Department B and Department F are really pretty astounding.”
Department G
Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae
“Quisque neque nunc, rhoncus placerat ante a, convallis posuere nisl. Quisque in tellus sit amet eros rutrum blandit ac id nisi. Suspendisse eget urna convallis elit vulputate tempus sed sit amet
metus.”
Department H
Morbi nec ligula cursus, cursus nunc ut, dignissim nisi. Mauris facilisis dui vitae mi ullamcorper fringilla
“Sed nulla nisl, porta ut mattis eget, lobortis sit amet dolor. Suspendisse ac libero id justo venenatis faucibus vitae hendrerit metus.”
Department Q
Nam sed urna sit amet leo auctor faucibus
“Fusce ac semper sem. Quisque accumsan nisl in lorem faucibus
vehicula.”
Department I
Quisque in tellus sit amet eros rutrum blandit ac id nisi
“Nam rutrum dui consequat orci varius, nec venenatis nulla placerat. Nunc lobortis tempus urna, ut semper diam varius egestas. In ut sollicitudin tellus. Nunc porta a turpis a malesuada.”
Qualitative Data Shows Dept. B is a Strength
Referrals toDept. “B”
Department
Total Referrals from Dept.
Referrals to Own Dept.
Percent Referred Within
Dept.
Department F 7 5 71%
Department H 14 8 57%
Department A 35 20 57%
Department B 18 10 56%
Department K 2 1 50%
Department B Had a High Rate of Internal Referrals 5 departments with highest percent of internal referrals
The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
Lindsey Smith, MPP
Research Assistant
Adrienne Zell, PhD
Evaluation Manager
David Dilts, PhDEvaluation Director
