ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2025
Training T-shaped translational scientists.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The SciLifeLab PULSE entrepreneurial model: accelerating drug discovery by bridging academia and industry.Nature biotechnology · 2026Article
- Formation of a Translational Science Professional Identity: A Heuristic Framework and Research Agenda.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Embracing complexity: An opportunity for developmental evaluation.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Organizational change readiness for team science: a pathway framework for team science success.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
- Building implementation science capacity: Adaptation of I-Corps™@NCATS training for rapid fit-to-context discovery and designing for scale-up and sustainability.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To evaluate the design of I-Corps@NCATS as a translational scientist training program, we mapped specific elements of the program's content and pedagogy to the characteristics of a translational scientist, as first defined by Gilliland et al. []: systems thinker, process innovator, boundary spanner, team player, and skilled communicator. Using a mixed-methods evaluation, we examined how the I-Corps@NCATS training program, delivered across twenty-two Clinical and Translational Science Award Hubs, impacted the development of these key translational scientist characteristics. Methods: We developed survey items to assess the characteristics of systems thinker, process innovator, boundary spanner, team player, and skilled communicator. Data were collected from a national sample of 281 participants in the I-Corps@NCATS program. Using post-then-retrospective-pre survey items, participants self-reported their ability to perform skills associated with each of the translational scientist characteristics. Additionally, two open-ended survey questions explored how the program shifted participants' translational orientation, generating 211 comments. These comments were coded through a team-based, iterative process. Results: Respondents reported the greatest increases in self-assessed abilities related to systems thinking and skilled communication. Participants indicated the highest levels of abilities related to team player and boundary crosser. From the coding of open-ended comments, we identified two additional characteristics of translational scientists: intellectual humility and cognitive flexibility. Conclusions: Participation in I-Corps@NCATS accelerates translational science in two ways: 1) by teaching the process of scientific translation from research ideas to real-world solutions, and 2) by encouraging growth in the mindset and characteristics of a translational scientist.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.