ArticleFrontiers in research metrics and analytics2025
Modernizing CTSA hub evaluation: an integrated system for performance monitoring and translational science impact assessment.
Article in Frontiers in research metrics and analytics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An iterative approach to evaluating impact of CTSA projects using the translational science benefits model.Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The Evaluation Unit at the Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute (ACTRI) implemented a balanced scorecard model in conjunction with a project management tool to consolidate data collection for progress monitoring, strategic alignment, and impact assessment. This approach aims to streamline communication and enhance information accessibility for all partners. We developed an efficient system for collecting, analyzing, and reporting key information on unit progress, impact, and alignment with institutional goals. The Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM) was proposed as a framework to evaluate the broader impact of our translational research, beyond immediate scientific advancements, across clinical, societal, economic, and policy domains. Methods: The ACTRI Evaluation Unit initially adapted the balanced scorecard (BSC) to the research environment, substituting business perspectives with research grant aims. In its second iteration, the BSC was integrated into Monday.com, a project management platform, to create customized, real-time monitoring dashboards for each unit within the institute. The Evaluation Unit's 3.0 version further adapted the TSBM to assess the broader impacts of unit activities. Quarterly data collection was implemented, and partners were trained in impact assessment and dashboard usage. This process began in early 2023 and is ongoing. Results: Eleven monitoring dashboards were developed and successfully implemented across the institute. The new system facilitated more efficient data collection and reporting, reducing communication overhead and increasing the frequency of updates. The data collected were utilized to draft annual reports as well as inform strategic planning and executive sessions. Conclusions: Integrating the TSBM into our existing BSC framework, combined with a project management tool, effectively streamlined impact assessment and progress monitoring. This approach not only enhanced data collection and reporting efficiency but also encouraged units to align their goals and activities with desired impacts, thereby strengthening the institute's overall strategic focus.
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.