ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2025
Building an evaluation infrastructure to capture process and progress within a Clinical and Translational Science Awards hub.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contextualizing Evaluation in Research Consortia: A Reflective Case Study from the Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMIs) Program.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Measuring what matters: Modern evaluation practices in clinical and translational science.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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To improve its management capacity, Frontiers Clinical and Translational Science Institute overhauled its evaluation infrastructure to be comprehensive, efficient, and transparent in demonstrating outputs and outcomes. We built a platform that standardized measures across program areas, integrated continuous improvement processes, and reduced the data entry burden for investigators. Using the Utilization-Focused Evaluation Framework, we created logic models to identify appropriate metrics. We built the evaluation data platform within REDCap to capture requests, events, attendance, and outcomes and to push work processes to Navigators. We initiated a membership model to serve as the backbone of the platform which allowed tailored communication, demographic data capture, and reduced data entry burden. The platform consists of nine REDCap projects across multiple programmatic areas. Using REDCap Dynamic SQL query fields and External Modules, the membership module was integrated into all forms to check and collect membership before service access. Data is synched to a dashboard for tracking outputs and outcomes in real-time. Since the launch of the evaluation platform in Fall 2022, Frontiers has increased its workflow efficiency and streamlined continuous improvement communication. The platform can serve as a model for other hubs to build efficient processes to create comprehensive and transparent evaluation plans.
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.