An empirical assessment of the short-term impacts of a reading of Deborah Zoe Laufer's drama Informed Consent on attitudes and intentions to participate in genetic research.

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the short-term impact of the play "Informed Consent" by Deborah Zoe Laufer (a fictionalized look at the controversy over specimens collected from the Havasupai Tribe for diabetes research in 1989) on perceptions of trust, willingness to donate biospecimens, and attitudes toward harm and privacy among the medical and undergraduate students, faculty, and the public in the Intermountain West. METHODS: Surveys were administered before and after a staged reading of the play by professional actors. Survey items included the short form Trust in Medical Researchers, and single-item questions about group identity, ethics of genetic testing in children, and willingness to donate biospecimens. In addition, respondents were given the option to answer open-ended questions through e-mail. RESULTS: Out of the 481 who attended the play, 421 completed both the pre and post surveys, and 166 participants completed open-ended questions online approximately 1 week after the play. Across all participants, there were significant declines for trust in medical researchers and for the survey item "is it ethical for investigators to test children for adult onset diseases" (p < .001 for both) following the play. There was a significant increase in agreement to improve group identity protections (p < .001) and there were no differences on willingness to donate biospecimens to research (p = .777). Qualitative data provided extensive contextual data supporting these perspectives. DISCUSSION: This is one of the first studies to document short-term impacts of a theatrical performance on both attitudes and behavioral intentions toward research ethics and clinical research participation. Future research should continue to explore the impact of theatrical performances among public and investigators on the ethical issues and complexities in clinical research.

Understanding investigators' attitudes through a results-based accountability framework within a single CTSA institution.

PURPOSE: The National Center for Advancing Translation Science (NCATS) is implementing a new strategic management plan called the results-based accountability framework. This framework is part of the common metrics initiative. For successful implementation and adoption of new management strategies, it is important to assess current stakeholders' experiences and needs. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with principal investigators who are conducting research and supported by the Center for Clinical Translational Science at the University of Utah. Between July and August 2016, 15 interviews were completed and audio recorded. A qualitative content analysis was conducted on the transcripts. RESULTS: Results indicated the need to provide education about the continuum of clinical translational research; time constraints during pre-award; barriers to IRB submissions; difficulty balancing other responsibilities in academic health centers; and the need for shared study coordinator resources. CONCLUSION: Implementing a new management philosophy requires an understanding key stakeholders attitudes and needs. The research identified ways to help engage investigators with centralized resources supported by NCATS and implementation of common metrics at this university.

Developing sustainable research careers for KL2 scholars: The importance of an inclusive environment and mentorship.

INTRODUCTION: The National Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Consortium 2.0 has developed common metrics as a collaborative project for all participating sites. Metrics address several important aspects and functions of the consortium, including workforce development. The first workforce development metrics to be proposed for all CTSA hubs include the proportion of CTSA-supported trainees and scholars with sustainable careers in translational research and the diversity and inclusiveness of programs. METHODS AND RESULTS: The University of Utah Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCTS), a CTSA hub, has been actively engaged in mentoring translational scientists for the last decade. We have developed programs, processes, and institutional policies that support translational scientists, which have resulted in 100% of our KL2 scholars remaining engaged in translational science and in increasing the inclusion of individuals under-represented in medicine in our research enterprise. In this paper, we share details of our program and what we believe are evidence-based best practices for developing sustainable translational research careers for all aspiring junior faculty members. CONCLUSIONS: The University of Utah Center for Clinical and Translational Science has been integral in catalyzing interactions across the campus to reverse the negative trends seen nationally in sustaining clinician scientists. Our programs and processes can serve as a model for other institutions seeking to develop translational scientists.