Optimising translational research opportunities: A systematic review and narrative synthesis of basic and clinician scientists' perspectives of factors which enable or hinder translational research

66Citations
Citations of this article
168Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Introduction Translational research is central to international health policy, research and funding initiatives. Despite increasing use of the term, the translation of basic science discoveries into clinical practice is not straightforward. This systematic search and narrative synthesis aimed to examine factors enabling or hindering translational research from the perspective of basic and clinician scientists, a key stakeholder group in translational research, and to draw policy-relevant implications for organisations seeking to optimise translational research opportunities. Methods and Results We searched SCOPUS and Web of Science from inception until April 2015 for papers reporting scientists' views of the factors they perceive as enabling or hindering the conduct of translational research. We screened 8,295 papers from electronic database searches and 20 papers from hand searches and citation tracking, identifying 26 studies of qualitative, quantitative or mixed method designs. We used a narrative synthesis approach and identified the following themes: 1) differing concepts of translational research 2) research processes as a barrier to translational research; 3) perceived cultural divide between research and clinical care; 4) interdisciplinary collaboration as enabling translation research, but dependent on the quality of prior and current social relationships; 5) translational research.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fudge, N., Sadler, E., Fisher, H. R., Maher, J., Wolfe, C. D. A., & McKevitt, C. (2016). Optimising translational research opportunities: A systematic review and narrative synthesis of basic and clinician scientists’ perspectives of factors which enable or hinder translational research. PLoS ONE, 11(8). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160475

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free