Quantifying complexity in translational research: an integrated approach
Author:
A. Munoz David,Black Nembhard Harriet,L. Kraschnewski Jennifer
Abstract
Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to quantify complexity in translational research. The impact of major operational steps and technical requirements is calculated with respect to their ability to accelerate moving new discoveries into clinical practice.
Design/methodology/approach
– A three-phase integrated quality function deployment (QFD) and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method was used to quantify complexity in translational research. A case study in obesity was used to usability.
Findings
– Generally, the evidence generated was valuable for understanding various components in translational research. Particularly, the authors found that collaboration networks, multidisciplinary team capacity and community engagement are crucial for translating new discoveries into practice.
Research limitations/implications
– As the method is mainly based on subjective opinion, some argue that the results may be biased. However, a consistency ratio is calculated and used as a guide to subjectivity. Alternatively, a larger sample may be incorporated to reduce bias.
Practical implications
– The integrated QFD-AHP framework provides evidence that could be helpful to generate agreement, develop guidelines, allocate resources wisely, identify benchmarks and enhance collaboration among similar projects.
Originality/value
– Current conceptual models in translational research provide little or no clue to assess complexity. The proposed method aimed to fill this gap. Additionally, the literature review includes various features that have not been explored in translational research.
Subject
Health Policy,General Business, Management and Accounting
Reference35 articles.
1. Akao, Y.
(1972), “New product development and quality assurance – quality deployment system”, Standardization and Quality Control, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 7-14. 2. Chang, C.L.
(2006), “Application of quality function deployment launches to enhancing nursing home service quality”, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 287-302. 3. Chaplin, E.
and
Akao, Y.
(2003), “Translate know-what into know-how”, Quality Progress, Vol. 36 No. 12, pp. 56-61. 4. Cheever, M.A.
,
Allison, J.P.
,
Ferris, A.S.
,
Finn, O.J.
,
Hastings, B.M.
,
Hecht, T.T.
,
Mellman, I.
,
Prindiville, S.A.
,
Viner, J.L.
and
Matrisian, L.M.
(2009), “The prioritization of cancer antigens: a national cancer institute pilot project for the acceleration of translational research”, Clinical Cancer Research, Vol. 15 No. 17, pp. 5323-5337. 5. Danner, M.
,
Hummel, J.M.
,
Volz, F.
,
van Manen, J.G.
,
Wiegard, B.
,
Dintsios, C.M.
,
Bastian, H.
,
Gerber, A.
and
IJzerman, M.J.
(2011), “Integrating patients’ views into health technology assessment: analytic hierarchy process (AHP) as a method to elicit patient preferences”, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 369-375.
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|