1. RESEARCH STUDIOS as part of CTSI Michael Nader, Christopher Whitlow, Aaratthi Thushyanthan, Lindsay Trost, Rachel Woodside CTSI Team Science Program

2. Acad Med. 2012;87:1052–1059 Studios are a series of integrated, dynamic, and interactive roundtable discussions that bring relevant research experts from diverse academic disciplines together to focus on a specific research project at a specific stage.

3. refine hypotheses and research questions; to promote the most appropriate and most rigorous study designs and research methods; to ensure the most effective and efficient approaches to study implementation; to examine and consider new study analyses in an effort to maximize both the amount and the rigor of information a project generates; and to facilitate the translation of research findings into publication, practice, and policy. Byrne et al. (2012) These sessions are intended to:

4. Hypothesis generation – Assist investigators with generating clear, concise, meaningful, and innovative research questions and hypotheses that will ultimately lead to funded, executed, productive projects. Study design – Assist investigators with developing improved research protocols that take advantage of the breadth of study design options available to address, as effectively as possible, the specific research hypotheses. Grant review – Assist investigators by critically reviewing the grant application to enhance the chance of funding; examines specifically the scope of the Specific Aims, the Background and Significance, the Preliminary Studies, and the Research Design/Methods. Function as an internal Study Section. Implementation – Assist investigators with executing and monitoring research projects that adhere to the best standards in research methods. Analysis and Interpretation – Assist investigators with analyzing and interpreting study data and findings, generating subsequent hypotheses and research questions, and identifying insights that could inform theories and understandings for further basic science, clinical research and/or population-based or community research. Manuscript review – Assist investigators in preparing a manuscript to enhance the chance of publication in a high-impact journal; assist investigators in presenting the data in the most compelling manner; function as an internal pre-review to improve clarity, to fix obvious errors, strengthen the focus and logic of the story. Translational – Assist investigators with examining the implications of their research in the context of the existing body of knowledge; how might the data influence best practices in the community.

5. Steps to request a Research Studio 1.The investigator logs onto the CTSI website. https://redcap.tsi.wfubmc.edu/redcap/surveys/?s=FPWHNF7PND 2.Completes the “Research Studio Request Form” 3.Aaratthi Thushyanthan, Lindsay Trost, Rachel Woodside, Chris and I review the request 4.The investigator receives a response from the Studio Manager within 3 days 5.We contact 2-6 experts and one moderator to participate in the Studio session 6.Aaratthi reserve a conference room and, when appropriate, order breakfast or lunch 7.The Studio Moderator gives the investigator 15 minutes to present and then leads discussion 8.Experts provide verbal and written feedback during the 90 min session 9.After the Studio session, the Manager organizes feedback and sends a report to the investigator

6. BRSA Service Request Form BRSA offers a variety of services to investigators conducting clinical and translational research within the institution. Please take a moment to review our services and select what is most appropriate for your needs. If you have questions regarding services or the request form, please contact us at brsa@wakehealth.edu or 336-716-1358brsa@wakehealth.edu Services Today’s Date * must provide value What service do you need? (click on the links to learn more about the service) * must provide value Study Coordinator REDCap Information Data Access Research Studio Biostats, Epidem, Res (BERD) I have a question/need a collaborator Contact/Request Information Requesting PI Name Academic Rank PI Department Primary Contact Primary Contact E-mail

11. Studio Expert Evaluation I had the relevant expertise to address the researcher’s specific issues or questions The studio moderator managed the allotted time in order to address the researcher’s issues/questions The studio was worth my time The scheduling for this studio was handled in a timely efficient manner The studio improved the quality of the science or research project The investigator was prepared for the studio Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree

12. Studio Expert Evaluation Would you be willing to participate as an expert in future studios? General summary/thoughts on PI’s presentation Suggestions for quality improvement of the studio process: Yes No

13. METRICS

14. Byrne et al. (2012)