Beyond the common metrics: Expanding the impact of the KL2 mentored career development program using alternative impact assessment frameworks

• Published in: Journal of clinical and translational science Vol. 3; no. 1; pp. 1 - 4
• Main Authors: Boateng, Beatrice A, Indelicato, Nia, Fischer, Ellen P, Delgado, Pedro L, Aitken, Mary E, James, Laura P
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Cambridge University Press 01.02.2019
• Subjects: Annual reports; Career development planning; Consortia; Education; Interviews; Legislation; Library associations; Medical libraries; Medical research; Medicine; Researchers; Scholars; Science; Scientists; Systematic review; Training; United States > US; CTSA; common metrics; KL2 program; impact assessment
• ISSN: 2059-8661; 2059-8661
• DOI: 10.1017/cts.2019.375

While the Common Metrics for career development seek information on the impact of the consortium in the training and retention of translational researchers, additional appraisal of the implementation of research outcomes is needed to fully understand the return on investment in research. A recent systematic review of methodological frameworks for the assessment of the impact of biomedical research identified five broad categories of impact: (1) primary research-related, (2) policymaking, (3) health and health systems, (4) health-related and societal, and (5) broader economic impact [13]. Similar to other research impact frameworks, the Becker list attempts to capture important but lesser known aspects of research and track post-publication impact of an individual’s research in five categories: advancement of knowledge, clinical implementation, community benefit, legislation and policy, and economic benefit. Implications There is increasing interest to assessing the impact of training programs such as the KL2 Scholars Mentored Career Development Program to demonstrate the value and return on research investments.