Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Dec 21.
Published in final edited form as: J Okla State Med Assoc. 2015 Mar;108(3):93–101.

Table 2.

Count (Percentage) of Investigators Reporting Involvement in Any T1, T2, Reverse Translation, or Any Translational Research by Respondent Characteristics. Only participants with at least 20% research effort were included (n=82).

Category of Respondent n (%) In Category T1 a (n=63) T2 b (n=30) RT c (n=32) T d (n=75)
Gender
 Male 59 (72) 47 (80) 21 (36) 20 (34) 54 (92)
 Female 23 (28) 16 (70) 9 (39) 12 (52) 21 (91)
Degree
 MD 24 (29) 15 (63) 13 (54) 10 (42) 21 (88)
 PhD 50 (61) 42 (84) 14 (28) 14 (28) 46 (92)
 MD/PhD 8 (10) 6 (75) 3 (38) 8 (100) 8 (100)
Appointment Rank
 Assistant Professor 26 (32) 22 (85) 6 (23) 9 (35) 23 (88)
 Associate Professor 19 (23) 14 (74) 9 (47) 9 (47) 18 (95)
 Professor 37 (45) 27 (73) 15 (41) 14 (38) 34 (92)
Primary focus of research
 Humans 40 (50) 26 (65) 26 (65) 14 (35) 37 (93)
 Animals 21 (26) 21 (100) 1 (5) 8 (38) 21 (100)
 Devices/instruments/methods 1 (1) 1 (100) 0 (0) 1 (100) 1 (100)
 Cell & Molecular Biology 18 (23) 15 (83) 2 (11) 8 (44) 15 (83)
a

T1 indicates early translation: translation of basic discovery into mechanistic studies in cell lines or animals, the translation of mechanistic studies into initial human testing, or the translation of initial human testing into proof of efficacy (clinical trials).

b

T2, later translation: translation of proof of efficacy into proof of effectiveness in a usual care setting, improving access to care, reorganizing and coordinating systems of care, helping physicians and patients to change behavior and make more informed choices, providing reminders and point-of-care decision support tools, or strengthening the patient-clinician relationship.

c

RT, reverse translation: translation of clinical observations to basic research.

d

T, any translational research.