Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Table 6.1
Exemplar factors that contribute to major informatics challenges encountered in the CTR domain
Category
Factor
Description
1. Technical
Availability of
appropriate
technologies
In many instances, the specifi c technologies needed to support or enable a given study design do not exist, and must be
created for the purposes of the research project. Examples include tools/methods for capturing data from specialized
instruments or devices, or the ability to collect data from patients in atypical settings
Ability to instrument
Healthcare IT (HIT)
platforms
When research program require the collection of data at the point-of-care, it is often desirable to instrument HIT platforms,
such as EHRs, to obtain such data. However, constraints placed by vendors and/or operational IT policies may prevent or
impede the customization of HIT platforms to enable such “secondary” data capture and reuse
Capability to collect,
store, manage, and
analyze “big data”
As introduced in Chap.
1
, “Big Data” is becoming increasingly common place in Biomedicine.
However, the lack of appropriate and necessary computational resources (e.g., data storage, network bandwidth, processor
capacity) as well as applicable analytical methods often impedes the analysis of such “Big Data”
and detailed in Chap.
7
2. Cultural
Predisposition towards
reductionism
Traditional approaches to science often emphasize a reductionist approach to hypothesis formulation and testing. However,
complex CTR study types often require a systems level approach to their formulation and conduct. Therefore, the ability to
break with cultural norms relative to reductionism continues to be both important and diffi cult
Enabling systems
thinking
In a corollary manner to the preceding factor, enabling research teams to address driving biological or clinical problems
at a systems level requires the creation of cultural environments to foster such “out of the box” and team-based thinking
Providing support for
team science
As research problems become increasing complex, the need for the formation and support of multidisciplinary teams
becomes more and more important. Unfortunately, cultural norms related to the assignment of scholarly credit and
academic career trajectories, as well as the business needs of private sector stakeholders, can create disincentives to
participate in such multidisciplinary and team-oriented projects
3. Organizational
Implementation of
appropriate structures
The preceding reductionist factors, often combined with environments that do not support/enable team science, are
usually symptoms of organizational structures that are incompatible with systems- and team-based approaches to science.
Therefore, organizational structures need to be realigned in order to address the preceding cultural factors. An example of
this type of factor may be the disciplinary and geographic distribution of departments and centers in a given Academic
Health Center (AHC). Unfortunately, effecting such change is politically and culturally diffi cult in complex organizations
with lengthy operational histories and established cultures
Engagement of
leadership
Without the appropriate engagement and support of leadership, it is unlikely that CTR teams will be able to gain access to the
resources and facilities needed to support/enable their research activities. Therefore, the full and regular engagement of key
leaders in the CTR “fabric” becomes very important to such initiatives. Such engagement requires that leaders “value” CTR
Access to suffi cient
resources
In a corollary manner to the preceding factor, CTR teams also require access to novel or complex infrastructure and
resources in order to address their scientifi c aims. Often, these resources span traditional organizational boundaries. As
such, appropriate leadership engagement and resourcing of CTR projects, particularly given complex funding and
Search WWH ::
Custom Search