Editorial: Impact evaluation using the translational science benefits model framework in the national center for advancing translational science clinical and translational science award program

Editorial on the Research Topic
Impact evaluation using the translational science benefits model framework in the national center for advancing translational science clinical and translational science award program

Introduction

Over the past several years, a new discipline has emerged called translational science. Translational science, championed by the National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS), is defined as “…the field that generates innovations that overcome longstanding challenges along the translational research pipeline. These include scientific, operational, financial, and administrative innovations that transform the way that research is done, making it faster, more efficient, and more impactful” (1). In this sense, translational science is quite similar to the discipline of implementation science, which studies how evidence-based scientific knowledge is translated, adopted, implemented, and maintained in communities and healthcare settings (2).

Knowledge translation is a critical dissemination activity that transforms research results into new products, practices, and policies to benefit health and society. Yet, effectively bridging the gap between clinical research and practical applications is challenging. The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and NCATS address this challenge through the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Program. The charge of the CTSA Program is to transform the organization and infrastructure of the academic research enterprise to accelerate the movement of discoveries from clinical science to the bedside and community.

Documenting the results of these efforts is a necessary component to assess outcomes, health and social impacts, and support continuous improvement. Within the CTSA program, more than 60 CTSA hubs, primarily located at academic health sciences research institutes across the nation, are beginning to systematically measure and evaluate the impacts of their activities. One model used to track and assess impact is the Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM), introduced in 2018, [see Figure 1, (3)]. TSBM is one of the pioneering frameworks for standardized documentation and dissemination of data on outcomes and impacts of translational science and translational research. Although translational science is still in its infancy, much work is being conducted nationally within CTSA hubs, communities, and research partners.

Figure 1

Figure 1. The Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM) logic framework.

The recent Frontiers in Public Health Research Topic (Impact evaluation using the translational science benefits model framework in the national center for advancing translational science clinical and translational science award program) included 11 articles, written by more than 60 co-authors based at a wide range of CTSA hubs, contexts, and settings. Based on these articles, this editorial presents three crosscutting themes for reflecting on the TSBM Research Topic and state of the evolving science: 1) Versatility and methodological insights of the TSBM, 2) Knowledge translation as a pathway to longer-term impacts, and 3) Advancing translational science.

Versatility and methodological insights of the TSBM

Articles in this edition demonstrate the versatility and methodological advancements of the TSBM. The TSBM began as a structured framework designed to assess the health and societal impacts of translational science. Over time, substantial advancements in methodology and operationalization have transformed TSBM into a dynamic tool for measuring the outcomes of translational science at multiple levels within the research enterprise, that also supports continuous improvement in scientific evaluation. This framework has been applied in various aspects such as setting strategic direction, operations management, continuous quality improvement (CQI), and tracking organizational contributions to advancing human health.

The integration of the TSBM framework has proven effective in eliciting recommendations for measures of significance on the contributions of the CTSA environment and consortium (Kane et al.). By integrating concept mapping with the TSBM framework, measures can be selected at both individual, organization and consortium levels, aiding strategic resource allocation.

For day-to-day management, the TSBM framework combined with the balanced scorecard and project management tools has supported organizational performance measurement at the program level, ensuring efficient allocation of resources and effective tracking of contributions to advancing priorities (Gholami et al.). Similarly, an adaptation of the TSBM framework in assessing performance has applied CQI tools to achieve performance improvements (Brimhall et al.). Methodological enhancements include real-time performance monitoring systems, balanced scorecards, and project management platforms, supporting frequent updates and comprehensive tracking aligned with strategic institutional goals (Swanson et al.).

Methodologies like Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, inclusive leadership in team science, and automation through natural language processing (NLP) and artificial intelligence (AI) have further expanded the operational capabilities of the TSBM (Molzhon et al.). Concept mapping has aligned program goals with evaluation priorities (Manjunath et al.), ensuring diverse stakeholder perspectives are captured and consensus around evaluation metrics is formed (Kane et al.).

Overall, these advancements illustrate the evolution of the TSBM into a dynamic, methodologically robust measurement tool that effectively supports continuous improvement, providing standardized and comparative monitoring, and adaptive evaluation in translational science. This integration enables organizations to create and sustain a culture of impact, promoting awareness of the real-world benefits of their work (Davidson et al.).

Knowledge translation: pathway to demonstrated health and societal impact

Potential and demonstrated knowledge translation impact is measured using four domains and 30 indicators operationalized in the TSBM. In a novel research project, CTSA hub-county interorganizational collaborations were followed longitudinally to assess both knowledge translation impact and the longer-term health and societal benefits reported in impact stories (Davidson et al.). Similarly, a Northern Ohio CTSA hub demonstrated societal benefits in public health practice, highlighting enhanced healthcare access, improving health outcomes, informing policy, and generating economic benefits (Zhang et al.). Researchers at the Duke University CTSA, shared the value of integrating TSBM into multiple levels of the research enterprise to examine impact, using case studies, program area level (e.g., pilot studies), and cross-program and institutional monitoring of TSBM in an organizational database (Sperling et al.). VCU CTSA evaluators emphasized increasing focus on educating investigators on the importance of measuring impact and the longer-term broad reaching effects of their translational science research (Molzhon et al.).

Advancing translational science

As an impact evaluation framework, the TSBM is clearly relevant to translational science, given its goal of producing impactful scientific innovations. More specifically, a number of articles in this TSBM Research Topic feature one or more of the core principles of translational science (4). For example, the principle of team science is prominent in the article by Brimhall et al., who developed a logic model featuring inclusive leadership and other team science concepts. Methodological creativity and innovation were prominent in article which featured concept mapping (Kane et al.), innovative CQI methods including real-time monitoring dashboards (Gholami et al.), and natural language processing of bibliometric data (Manjunath et al.). Finally, a number of articles featured boundary-crossing partnerships between academic and community organizations in Los Angeles (Davidson et al.), Wisconsin and Missouri (Manjunath et al.), and a consortium of rural states (La Manna et al.).

Conclusions

In summary, the CTSA Program, supported by NIH and NCATS, plays a pivotal role in transforming research into tangible health and societal benefits. The use of the TSBM has proven instrumental in systematically measuring and documenting these impacts. According to NCATS, “Translation turns observations in the laboratory, clinic, and community into diagnostics, therapeutics, medical procedures, and behavioral changes;” these are literally measured in the TSBM and are precursors to improvements in the delivery system and people's health.

Through advancements in methodology and versatile applications, the TSBM supports continuous improvement and adaptive evaluation, fostering a culture of impact within translational science. The Research Topic of articles in this edition reflects on the evolving state of translational science, underscoring its significance and the real-world benefits it provides.

Author contributions

PD: Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. JH: Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. AL: Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. DL: Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article. This study was funded by the NCATS CTSA Program grant # UL1TR001881 to the University of California, Los Angeles, Clinical and Translational Science Institute (UCLA CTSI), Indiana University School of Medicine, Indiana CTSI UM1TR004402. This study was also supported by the Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational Sciences grant UL1TR002345 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official view of the NIH. This editorial is the result of funding in whole or in part by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). It is subject to the NIH Public Access Policy. Through acceptance of this federal funding, NIH has been given a right to make this manuscript publicly available in PubMed Central upon the Official Date of Publication, as defined by NIH.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declare that no Gen AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

1. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. About Translational Science. NIH. Available online at: https://ncats.nih.gov/about/about-translational-science (Accessed September 25, 2025).

Google Scholar

2. Brownson RC, Colditz GA, Proctor EK, editors. Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health: Translating Science to Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press (2023).

Google Scholar

3. Luke DA, Sarli CC, Suiter AM, Carothers BJ, Combs TB, Allen JL, et al. The translational science benefits model: a new framework for assessing the health and societal benefits of clinical and translational sciences. Clin Transl Sci. (2018) 11:77–84. doi: 10.1111/cts.12495

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

4. Schneider M, Woodworth A, Ericson M, Boerger L, Denne S, Dillon P, et al. Distinguishing between translational science and translational research in CTSA pilot studies: a collaborative project across 12 CTSA hubs. J Clin Transl Sci. (2024) 8:e4. doi: 10.1017/cts.2023.700

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar