Clinical Research Oriented Workshop (CROW) Meeting: March 27, 2014

Present:  Kairn Kelley, Rodger Kessler, Mark Kelly, Connie van Eeghen

Start Up: Welcome to Diantha Howard for a discussion about REDCap.  Kairn finally received IRB approval – hooray!

1.                  Discussion: Advanced Topics on REDCap to follow previous CROW workshop

a.       Randomization Module:

                                                  i.      Allows user to input a coding order (the randomization plan), which REDCap uses to assign surveys.  Randomization is a choice in Project Set Up (after allowing user permission to access Randomization under User Rights).  Once the randomization plan is updated, it is fixed – it cannot be changed.

                                                ii.      Example: Kairn is planning to give 3 tests to subjects in 6 different possible orders.  She would like to use all six orders, evenly distributed and randomly assigned.  She has to develop the assignment system outside of REDCap, e.g. in Excel.

                                              iii.      Randomization may be stratified, for example, on gender, so that within each gender there will be a similar number of different treatments.  In this case, there is a table for each stratified alternative, each with its own randomized plan.

                                              iv.      There are strategies for balancing randomization when the n is low, but these happen in the randomization plan outside of REDCap (e.g. an algorithm for a Latin Square).

b.      Report building

                                                  i.      Primary purpose: view the data – does NOT do much to summarize the data – in order to check for data collection or to produce a list of records for action

c.       Tips:

                                                  i.      Keep in mind that there are two REDCap applications available to us: FAHC (behind a firewall) and UVM (the only application that can mail out surveys to email addresses)

                                                ii.      Multiple projects can be managed using the Bookmark feature in the future, after the next upgrade.

                                              iii.      The choice of a “longitudinal” study means using the EXACT same form (survey) more than once.  It results in a file that creates multiple rows per subject.

d.      Thank you, Diantha!

2.                  Next Workshop Meeting(s): Thursdays, 11:30 a.m. – 12:45 p.m., at Given Courtyard South Level 4.   Remember: the first 15 minutes are for checking in with each other.

a.       April 3: Rodger’s discussion of research design for PCORI study comparing integrated models of care.

b.      April 10:

c.       April 17:

Recorder: Connie van Eeghen

SUB-Clinical Research Oriented Workshop (CROW) Meeting: March 13, 2014

Just a sub-workshop meeting with: Kairn Kelley, Connie van Eeghen

Start Up: Happy half a snow day!

1.                  Discussion: Surveys for Toolkit on Behavioral Health Integration, Connie van Eeghen

a.       Introduction needs tightening.  Clarity needed on who the audience is and what the surveys is for.

b.      Questions related to “organizational readiness” read differently – should this be better described in the instructions?

c.       Some questions in pre-project survey are similar to pre-decision survey.  Clarify; make the questions in pre-project specific to BHI.  This is an opportunity to link back to questions in the pre-decision survey.

d.      The pre-project survey is focused on determinants of effective change; need to know opinions about behavioral health services at the practice?

e.       Back to the drawing board – thanks Kairn!

2.                  Next Workshop Meeting(s): Thursdays, 11:30 a.m. – 12:45 p.m., at Given Courtyard South Level 4.   Remember: the first 15 minutes are for checking in with each other.

a.       March 20: Rodger on VIP metrics

b.      March 27:

c.       April 3:

Recorder: Connie van Eeghen

Clinical Research Oriented Workshop (CROW) Meeting: March 6, 2014

Present:  Marianne Burke, Kairn Kelley, Connie van Eeghen

Start Up: Hummus: many varieties, one good recipe – see Kairn and Connie for details.

1.                  Discussion: Marianne’s update

a.       Developing an approach to evaluating the impact of information resources (such as library services) based on:

                                                  i.      An intervention: information sources or service (UpToDate, Dynamex, Visual Dx, PubMed, Library…)

1.      Could be supported by PRISM, but might take a while, and there is no ability to limit access to the new service

2.      Could be supported by a separate website, which might be hard to track without personal observation

                                                ii.      Selected outcomes: advice given to patients, choice of drug, diagnosis, choices of test, LOS (based on provider survey on critical incident recall of library services with n=12,910)

                                              iii.      A selected setting: inpatient, outpatient, by department (Medicine, Family Medicine, Psychiatry, ED?)

b.      We know that physicians are heavy users of data bases (for 20% of patients seen; 50% of questions asked are pursued…)

                                                  i.      What is the value of a marginal change in access to information sources that providers demonstrate in terms of changed behavior as measured by the medical information system or by feedback forms gathered from the providers?

                                                ii.      Does making the resource readily available at the point of care improve the outcome?

1.      This issue can be confounded by the settings and patients seen by the providers.

                                              iii.      Consider evaluating the access of information resources through IP addresses, with and without facilitated access, with and without training

1.      For facilitated access, consider a cross-over design

c.       Kairn provided a tree diagram graphic as an example demonstration of where to focus the research question and data collection

d.      Marianne will continue and bring her work back to a future meeting.

2.                  Next Workshop Meeting(s): Thursdays, 11:30 a.m. – 12:45 p.m., at Given Courtyard South Level 4.   Remember: the first 15 minutes are for checking in with each other.

a.       March 13: Connie: Opioid Rx Management Toolkit - sample

b.      March 20: Rodger and Connie on SBIRT plan

c.       March 27:

Recorder: Connie van Eeghen

Lung Biology Training grant has openings for pre-doc and post-doc awardees

‐ Call for Applications –
Vermont Lung Center, Multidisciplinary Training in Lung Biology T32

It is anticipated that two predoctoral slots and two postdoctoral slots will be opening on the
Multidisciplinary Training in Lung Biology (T32) Training Grant. One predoctoral slot is available
immediately, one predoctoral slot should be open in May 2014, and the two postdoctoral slots should
be open in June 2014. Applications from potential mentors and trainees are now being solicited to fill
these slots. Since the NIH provides additional resources for trainees who are underrepresented in the
biomedical, behavioral, clinical and social sciences (this includes individuals from an underrepresented
racial and ethnic group, an individual with a disability, or an individual from a disadvantaged
background that has inhibited his/her ability to pursue a career in health‐related research; see Section
1.1 of https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/funding/training/guid‐app.htm), applications from these potential
trainees will be reviewed independent of whether any of the other slots are available.
Student eligibility requirements include:
‐ Be a full‐time UVM PhD candidate in good standing enrolled in the a) Cell, Molecular, and
Biomedical Sciences, b) Bioengineering, c) Clinical and Translational Sciences, or d) Public
Health graduate program.
‐ Have successfully completed the graduate program‐required Comprehensive/Qualifying
examination. Promising candidates who have not completed this examination will be
considered provided a timeline to completion is included in the application.
‐ Be a US Citizen, noncitizen national of the US, or have been lawfully admitted for permanent
US residence.
‐ Propose a research project of relevance to the goals of the Vermont Lung Center and the
NHLBI.
Postdoc eligibility requirements include:
‐ Have completed all relevant requirements for the doctoral degree.
‐ Be a US Citizen, noncitizen national of the US, or have been lawfully admitted for permanent
US residence.
‐ Propose a research project of relevance to the goals of the Vermont Lung Center and the
NHLBI.
Required application materials include:
‐ Cover letter from the mentor detailing the research project the trainee will work on, the
funding available to support the project, and the mentoring credentials of the prospective
mentor ‐ Trainee and mentor CVs
‐ Trainee graduate transcript(s) or documentation of courses and grades fromthe graduate
program office
‐ Trainee undergraduate transcript(s)
‐ Names of Thesis or Advisory Committee members
‐ Mentoring plan (< 1 page)
‐ Research plan (<1 nbsp="" p="" page="">‐ Vision for the future career of the trainee (<1 nbsp="" p="" page="">Competitive applications will demonstrate a strong record of high‐caliber academic performance,
clearly‐conveyed research and mentoring plans, available operating funds for the research proposed, a
track record of effective mentoring, and relevance to the goals of the Vermont Lung Center and the
NHLBI.
Application packets should be submitted electronically as a PDF to Dr. Charles Irvin, Training Grant
Director (charles.irvin@med.uvm.edu), Dr. Matthew Poynter, Associate Director of the VLC
(matthew.poynter@med.uvm.edu), and Ms. Jean Hood, Administrative Assistant to the VLC
(jean.hood@med.uvm.edu). Applications will be evaluated on an ongoing basis by the Multidisciplinary
Training in Lung Biology administration and the Selection Committee (Irvin, Bates, Budd, Rincon,
Poynter, Dixon, and Kaminsky) will interview select student applicants until a suitable mentor/trainee is
identified.