Jing Li, Naomi Duffort, Ehsan Abdalla, Khalilah Brown, Sara Cooper, Sara L Davis, Thomas Dobbs, Kirsten Dorans, Karen Johnson, Kristine Ria Hearld, Peter T Katzmarzyk, Benjamin Springgate, Renee Heffron, Salisa Westrick, Michael Mugavero
There is strong engagement in D&I science, but gaps in expertise, infrastructure, and support persist. A coordinated strategy integrating structured training with centralized consultation and collaboration mechanisms is needed to strengthen D&I capacity. These findings informed implementation initiatives and illustrate a pragmatic approach that may inform D&I capacity-building efforts in other CTSA environments.
BACKGROUND: Dissemination and implementation (D&I) science is essential for translating evidence into practice, yet capacity remains uneven across Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hubs and networks. The University of Alabama at Birmingham Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCTS) serves an 11-institution, multi-state Partner Network.
METHODS: We conducted a multi-phase assessment across the CCTS Partner Network. First, we performed qualitative interviews (April-June 2,025) with 18 stakeholders representing diverse roles and institutions to identify activities, barriers, and needs. Findings informed a needs assessment survey (February-March 2026) administered across the network (N = 202). Descriptive statistics summarized participant characteristics and priorities for training and consultation.
RESULTS: Qualitative findings revealed heterogeneous but growing D&I capacity, with gaps in training, infrastructure, and evaluation support. Participants reported limited formal training, strong demand for applied skills (e.g., study design, mixed methods, grant writing), and challenges in real-world implementation. Strong interest emerged in flexible, practice-oriented training and consultation services. Survey results reinforced these findings: although 49% of respondents identified as contributing to D&I, only 20% reported high expertise. Nearly half expressed strong interest in intensive short courses, particularly in frameworks, outcomes, and measurement. Consultation demand was high (77%), especially for study design, implementation strategies, and evaluation.
CONCLUSIONS: There is strong engagement in D&I science, but gaps in expertise, infrastructure, and support persist. A coordinated strategy integrating structured training with centralized consultation and collaboration mechanisms is needed to strengthen D&I capacity. These findings informed implementation initiatives and illustrate a pragmatic approach that may inform D&I capacity-building efforts in other CTSA environments.