Como você reconhece e recompensa as contribuições e realizações das partes interessadas na pesquisa translacional?

Agreed but I would add to this the vital nature and immense importance of 'basic research', without which 'translational research' doesn't exist. Call it the true 'bench' in the 'bench to bedside'

The primary goal of translational research is to bridge the gap between bench to bedside. Besides healthcare providers, patients must recognize that there so many researchers behind the curtain, through whom they get all their diagnostics, medications etc., Although healthcare industry reaps all the benefits from hardworking scientists, unless, patients begin to appreciate the actual people and their noble deeds, science cannot progress. Stakeholders must bring the scientists working behind the curtain to the center of stage, recognize them and promote the culture of science to public, that's how knowledge, passion and desire to help the humanity will grow, and they can reap better returns as well.

Establish transparent criteria for recognition. Implement a structured program acknowledging stakeholders. Communicate the importance of each role in research. Use tangible (financial incentives) and intangible rewards. Foster peer recognition through awards or accolades. Regularly update the system to align with priorities. Provide timely feedback on specific contributions. Emphasize teamwork and collaboration in recognition. Ensure inclusivity, considering diverse contributions.

As an R&D scientist, I definitely think more feedback would be amazing to have. While a conventional clinical trial has a plan for collecting data before, during, and after an intervention, I’m often working with fast-paced iterations and uncontrolled environments where I have few options for data collection beyond what my products capture directly. From time to time, providers or users send me testimonials praising an intervention I designed, which is so powerful for me, but it is rare, and I almost never have a reliable way to build that feedback in, positive or negative. I wish I had the regular ability to collect aggregate outcomes cleanly enough for a strong analysis to see what kind of effect I’m having out in the “real world”.

-Provide access to training programs, workshops, and conferences to enhance stakeholders’ skills and knowledge. -Establish mentorship programs to support stakeholders in their professional development and career growth. -Offer resources such as access to journals, online courses, or research tools to facilitate continuous learning.

-Engage stakeholders in the planning and execution of research projects, allowing them to contribute ideas and expertise. Include stakeholders in key decision-making processes to ensure their perspectives and interests are represented. -Encourage co-authorship on research papers and publications, recognizing their intellectual contributions.

Biggest challenge in academia is that, when inventions are made, the inventor often gets sidelined and the IP rights become owned by the academia. Inventor may get a token or tip for their service, but the academia takes the most profit out of inventor's hard work. Thus without proper recognition, such disrespectful attitude towards scientific minds kills the passion for research. The principles of translational research partnership should embody bestowing of significant IP ownership with the inventor, instead of stealing the intellect away from those who put their heart and soul into such research. Great minds often leave academia disappointed and dejected, unless things change in favor of scientists, science will degrade.

I always wanted to establish the Journal of Negative Results. To prevent repeating others' efforts that were not successful would provide a service to your field of choice. It is astonishing to me how often I would hear a paper at a scientific meeting that reported on work that had been unsuccessfully done by others. A corollary is how often researchers dive into a topic without spending any time reviewing the literature to familiarize themselves with what had been done to date in that area.

-Customize recognition and rewards to align with the individual preferences and motivations of stakeholders. -Foster an inclusive culture where all contributions are valued, regardless of the role or level of involvement. -Ensure that recognition and reward practices are sustainable and can be consistently maintained over time. -Implement mechanisms for stakeholders to provide feedback on the recognition and reward processes, ensuring continuous improvement. -Build long-term relationships with stakeholders by maintaining regular communication and showing ongoing appreciation for their contributions.

As a cancer biologist with 25 years of experience, I feel that scientists and their contributions are hardly recognized or appreciated, even among peers or public. Those who are recognized often are elites. I see a lot of stereotypical research published in high profile journals, but when new ideas or concepts are put forward, we get ignored. Unfortunately, unorganized research, intellectual theft/slavery/prostitution etc., is a common occurrence which is negatively impacting our efforts to provide meaningful contributions. Prevailing through these impediments and being successful in achieving our objectives is a massive challenge. Unless these practices change, thousands of Einstein or Marie Curies will continue to remain invisible.