This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related letters  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Statistics and Research Methods  • Alert me on articles by topic

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In Reply: Among the suggestions in my Commentary was to replace the vague label "translational research" with more descriptive terms that better differentiate T1 from T2, and I commend both letters for beginning to examine the options. The terms suggested by Dr Fiscella and colleagues—preclinical research and applied clinical research—are useful to consider but may be inadequate to clear up the confusion. Whether or not applied clinical research was meant to include conventional drug and device trials, those who conduct such studies are likely to assume that their work falls under this category. Conversely, public health and health services researchers might be confused to see the term applied to their work.

Furthermore, using "clinical" in both terms perpetuates the tendency of the medical profession to view health research through the clinician's lens alone. Fiscella et al do include "organizational- and community-focused" research within their definition of applied clinical . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Steven H. Woolf, MD, MPH
swoolf@vcu.edu
Department of Family Medicine
Virginia Commonwealth University
Richmond

RELATED LETTERS

Nomenclature in Translational Research
Kevin Fiscella, Nancy M. Bennett, and Peter G. Szilagyi
JAMA. 2008;299(18):2148-2149.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Nomenclature in Translational Research
Ian D. Graham and Jacqueline Tetroe
JAMA. 2008;299(18):2149.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT