Click the play button to listen.
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Amazon Music | PodBean | Spotify | YouTube
See the full Episode List
Or watch the video podcast on YouTube:
In this episode, host Lora Parent, Director of Strategic Partnerships & Research Development for the CTSC, welcomes Martha Sajatovic, MD, and Samuel Rodgers‑Melnick, PhD, for a timely conversation on shifts in the scientific landscape. Together, they explore how research priorities, technology, and public trust in science have evolved across career stages, and how integrative, whole‑health approaches and EHR‑based research are reshaping translational science. The discussion highlights the value of cross‑generational perspectives, interdisciplinary collaboration, and adaptability as science continues to change.
Transcript
Martha Sajatovic:
Sometimes, at least for me, it feels like The Sorcerer’s Apprentice from the old Disney movie—everything just gets faster and faster, and we’re all trying to keep up.
Lora Parent (Host):
Welcome to another episode of From Research to Real Life. I’m your host, Lora Parent, and today’s episode is all about shifts in the scientific landscape—changes in research priorities, public trust in science, and how science itself has evolved over time.
I’m excited to talk about how telehealth, technology, and integrative approaches continue to emerge and reshape how research is conducted, received, and translated into practice. I’d like to start by welcoming our guests.
First, Dr. Martha Sajatovic. She is a Professor of Psychiatry and Neurology at the Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine. She’s a clinician, educator, and internationally recognized researcher focused on psychiatric and neurological care for older adults. She leads the first global consortium devoted to bipolar disorder and aging and has authored more than 500 peer‑reviewed publications. Welcome, Martha.
Martha Sajatovic:
Thank you. I’m happy to be here.
Lora Parent:
We’re also joined by Dr. Samuel Rodgers‑Melnick from University Hospitals Connor Whole Health. Sam’s research spans integrative health, music therapy, mixed‑methods trials, and electronic health record–based research. His work focuses on implementing whole‑health assessment tools directly into clinical systems. Welcome, Sam.
Samuel Rodgers‑Melnick:
Glad to be here.
Lora Parent:
Let’s start with the big picture. Science doesn’t exist in a vacuum—it’s shaped by technology, funding, public trust, and societal needs. Martha, from your perspective, what has been the most significant shift in scientific inquiry or public perception since you began your career?
Martha Sajatovic:
It’s been almost four decades for me, and I’ve seen a lot of change. The biggest shift has been technology—it has dramatically changed what we can do and how we do science.
For example, I’m involved in a global consortium that now has the world’s largest database on older‑age bipolar disorder, with about 6,000 cases from around the world. Early in my career, this would not have been possible. Now, data can be securely shared electronically, analyzed centrally, and discussed through Zoom meetings with investigators across the globe. That reach and efficiency have fundamentally changed science.
Lora Parent:
Sam, you’re coming into research in a very different environment. Tell us about your background and how you see these shifts playing out in your work.
Samuel Rodgers‑Melnick:
I didn’t initially plan on becoming a researcher. I came to University Hospitals in 2012 as a music therapy intern, working with adults with sickle cell disease during pain crises. We noticed that music therapy helped with pain and brought patients and staff together.
There wasn’t research in sickle cell disease music therapy at the time, so I pursued funding to study it. That led to randomized controlled trials and later NIH‑supported multi‑site studies. I was initially skeptical of telehealth—music therapy is interactive, and lag can be a challenge—but during COVID we adapted.
Now we run studies with both in‑person and virtual arms, even providing iPads with LTE for participants in rural areas. Telehealth has expanded access and scalability, and it’s changed how we think about impact.
Lora Parent:
Martha, how have you seen technology—especially EHRs—translate into real‑world impact?
Martha Sajatovic:
One example is our epilepsy self‑management program, supported by the CDC. We’ve moved from efficacy trials to effectiveness trials and now to what I call “science to service.”
Using Epic, clinicians can identify patients with epilepsy who may benefit from the program. A prompt appears during a visit, allowing the clinician to discuss the program with the patient. If the patient is interested, the system triggers follow‑up and enrollment into our remotely delivered intervention.
We track outcomes like seizures, depression, quality of life, emergency visits, and hospitalizations. We’re seeing the same positive outcomes in real‑world settings that we saw in research trials.
Lora Parent:
That sounds great conceptually—but how do you get buy‑in from clinicians, patients, and payers?
Samuel Rodgers‑Melnick:
In integrative health, many services aren’t well reimbursed, so we have to advocate for their value. My goal is to make it easy to capture outcomes that show impact—pain, stress, quality of life.
There are also policy drivers, like CMS requiring patient‑reported outcomes for certain procedures. If we capture meaningful data early, we can better target interventions and demonstrate value to health systems and payers.
Martha Sajatovic:
As researchers, we’re responsible for measuring outcomes that matter to everyone. For patients, that’s quality of life. For systems and payers, it’s avoiding negative health events like emergency visits or hospitalizations. When we show reductions in those outcomes, the value becomes clear.
Lora Parent:
How do you both see technology serving as a bridge between traditional clinical research and more holistic models of care?
Samuel Rodgers‑Melnick:
Technology can reduce friction. Wearables, EHR integration, and patient‑reported outcomes can create a seamless experience. It also allows for scale—recording interventions, delivering them remotely, and targeting people who need them most.
But technology should augment—not replace—human connection.
Martha Sajatovic:
Exactly. Technology allows us to address mental health, self‑management, and quality of life alongside traditional clinical measures. It supports whole‑person care, not just disease metrics.
Lora Parent:
What about the downsides of technology—data fatigue, mistrust, misinformation?
Samuel Rodgers‑Melnick:
People are overwhelmed with notifications and surveys. It’s harder to collect data now because people are wary of spam and misuse. We need to clearly communicate why data matter and how they’ll be used.
Technology isn’t the complete answer. Especially for vulnerable populations, trust and human interaction are essential.
Martha Sajatovic:
Credibility is key. Institutional review boards, peer review, and transparent funding help differentiate real research from marketing. That trust is essential for participation and public confidence in science.
Lora Parent:
As we wrap up, what excites you most about the next five to ten years?
Martha Sajatovic:
I’m hopeful we’ll move toward more personalized, inclusive research. Technology and team science can help us reach broader populations and develop interventions tailored to individual needs.
Samuel Rodgers‑Melnick:
I’m excited about capturing what matters—when integrative interventions happen and how they affect quality of life. My focus is on real‑world implementation: taking what works and scaling it responsibly through health systems.
Lora Parent (Closing):
Thank you both for such an insightful conversation. This discussion highlights how science evolves not just through technology, but through collaboration, adaptability, and trust.
If you’re interested in resources that support innovative, translational research across career stages, visit the Clinical and Translational Science Collaborative and submit a SPARC request.
Thanks for joining us on From Research to Real Life. We’ll see you next time.