With the Human Lung Cell ATLAS impact story, we aim to introduce different steps of the journey to showcase research impact. In the first post, the input for the human lung cell atlas and the intended impact were discussed. In this post, the stakeholders and outcomes will be elucidated, in line with the previously mentioned impact cycle.
Working together with several stakeholders means being able to describe the impact the project can have on them. According to Dr. Nawijn, the important stakeholders for his project are scientists, clinicians, patients, students, the general public and the diagnostic and pharmaceutical industry.
The main benefit for the industry would be the identification of targets for medicines. Industry is interested in studying ‘sick tissue’ rather than ‘healthy tissue’, whereas for the lung cell atlas it is crucial to get an understanding of the ‘healthy tissue’. By studying material of sick people, a control group with healthy people is necessary: this makes sure that the cooperation between academia and industry can be established and both parties can benefit from the research. With this knowledge, the pharmaceutical industry will be able to develop medicines or identify biomarkers for diagnostics.
The benefit for patients is to get a better visualisation of their condition, thereby understanding why they have some specific symptoms. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease would like to give feedback and have their questions answered, such as ‘What exactly happens when I have shortness of breath?’. Dr. Nawijn is already in contact with patients to discuss/exchange and answer those questions (outcome).
There are often stakeholders who are not involved in a project, but should be. An example of stakeholders not (yet) involved in this project are policymakers. Some patients mentioned the possibility to use the atlas to visualise how far air contaminant particles, depending on the size of the lungs, can penetrate inside the lungs. Sometimes particles are so microscopically small that you cannot see or notice them, but these particles could still reside deep inside the lungs where they can have negative effects. This could be used to persuade policymakers that particular air contaminants are dangerous and that existing guidelines have to be changed (outcome).
