OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Clinical research professionals (CRPs) are vital for high quality research. Professional development opportunities for CRPs help improve job satisfaction and retention. This poster will present data on peer-presenter satisfaction and their assessment of co-leading a workshop as an important professional development and networking activity. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Developing a Research Professionals Network Workshop is an important professional development opportunity for peer-presenters in a mentored, collaborative environment that encourages networking and inter-institutional teamwork. Presenters are connected by the leadership team and then work together to develop the workshop’s learning objectives, presentation, and activities. A summary of learner evaluations are provided to the presenting team to provide constructive feedback for future presentations. A survey to assess experience in leading the workshops is sent to presenters after the workshop to assess overall satisfaction and assessment of importance in their professional development. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Presenter evaluation response data from the years of 2019-2022 showed high rates of agreement that presenters’ participation 1) increased their knowledge of the topic, 2) appreciated the support provided by the leadership team, 3) felt adequately prepared to lead the workshop, and 4) were overall satisfied with the experience. Questions specifically around the inter-institutional collaboration and professional development of the workshop experience were added in 2021 and similarly showed high marks of satisfaction. Qualitative response data showed that some presenters continued collaborations after workshop completion. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Overall results show that workshop presenters felt that leading an RPN workshop with collaborators from the other participating sites was a useful experience that supported their ongoing professional development. High marks on satisfaction by presenters is attributed to the multi-hub partnership and guidance from the leadership team.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Mayo Clinic implemented a CRC Placement Hub to improve hiring experiences for candidates and hiring managers. Candidates apply to a centralized posting. A Placement Coordinator handles administrative and screening responsibilities, allowing hiring managers to focus on selecting best candidates. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The CRC Placement Hub was implemented in phases. Initially, first and second interviews were conducted using Zoom and hiring manager utilization of the Hub was voluntary. Positive candidate and hiring manager feedback shifted Hub utilization to the standard practice and hiring managers must request an exception to post separately for unique candidate requirements. The third phase progressed to utilizing the HireVue hiring platform. Qualified candidates are invited to complete an on-Demand interview at their convenience, which hiring managers utilize to select candidates to continue through the interview process. HireVue utilization has decreased time to fill metrics for CRC candidates. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The intentions for the CRC Placement Hub are to offer a positive hiring experience for candidates and reduce administrative burden for the hiring managers, while maintaining autonomy of hiring decisions. Additional purposes for the Hub are to increase the candidate pool by developing recruitment pipelines and decrease overall timeline to fill an open position. Qualitative and quantitative metrics were established to monitor performance. Metrics depict positive experiences for candidates and hiring managers, and decreased timelines to fill open positions. Candidate pools continue to increase as the Hub Placement Coordinator holds off-campus and online recruitment events. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The CRC Placement Hub provides candidates a positive experience, allowing them to apply to one posting but considered for all open positions. The Hub decreases administrative burden for hiring managers, allowing them to focus on critical aspects of candidate selection and managing clinical research.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: A clinical research coordinator (CRC) digital badge offers a novel approach to addressing the ongoing shortage of CRCs at academic medical centers. We sought to pilot this low-cost, short-term training digital badge to train entry level CRCs and to attract a diverse pool of individuals. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Experienced clinical research professionals outlined competencies needed by study coordinators working in an academic center using a Delphi approach. The competencies aligned with 6 of the 8 domains established by the Joint Taskforce for Clinical Trial Competencies. Five course modules were created in a standardized format consisting of instructional videos, handouts, and a 25-question quiz (passing grade: 90%) which was hosted in the university learning management system. Beta testers were recruited to complete surveys at the conclusion of each module addressing both module performance and content accuracy. An item analysis was performed on the 25-question quiz. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Nine volunteers were recruited for the pilot. Seven completed the badge. All participants, with years of experience from 0 to over 10 in clinical trials, found the course to be informative. The majority (84%) of responses on course logistics were positive or neutral. The quiz item analysis identified most questions (86%) as either Easy or Neutral, which is ideal for a Level 1 Badge addressing foundational skills. Forty percent of the quiz questions scored high on the Discrimination Index, indicating that the quiz could identify those who performed well and those challenged by the quizzes. One negative comment received stated that course was too intense to be completed in 4 weeks. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The results of this pilot study demonstrated that this badging course offers a low cost, easily accessible option for recruiting and training entry level clinical research professionals. The proof-of-concept study encouraged our initiation of the program and attempt to broaden our reach.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The goal of this study is to demonstrate growth in leadership skills in areas of milestone selection, conditions of success, and self-efficacy for females in the Capita3 Leader Launch (LL) Program. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Forty females were self-selected to participate in the LL Program, a 21 day program which is organized around a highly significant career goal that each participant selects. The program is designed to guide participants through a unique and transformative process to increase the probability that each participant will achieve their selected career goal. In the fall of 2022, seventy people participated in the LL program. Participants were asked to fill out a Leadership assessment prior to participation and then again following participation in the program. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Immediately after the program, participants self-report 86% increased confidence, 85% being on track to achieving their selected milestone or an appropriate pivot, and 80% feel more equipped to navigate their external environment. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This study demonstrates that the LL Program addresses barriers that are neither fully understood nor addressed by existing programs and policies for women. Future programs can use the LL Program to help females take on high visibility assignments, larger organizational roles, and leadership positions within the current organization environment.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The goal of this project was to create a professional network for the Rutgers Clinical Research Management master’s program to foster relationships between potential and current clinical research professional workforce members. A professional network provides an opportunity for its members to stay continuously engaged in the community. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Two Qualtrics surveys were created after researching the social presence of the Rutgers SHP community, similar master-level programs, clinical research professional networks, and general social landscapes. The surveys were sent through LinkedIn and email with telephone reminders to the Rutgers SHP CRM community to gather demographic information, preferred method of engagement, and desired network content. In addition, six alumni and two faculty SHP CRM members were interviewed via Zoom for further feedback. The data from these surveys was analyzed on excel and supported the creation of content and structure for the CRM Network. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Survey results indicated 70% (n=20) of respondents preferred engagement through email or LinkedIn. Engagement topics included alumni/faculty news, workforce opportunities, and networking events. A LinkedIn page and website were created to highlight members’accomplishments and activities. An electronic quarterly newsletter was developed to expand the content with alumni and faculty editorials and future opportunities to engage with the Rutgers CRM program. Further data analysis revealed that 73% (n=16) preferred in-person vs remote events. A Facebook page was created to provide a forum for casual interactions that may lead to in-person opportunities. Seven participants volunteered to join the newly formed CRM Network Advisory Committee that will develop future content and manage the CRM Network. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The CRM Network was well received by the Rutgers CRM community as a tool to foster relationships between current and future clinical research professionals. Despite data limitations (small sample size and incomplete responses), the CRM Network was created and transferred to the Advisory committee for implementation and future expansion.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Surgical training is constrained by duty hour limits, bias, and a trial-and-error learning process. Surgeon skill variation is a healthcare system disparity that can impact patient outcomes. Incorporating validated, standardized assessment tools and machine learning (ML) algorithms may help to standardize and reduce bias in surgeon education. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: To support assessment tool and ML algorithm development, we are curating an annotated video registry of neurosurgical procedures. Point-of-view video of resident and attending neurosurgeons performing craniotomies is recorded via an eye-tracking headset. A Delphi panel of neurosurgeons will review the video and determine which represent expert versus trainee performance. Neurosurgery attendings will be interviewed to provide descriptions of craniotomies which will be used to develop an assessment rubric. A Delphi panel will determine what rubric components should be maintained. New craniotomy videos will be viewed by attendings in a blinded fashion while completing the assessment rubric. An online feedback platform is being developed allowing residents to prospectively track assessment data. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We anticipate development of an annotated, institutional video database featuring craniotomies performed by residents and attending neurosurgeons. Using a Delphi approach, we anticipate achieving consensus on which videos reflect expert versus trainee performance. We anticipate development of a novel craniotomy assessment rubric that is both valid and reliable. Our online feedback platform will allow prospective tracking of assessment data from multiple sources and enhanced transparency in the feedback process. The video registry and assessment data will enable development of novel ML algorithms able to recognize craniotomy segments and estimate operator skill. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Building a video registry of procedures, validated assessment tools, and a prototype feedback platform enables a pipeline for ML algorithm development. Together these tools will help to standardize and optimize resident education translating to earlier operative independence, improved patient safety, and reduced bias during surgical training.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The objective of this study was to use NIH RePORTER (Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools) to analyze K99 funding trends and determine if R00 to R01 or R21 achievement time correlates with the future success of an early-stage NIH-funded investigator. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: All award data were collected from NIH RePORTER. All K99 awards and funding data in this study were limited to All Clinical Departments (ACD). All researchers (n = 1,148) and awards (n = 2,022) were identified through a K99 search from FY 2007 to FY 2022 across ACD. Historic trends in K99 awards and funding from NIH Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 to FY 2022 were investigated. An R00 dataset was generated from NIH RePORTER. The K99 to R00 achievement statistics from FY 2007 to FY 2022 was investigated. NIH annual datafiles for FY 2007 to FY 2021 were aggregated to generate a master datafile of all R01 (n = 395,505) and R21 awards (n = 61,766). R01 and R21 award data were linked to the researcher previously identified through the K99 search. The connection between K99/R00 awardees and subsequent R01 or R21 awards was focused on. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: From FY 2008 to FY 2022, the number of K99 awards per year increased 123.4%, from 94 to 210. Over the same period, after correcting for inflation, the NIH K99 budget increased 127.0% while the NIH program level budget increased 17.3%. For researchers who achieved their first R01 or R21 0–3 years versus 3–6 years after the start of their R00, their average funding per year since the start of the R00 phase was $467,425 versus $290,604, respectively (p < 0.001). In summary, NIH investment in the K99 award pathway has substantially outpaced the NIH program level budget increase, and there is a strong relationship between average funding per year since the start of the R00 phase and time from R00 to R01 or R21. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Our study offers additional evidence of the Matthew effect in science, where previous success generates future success. This analysis may be useful to clinical departments as they evaluate selecting new and retaining current biomedical scientists for independent research positions.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Scholarly achievement metrics are essential for academic researchers since they are used for promotion and funding opportunities. Our objective was to create awareness among pilot project PIs about how these scholarly activities are evaluated and about the need for continuous auto-evaluation. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: NIH-sponsored Clinical & Translational Research (CTR) infrastructure grants are a critical mechanism to increase scholarly activity. The Pilot Project Program Core (PPP) of The Alliance IDeA-CTR created a weighted metrics system to evaluate activities including presentations, publications, promotion, honors, & community service. We used the revised evidence-based medicine pyramid to develop the metric instrument. Pilot project PIs received the metric table and met quarterly with a PPP member to discuss progress. The top PIs were acknowledged during the Alliance Research Day with a platform presentation and a monetary award for research expenses or travel to scientific meetings. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: During our first 2 pilot project calls (2020-2022) the PPP funded 7 one-year pilot projects for ($50,000 each). We had a total of 10 PIs, 2 of the projects were MPI. Seven PIs were early or new stage investigators (ESI/NSI). Using the productivity award metric we had a total of 33 presentations, 10 publications, 12 events of community service, and 2 external grant funding. These are significant outcomes considering the pandemics impact on clinical & translational research. A total of 3 awards were given, one award per year for funding and an overall award. The activity was well received by the PIs who actively participated in the tracking of their scholarly activities using the metric. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Productivity metrics are crucial for the career development of ESI and NSI by raising awareness regarding the importance of scholarly activities in their career. This activity will help them track their productivity in an ongoing manner while becoming independent researchers.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Pursuit of independent funding by predoctoral and postdoctoral fellows requires navigating the intricate steps in preparing extramural grant applications. The Workforce Development Core of the NJ Alliance for Clinical and Translational Science (NJ ACTS) sought to evaluate an interactive grant writing group of fellows mentored by a trained coach. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Participants meet weekly for 3 months to develop components of a fellowship application for submission to NIH and private foundations. Sessions were moderated by a senior faculty member trained as a coach by the National Research Mentoring Network. Participant grant submission and review of the program were collected annually for the period of 2019 to 2021 as well as demographics for the 2022 cohort. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Over this period, 32 predoctoral and 19 postdoctoral fellows participated in the peer review writing groups with 24 trainees currently enrolled. The peer review writing group moved to Zoom in 2020 which has enabled expansion of training to include the 3 Hub institutions and 6 additional universities. Of the 41 survey respondents, 78% submitted fellowship applications to NIH (N=28) or a non-NIH agency (N=4). Eight of these applications are currently under review or have been resubmitted for peer review. 54% of reviewed applications have been funded as NIH fellowships, diversity supplements, career grants, or non-NIH fellowships. Over 90% of participants have recommended the writing group to other trainees. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: In conclusion, a weekly grant writing group of predoctoral and postdoctoral fellows is an effective means to receive peer review of fellowship application components and support submissions for extramural funding.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Clinical research degree program accreditation brings value to university programs situated in competitive environments. While the requirements of accreditation can be burdensome and tedious, it remains important to program growth. The objective of this project was to assess the use of REDCap for the accreditation process to reduce that burden. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A review of credentialing requirements was conducted to identify required data and its sources. Initial course data from a small sample of courses was collected in Excel to better assess the order of the data collection process. REDCap was then used to create a series of data collection instruments that effectively met the program evaluation data needs and customized reports for three years of course learning outcomes. The instruments were developed for its translation to other programs. Faculty, administrators, and interns participated in 2 different types of data collection activities (excel and REDCap) and evaluated the differences between the experiences. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Data collection included 85 courses, with a range of 3-22 objectives that classified aligned assignments among 8 clinical research professional domains, 50 competencies, and 3 learning levels. Student outcomes data was also calculated and recorded. The time to complete the data collection process using the REDCap tool verses the excel spreadsheet per course was notably more efficient. User satisfaction was 100% improved using the REDCap tool with the average score of 8.5 out of a 1-10 scale. User comments supporting the REDCap process focused on improved time to complete and ease of process. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The incorporation of REDCap into data collection for program accreditation data requirements highlights the efficiency and ease of electronic data capture compared to manual entry in excel. The development of instruments makes it easy to translate to other program evaluation and accreditation needs.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The ITHS TL1 program is designed to grow trainees’ competence and knowledge in translational research. Our objective is to expand the program to the 5-state Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho (WWAMI) region by establishing a TL1 cohort at Montana State University (MSU). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Interdisciplinary training at the predoctoral level is ideal for preparing the future translational workforce. At this stage in their training, they have developed disciplinary expertise but have not yet narrowed their specializations. By expanding the TL1 program to include both University of Washington (UW) and MSU we are amplifying the robust academic research networks of both institutions, particularly programs in rural health equity, rural and tribal populations, and emerging infectious diseases. Using a collaborative, online educational model we will bring together trainees in a multi directional, joint training effort utilizing existing and emerging collaborations. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The anticipated outcome is to create a single program by bringing together a cohort of scholars from various disciplines spanning the translational science spectrum, with diverse types of research experience which enables them to learn from each other in a diverse setting. This will allow the program to more effectively grow trainee’s competencies and knowledge in multidisciplinary translational research methodology, as well as build skills in team science and cross-disciplinary communication. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: If successful, the ITHS TL1 program will prepare translational scientists with an awareness of diverse perspectives and contemporary research challenges. This would benefit the 5 state WWAMI region, which covers 27% of the total land mass of the US.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Previous literature has suggested that the lack of participation of minorities and women in the science field affects research centers’ quality and competitiveness. This study assessed perceived self-efficacy, obstacles and factors that influenced the development of Hispanic women in a STEMM career. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: This project followed a mixed-method approach with a convergent design. It included two simultaneous phases: an electronic survey as the quantitative phase and semi-structured interviews as the qualitative phase. Data was collected from an academic-research institution in Puerto Rico. A total of 71 questionnaires were collected applying the Baessler & Schwarzer General Self-efficacy Scale. Five women were interviewed using a semi-structure questionnaire. These women hold a tenure-track faculty position, have held a leadership position, had more than ten publications in peer-reviewed journals, and have received grants for research projects. The data was analyzed by triangulation. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The General Self-efficacy scale sum scores ranged from 26 to 40 and a mean score of 34.25 (SD=3.79). Items where all answered the higher score stated, ’Thanks to my qualities and resources I can overcome unforeseen situations’ and ’I can solve most problems if I put in the necessary effort.’ Age was the only variable showing statistically significant relationship with general self-efficacy. The most relevant factor facilitating the development in STEMM fields’ careers was the family support. Other contributing factors were the opportunities of employment, positions, professional development, financial status, early experiences during middle and high school, and good mentors, among others. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Results identified some contributing factors and barriers for Hispanic women’s career development in STEMM. Strategies must be implemented as early as middle school for girls showing interest in this field and should include administrative resources to support the career development of women.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Writing self-efficacy & self-regulation are tied to publication & grant submission” writers high in these traits are more productive. We investigated if participating in Shut Up & Write! would produce statistically significant gains in self-efficacy & self-regulation when comparing pre/post surveys. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: 47 US med students, TL1/KL2, & early-career faculty expressed interest in participating. We conducted a 12-week, 1 hr/week Shut Up & Write!-style (SUAW) activity, held on Zoom, and measured the effect using a pre-post survey adapted from the Writer Self-Perception Scale. Matched pairs t-tests (I2=0.05) to test for significant differences between pre- and post-test means were conducted on 3 subscales. The 3 subscales reflected writing attitudes (self-efficacy), writing strategies (self-regulation), and avoiding writing distractions (self-regulation). Subscales showed acceptable internal consistency with Cronbach’s alphas of 0.80, 0.71, and 0.72. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: 24/37 (65%) completed pre-post surveys. 81% presented as female. 60% were NIH-defined URB and/or were from MSIs. 60% previously participated in an activity similar to SUAW. Sum scale statistics for those who previously participated were significant for the self-efficacy subscale (p=0.020) and writing strategies subscale (p=0.041). Sum scale statistics for those who had not previously participated were significant for the writing strategies subscale (p=0.002). We saw no difference in the avoiding writing distractions subscale. 80% were very satisfied/satisfied with SUAW (I really loved these sessions” they helped me to identify a writing goal that could actually be accomplished in an hour.) DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: We found significant differences in self-efficacy & self-regulation, building upon findings from a 2021 pilot, and providing evidence that regular participation in an activity like SUAW produces increased self-efficacy and self-regulation and may increase manuscript and grant-writing productivity

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Clinical Research Professional (CRP) shortages and high turnover rates directly impact the conduct of studies. A strategy for improving CRP retention is using Stay Interviews (SI), which are intentional exchanges between CRPs and leadership to enhance transparency and trust. Importantly, SIs are entirely separate from performance evaluations. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Representatives from seven academic medical centers formed a collaborative workgroup (WG) as part of the Association for Clinical and Translational Science (ACTS) Clinical Research Professionals Taskforce (CRPT) Special Interest Group (SIG). The purpose of this workgroup was to develop a Stay Interview (SI) toolkit that will empower leadership to retain high quality staff by engaging employees in open and responsive conversations about motivations to stay in their current roles. Tools previously used by collaborating institutions were evaluated and aligned to establish a sharable guide for SI best practices. Training resources to support leaders in effectively using SI tools were also developed to accompany the toolkit. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Discussions of current tool use among group members highlighted 2 categorical use cases: continuous integration to promote workforce engagement and retention; and targeted use to address acute workforce challenges. The WG identified the need for a standardized conversation guide as well as leadership tools to support effective use of the guide. From the examples collated, the group crafted a 14 question SI guide with additional probing questions that can be tailored to the work environment. Questions fell into 4 key themes: likes/dislikes, motivations, workplace influence on work life, and professional development barriers and opportunities. Anecdotally, SI use in other industries suggests that wide adoption is likely to reduce CRP workforce turnover and improve job satisfaction. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: SIs are designed to build trust and strengthen relationships, fostering positive change by acknowledging issues, understanding motivations, and increasing engagement. Leaders can make immediate actions: clearing obstacles, providing new resources, and increasing recognition. Our next step is implementing a pilot to gather workforce metrics.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To address investigator frustration and appropriate oversight for student interns performing clinical research activities, we created infrastructure to support matchmaking with clinical research teams and onboarding of student interns, thereby allowing for more meaningful internship experiences with access to clinical research systems. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Internship requests may be initiated by a student, an affiliated institution, or an investigator. Requests are triaged accordingly. Affiliation agreements define the parameters for these placements. Unaffiliated institutions may request an agreement by contacting CRISP; otherwise, unaffiliated interns will be classified as visiting scholars with restricted access. If a student is from an affiliated institution, the Clinical Research Internship Portal (CRISP) is used to collect and track information regarding the internship. CRISP provides: Matchmaking for student interns with placements Compilation of onboarding documentation Tools (e.g., learning agreements) for student intern supervisors Professional development workshop series for all student interns RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Launched in 2021, CRISP is a relative newcomer to the Duke research training landscape, but preliminary impact may be measured by the following metrics: Affiliated institutions: 8 agreements in place, 4 pending 25 student interns from 7 institutions placed across 11 departments/institutes 7-session professional development series garnering positive feedback from interns and supervisors Improved access to clinical and research systems aligned with clinical research activities Enhanced oversight and tracking of student interns across Duke enterprise Expansion of program to include internal and external student interns CRISP has engaged invested parties within and outside of Duke to ensure robust oversight of these valuable training opportunities and to create new pathways into our workforce. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Streamlining intern placements has lessened pain points related to including students in our research environment, both for investigators and institutional partners. Future plans include expanding the number of affiliation agreements, creating an interface to quickly triage intern requests, and scaling up the professional development series.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: There are few training programs for health research staff and clinicians like The Practice-Oriented Research Training program, that include opportunities to conduct funded clinical and translational research. The goal of this study is to evaluate the long-term impact of this program on participants professional development and advancement. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The Practice-Oriented Research Training program for health research staff and clinicians was operated by the Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research from 2008 through 2018. Participants received training and formed teams that received financial support to conduct a clinical or translational study with a faculty mentor. Eleven cohorts comprising 111 individuals participated. The long-term impact of the program was evaluated using sequential mixed methods. All participants were invited to evaluate the program via an online survey in 2021. Respondents were invited to participate in interviews in 2022. Secondary records of the participants’ publications, grants, and professional advancement were collected. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: 68 participants in the PORT program published 345 papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals following the program, averaging over 5 publications per participant. These publications have been cited over 4000 times with an average of over 13 citations per paper. Large proportion of program participants have continued contributing to health research; the vast majority of program participation chose to continue at the University of Michigan. Survey results indicate participants’ belief that the program had wide-ranging and enduring impacts on key aspects of their careers, including their application of research to practice. Interviews confirmed that the program helped many participants make substantial advancement in their careers. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Training programs for health research staff and clinicians can have a substantial and enduring impact on their professional development and advancement. The need for programs like PORT will increase as the health research workforce grows. These results inform recommendations for translational scientists.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The duration of the apprenticeship program is 2 years, with promotability to: -Research Program Coordinators -Senior Coordinators. CRCs learn essential clinical research foundations through courses and instructor led training, mentoring, and shadowing of other CRCs, such as: -Good Clinical Practices (GCP) -International Committee on Harmonization guidelines (ICH) -Institutional Review Board (IRB) -Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) -Shipping Dangerous Goods (DOT/IATA) -REDCap data entry -Clinical Research Management System (CRMS) -Clinical Skills (i.e., vital signs, ECG, and phlebotomy) -CPR (etc.) -EPIC training RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: -Over 100 CRCs have been trained since 2012 -Currently more than 40 active studies assigned between 16 CRCs -Over 10,000 hours of clinical trial activity in the past 15 months -The program is moving towards cost neutrality CRCs have gained access to begin DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE:

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Establishing a career trajectory geared towards undergraduates interested in a biomedical career has led to the development of a Clinical Research Training (CRT) Program. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the student experience of the program. It is our hopes to train the next generation of clinical researchers straight out of undergrad. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Establishing the success of the recently established Clinical Research Training Program and creating quality improvement measures has been analyzed with a focus on 5 domains. Outcome quality measurements and evaluation of the following domains have been completed from a student’s experience. These domains include: 1) the capstone course, 2) the internship experience, 3) career development opportunities, 4) hands-on training opportunities, and 5) post-baccalaureate career plans or career attainment. Each of these outcomes have been collected from students who have completed the program as well as students currently enrolled. Data will be obtained via qualitative measures such as course surveys, Likert scale ratings, and evaluation of data-based outcomes. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: In this ongoing study, results will demonstrate there is a percentage of students who were directed into clinical research positions due to their exposure to the clinical research world during their undergraduate training. Transferable skills such as CITI training, knowledge of good clinical practice, and familiarity of current research topics are associated with a higher likelihood to pursue a career in clinical research. Students placed within an associated internship slot with the community partners has also led to an increase in career placement in clinical research. Other factors provided by the course such as establishment of an extensive network, exposure to career pathways related to clinical research, and an increase in cross-trainings that lead to increased advancement in the scientific domain. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: To address clinical research workforce gaps by training students during their undergraduate education. Also, by addressing this gap, we can begin to strengthen the career trajectory and goals of students interested in a career in the life sciences. By targeting this workforce, it can lead to an increase in diversity and retention in the workforce.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Assistive technology (AT) can improve older adults’ function in daily activities. However, Latinos are among the least likely to use AT. Given that primary health care physicians (PCPs) have low awareness about AT, this study aims to evaluate the usability and acceptability of an AT WebAPP among PCPs to increase older Latinos’ access to AT. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A team of an established researcher, a sub-graduate faculty and student, and a graduate student will recruit ten PCPs in Puerto Rico and will interview them to explore their current practice in addressing the functional needs of older Spanish-speaking Latinos. The researchers will then train PCPs in the use of a Spanish evidence-based AT WebAPP developed in one of our earlier studies. PCP participants will use the APP with their older patients for 30 days. At the end of the usage period, the analysis will include a mixed method design, consisting of the simultaneous collection of quantitative data using a validated scale followed by qualitative data through individual interviews. Quantitative data will be analyzed with descriptive statistics and qualitative data with thematic content analysis. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We expect that the AT WebAPP will be rated as particularly useful and acceptable by the PCPs to increase older Latinos’ access to information about AT that could compensate for their physical function disabilities. We also expect that PCPs will offer recommendations for enhancing the design and usability of the AT WebAPP. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Studying the usability and acceptability of this AT WebAPP among PCPs will advance our understanding of its feasibility in enhancing PCPs AT knowledge and recommendations of AT devices for older adults with disabilities in Puerto Rico and in Latino communities in the continental United States.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The training needs of clinical & translational scientists are evolving. Implementation of new curriculum content requires assessment of need, fit with current curriculum, incentives and barriers to implementation. We used implementation science methods to plan the implementation of a dissemination and implementation science training toolkit. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The Tufts Clinical & Translational Science (CTS) Graduate Program is the training core of the Tufts CTSI and its associated TL1. To assess barriers and facilitators to implementing the University of Washington’s Dissemination and Implementation (D&I) Science Toolkit for TL1 Programs into the Tufts CTS Graduate Program, we used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We developed an interview guide based on CFIR constructs or categories of factors that might influence implementation of the D&I Toolkit and interviewed 8 stakeholders including leadership, trainees and faculty. We compared D&I Toolkit content to the current curriculum on stakeholder engagement (SE) and research study quality improvement (QI) to identify how the D&I Toolkit could be adapted to fit trainee and program needs. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Stakeholder interviews and review of the current curriculum identified facilitators and barriers to implementing the D&I Toolkit in the Tufts CTS Graduate Program. The program has a strong SE focus and fosters the use of research study QI methods. Interviews identified student and faculty desire to implement the D&I content yet time constraints and overlap with the current curriculum were identified. The following plan to adapt the D&I Toolkit content to fit contextual factors was developed and executed: 1. Adapt didactic content to fit into a 90-min session. 2. Highlight the synergy between the current SE curriculum and the role of stakeholders in D&I science. 3. Modify course materials to highlight examples of disseminating local research results. 4. Limit the experiential learning component to a SE plan. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: TL1 training programs must balance competing demands in selecting curriculum content. The CFIR framework was used to systematically assess implementation barriers by engaging program faculty, students and leaders to identify implementation strategies. This process could be useful when evaluating the addition of other educational content.