OBJECTIVES/GOALS: We describe the transition of ShAred Resource Panels (ShARPs) within the Center for Community Health (CCH) at Northwestern University’s Clinical and Translational Sciences (NUCATS) Institute to virtual sessions and explore ongoing practices. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Restrictions placed during the COVID-19 pandemic led to changes in community-engaged health equity research, such as the transition of community and partner-engaged panels from in-person to virtual. ShARPs have occurred since December 2015. The model includes research team members, community members, community co-facilitator, and CCH staff. These custom panels bring together 8-10 community members familiar with a research topic or community of focus, offering feedback on adaptations that can improve research relevance and feasibility. Until the COVID-19 pandemic, all ShARPs were conducted in person. From March 2020 to January 2023, panels occurred virtually. From 2023, the option of virtual or in-person ShARPs has been available. Count data and informal interview data were reviewed. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The number of ShARPs peaked in 2019 and has remained stable. The first virtual ShARP occurred on April 22, 2020, and all subsequent sessions have been virtual. As of October 2023, 6 ShARPs have occurred, with no research teams pursuing an in-person session despite its availability. Participants described virtual ShARPs as convenient and accessible. Academic teams cited concern about low community member participation should they opt for an in-person session. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: It is feasible to conduct ShARPs virtually and is the current preferred modality. Whether virtual ShARPs enhance, neutralize, or detract from the effectiveness of the session is unknown and guides our future work. More research is needed, including discussion, and learning from our CTSA colleagues.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The time between lower extremity amputations and prosthetic acquisition profoundly influences patient rehabilitation and mortality outcomes. Our primary outcome was time to prosthetic acquisition following major limb amputation. We hypothesize that women face an increased time lag between amputation and prosthetic acquisition compared to men. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We used the 2015-2021 Truven Marketscan Medicare and Commercial Claims Administrative dataset to identify individuals with lower extremity amputations based on CPT codes. We excluded patients < 18 years old, those with prior/concurrent major extremity amputations, and those with <= 31 days discontinuity in enrollment. To estimate time to prosthetic acquisition after initial amputation, Weibull Accelerated Failure Time multivariable regression models were used to estimate unadjusted and adjusted time ratios and 95% confidence intervals comparing men to women. We adjusted models for age, Medicare supplement/commercial payer, Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), amputation type, social deprivation index, and Elixhauser comorbidities. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We identified 4,054 patients with major lower extremity amputations (75% below knee and 25% at or above knee). Patients were predominantly male (72%). For patients who received prosthetics, 39.06% of men and 31.28% of women received prosthetics within the first three months of amputation (p<0.001). Time ratios > 1 indicated longer time to prosthetic acquisition between comparison groups. The adjusted time ratio for women compared to men for the time to acquisition of prosthetics was increased; this was statistically significant (TR 1.3281, 95% CI 1.1667, 1.5118). This time ratio suggests that if a man received a prosthetic in 100 days, a women would receive her prosthetic in 133 days. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: We found a significant difference in the time to prosthetic acquisition following major limb amputation and acquisition rate in the first three months of amputation among men and women. Successful rehabilitation, quality of life, and healthcare costs are influenced by the timeliness of prosthetic acquisition.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The molecular basis of increased risk of triple negative breast cancer in non-Hispanic Black women represents a critical knowledge gap that this research is designed to address; successful completion of this work could lead to better prevention, earlier stage diagnoses, and possible discovery of novel therapeutic strategies for this population. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We have recently generated a living tissue cohort of 11 non-Hispanic Black and 25 non-Hispanic White women who underwent breast surgery at Mayo Clinic. Gene expression profiling of normal breast tissue from this cohort has identified a pattern of gene expression differences that have been associated with the development of basal breast cancer and are also reflective of Hedgehog (Hh) signaling. We will identify protein-based biomarkers for Hedgehog signaling within normal breast tissue using immunohistochemistry methods. We will culture primary human mammary epithelial cells and further separate luminal and myoepithelial cells using flow cytometry to then decipher Hedgehog signaling. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We anticipate identifying and localizing protein-based biomarkers for Hedgehog signaling within myoepithelial cells of non-Hispanic Black women. Using our findings, we aim to create a biomarker risk model for triple negative breast cancer and validate this model within a separate and larger cohort of women to predict breast cancer risk. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: In addition to immediate benefits from improved risk prediction, the proposed work has the potential to provide new insight into the driving forces underlying basal breast carcinogenesis and the distinct biological differences that distinguish non-Hispanic Black women from non-Hispanic White women.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The Appalachian Translational Research Network (ATRN) Newsletter provides a unique platform that facilitates communication among Appalachian-serving CTSAs/CTSIs and partnering academic and community organizations that strengthens research efforts and advances translational science across the region. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Published biannually, each ATRN Newsletter features content submitted by ATRN member universities and organizations. Members of the Communications Committee, who represent both CTSA- or non-CTSA- affiliated ATRN member institutions, provide as well as review and edit content for the Newsletter. Regular features include researcher and community member spotlights; funding opportunity announcements; information on upcoming seminars, trainings, and special events; and opportunities for collaborations among partnering ATRN institutions. Complementing regularly scheduled Newsletters, special editions are released as warranted, such as a special COVID-19 focused edition published in 2020. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: First published in 2012, the ATRN Newsletter initially represented founding ATRN institutions, the University of Kentucky and the Ohio State University CTSAs, and a readership of 50. Reflecting ATRN growth that now represents 9 academic centers including NCATS- and IDeA-funded hubs, affiliated universities and partnering organizations, readership has grown to include 500 subscribers from across the U.S. and 3 other countries. With the establishment of the official ATRN website in 2019, the ATRN Newsletter became a prominent addition, providing ATRN members’ access to both new and archived editions, thereby expanding reach and further strengthening critical communication across the Network. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Providing a vehicle for communication that supports ATRN collaborations and networking, the Newsletter is foundational to the success of the ATRN mission to improve health outcomes across Appalachia by fostering collaborative inter-institutional and community-academic research partnerships.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted established social support networks (faith-based, community, family, friends), resulting in unprecedented health-related, financial, and employment challenges among African Americans (AAs). This study explores the psychosocial influences of the pandemic on the health and wellness of AAs. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The FAITH! (Fostering African-American Improvement in Total Health!) Program, an academic-community partnership with AA churches, shifted focus to COVID-19 prevention in AA communities. Funded by the Mayo Clinic Center for Clinical and Translation Sciences, this cross-sectional study recruited AA adults from FAITH!-affiliated churches and social media to complete a survey exploring the personal impact of the pandemic from hardships (e.g., food and housing insecurity, paying utilities) on healthy lifestyle (HL). The primary outcome was difficulty maintaining a HL during the pandemic. Logistic regression (odds ratios and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs)) was used to examine the associations between difficulty maintaining a HL and factors including COVID-19 hardships and mental health. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Participants (N=169, 71.4% female, 41.4% essential workers) had a mean age [SD] of 49.4 [14.9] years. Over half (91/169, 54%) reported difficulty maintaining a HL. Those reporting unemployment (OR 2.3; 95% CI [1.2,4.4]; p=0.008), difficulty paying rent (OR 4.1; 95% CI [2.1,8.6]; p<0.001), or food/utilities (OR 5.5; 95% CI [2.7,11.5]; p<0.001) all had greater odds of difficulty maintaining a HL. High stress (≥5/10, scale 1-10) was associated with difficulty maintaining a HL (OR 4.1; 95% CI [2.1,8.5]; p<0.001) compared to AAs with low stress. Negative mental health (depression (OR 3.4; 95% CI [1.0,13.7]; p<0.001), anger (OR 2.5; 95% CI [0.5,18.9]; p=0.005), and nervousness (OR 4.1; 95% CI [1.1,19.5]; p=0.003) was associated with difficulty maintaining a HL compared to AAs with positive mental health. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Our study findings revealed that COVID-19 hardships, stress, and negative mental health impacted the ability of AAs to maintain a HL. These issues should be considered in the design and implementation of community-based health programs to promote healthy living during future public health emergencies.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: While strategies for community engagement in health research and clinical trials are well documented, participation from underserved populations remains low. Our research team conducted a series of Community Engagement Studios for community members to discuss what is still needed for them to engage in health research. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: In the spring of 2023, our research team conducted four community engagement studios using the Vanderbilt Community Engagement (CE) Studio model. Community members were recruited through health councils- which are a community-led collaborative, focused on health at the county level throughout the state. In the CE Studio model community members or stakeholders are referred to as experts. In total, 31 experts from 12 different health councils from around the state participated in the CE Studios via Zoom. The CE Studios centered around two main questions 1.) What do communities want to know before agreeing to participate in research? And 2.) When a study is presented as an opportunity for your community, what things need to be addressed to see if it is a good fit? RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Themed summaries for each CE Studio and one overall themed summary were developed by a designated notetaker on the research team. Of novelty were cultural considerations for each region that included recommendations such as “Foster kinship between those doing the research and the community” speaking to the shared community bond that unites people and the need for researchers to also spend time creating meaningful community bonds throughout the research process. The CE Studio overall summary revealed two main themes for researchers: 1.) Things that help with research participation, and 2.) Things that get in the way of research participation. Overall themes echoed documented best practices for community engagement efforts. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Each CE studio revealed cultural considerations that included recommendations to researchers. Overall themes echoed documented best practices for community engagement efforts implying that while strategies for researchers to engage with communities are well known, more needs to be done to continue to implement these practices.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Studies show a decrease in injury-related emergency department (ED) visitsduring COVID.There is a gap in the literature regarding the effect of the pandemic on breast injury-related ED visits. We aim to compare these visits pre- and post-COVID, and whether this subset reflects the same trends seen in overall injury-related ED visits. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A retrospective study of breast injuries was conducted between 2018 and 2022, using the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System. Patients were categorized into pre-COVID and post-COVID groups, for visits occurring before and after January 20, 2020. A total of 1077 breast injuries were stratified into pre-COVID (n = 444) and post-COVID (n = 633) groups. Clinical data on patient demographics, diagnosis, disposition, location, and alcohol use were collected. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Mean age was significantly different: pre-COVID mean age was 37.29; post-COVID’s was 40.40 (p = 0.0338). >90% of patients were female (p = 0.4066). White patients accounted for 36.0% of pre-COVID visits and 47.2% of post-COVID; BIPOC patients were 32.88% and 31.75% respectively. There was significant difference between race and COVID groups (p = 0.0013). No significant differences were found when considering all diagnoses (p = 0.3841) or the top three diagnoses (other, contusions/abrasions, and burns/scald) (p = 0.6176). Incident location showed a weak evidence of association (α = 0.1), when including unrecorded data (p = 0.1365) and removing those entries (p = 0.0832). Alcohol use did not reveal a significant association (p = 0.2110). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: There are more breast injuries reported post-COVID. No significant difference was identified in the types of injuries diagnosed, the location these injuries took place, and how these injuries were treated. However, the demographics (age, race) of patients seeking care were significantly different.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The Community Research Liaison Model (CRLM) is a novel model to facilitate community engaged research (CEnR) and community–academic research partnerships focused on health priorities identified by the community. We describe the CRLM development process and how it is operationalized today. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The CRLM, informed by the Principles of Community Engagement, builds trust among rural communities and expands capacity for community and investigator-initiated research. We followed a multi-phase process to design and implement a community engagement model that could be replicated. The resulting CRLM moves community–academic research collaborations from objectives to outputs using a conceptual framework that specifies our guiding principles, objectives, and actions to facilitate the objectives (i.e., capacity, motivations, and partners), and outputs. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The CRLM has been fully implemented across Oregon. Six Community Research Liaisons collectively support 18 predominantly rural Oregon counties. Since 2017, the liaison team has engaged with communities on nearly 300 community projects. The CRLM has been successful in facilitating CEnR and community–academic research partnerships. The model has always existed on a dynamic foundation and continues to be responsive to the lessons learned by the community and researchers. The model is expanding across Oregon as an equitable approach to addressing health disparities across the state. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Our CRLM is based on the idea that community partnerships build research capacity at the community level and are the backbone for pursuing equitable solutions and better health for communities we serve. Our model is unique in its use of CRLs to facilitate community–academic partnerships; this model has brought successes and challenges over the years.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The COVID-19 pandemic limited family caregivers’ in-person visits to their loved one’s healthcare appointments, and many switched to phone and video calls with their loved one’s healthcare providers. We sought to determine the relationship between virtual communication with their loved one’s healthcare providers and caregiver’s mental stress. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: This research utilizes cross-sectional retrospective data from the National Study of Caregiving (NSOC) Round VI (June 2021 – January 2022), a nationally representative cohort of caregivers of Medicare enrollees ages 65+. Caregivers reported the frequency of contact with their loved one’s healthcare providers and the healthcare provider’s rated helpfulness. Univariate, bivariate, and multivariate analyses will be performed in Stata to characterize how communication frequency between caregivers and their loved one’s healthcare providers may be associated with outcome variables including symptoms of anxiety and depression, as measured by the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2 (GAD-2) and Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) scales. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Analysis is ongoing. We anticipate that this research will help in determining significant symptoms of anxiety and depression as measured by the GAD-2 and PHQ-2 scales amongst caregivers according to their virtual communication use. In addition, we anticipate that results may vary based on sociodemographic characteristics including gender, age, race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and level of education. Other possible covariates that might be associated with varying levels of stress in using virtual communication include caregiver’s health status and comfort with technology. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This research is important as many caregivers cannot attend their loved one’s healthcare appointments in-person, like in situations of geographic distance or inflexible work hours. Further, study results may identify stress disparities among caregiver sociodemographic groups for future targeted intervention.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research Community Engagement (MICHR CE) has collaborated for 15+ years with underserved communities on public health issues. As Michigan’s sole CTSA institution, we aim to advance the science of community engagement in translational science statewide. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: MICHR CE PACE (Promoting Academic-Community Engagement) will advance clinical and translational science. Key steps include: 1) form a PACE Steering Committee; 2) PACE Trainings with community-academic partner Detroit Urban Research Center; 3) PACE Training Manual; 4) community Grand Rounds to bridge academic-community insights; and 5) community resources (e.g., toolkits). PACE projects will spotlight community-engaged research (CEnR) via diverse media including social media and community-level communications. The PACE ScienCE initiative will embody cultural humility by addressing power imbalances, emphasizing trust. We will utilize assessments and root cause analyses to navigate CEnR barriers. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Anticipated results from MICHR CE’s planned approach with PACE include strengthened academic-community relationships. Formation of the PACE Steering Committee and collaborations are expected to foster more structured and impactful CEnR trainings. The PACE Training Manual will become a foundational resource for CEnR best practices. Community Grand Rounds will reveal increased interdisciplinary insights and community trust. All PACE projects will utilize diverse media to enhance CEnR visibility and community-level access. Lastly, by addressing power disparities via PACE ScienCE, we foresee enhanced trust, reduced barriers, and more transparent community-academic collaborations. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This strategy, based on co-planned efforts and community consultations, aims to reshape Michigan’s CEnR landscape and offers a replicable model for other regions. The insights gained will guide community-academic collaborations promoting translational, inclusive, and efficient community engagement.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Early HIV detection and treatment are key to reducing patient morbidity and mortality, yet 40% of people living with HIV do not know their status. “OPT-OUT” approaches to hiv testing, in which patients #_MSOCOM_1 are informed that an HIV test will be conducted unless they decline, are being increasingly recognized as a means to increase HIV testing. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: the ed at Uhealth tower (UHT) implemented #_MSOCOM_1 the focus program that integrates routine “opt-out” HIV screening into the existing electronic medical record workflow to increase the number of individuals who know their HIV status, optimize linkage to care, and reduce stigma associated with HIV. the emr facilitates the opt-out screening model and maximizes the use of information systems to seamlessly integrate screening as a routine practice in a high-volume ed. our partnership with the florida department of health in miami dade (FDOH) allows uht to verify whether cases are new or known /out-of-care, link individuals immediately to care, and increase efficiencies with real-time data reconciliation. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: since implementation#_MSOCOM_1, from October 2019 - Dec 2022, the UHT ED screened 34, 314 eligible patients for HIV, of which, 17, 850 were tested. 228 people with hiv were identified; 37 were newly diagnosed. of HIV+ Diagnoses, 54.67% of HIV+ individuals were black and 36.89% HISPANIC. HIV+ individuals were referred to the doh with linkage to care at 81%. comparatively, before the onset of focus, the ED ordered 38 HIV tests, with one positive from Oct 2018 TO Sept. 2019. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: UHT ED’s focus “OPT-OUT” HIV testing is a valuable conduit for HIV detection, prevention, and care. OPT-OUT screening removes the stigma associated with hiv testing, fosters earlier diagnoses and treatment, reduces health disparities, and decreases the risk of transmission.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Disparities persist among minority and marginalized populations in immunizations and research. The Clinical Research Vehicle Team aimed to bring research to our community’s doorstep, building generalizability of research outcomes. Our mission adapted due to the pandemic to include increasing COVID-19 vaccinations and health education. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Community Engagement Events are planned when event organizers submit a request, then the proposal is discussed by the Clinical Research Vehicle (CRV) Team and UF HealthStreet. We go to underserved communities throughout Florida, food distributions, churches, community centers, rural areas, etc. At these events we offer services at no cost, including: COVID-19 and flu vaccines, as well as health screenings. We provide health education to individuals and refer them to UF HealthStreet for community resources, as appropriate. Research events are planned when researchers submit a request for the CRV, then the request is discussed by the CRV Team. The studies covered topics from COVID-19 research to the development of a diverse health database. Our fleet consists of two Community Health Vehicles and the CRV. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: As Community Engagement Events are ongoing, the presented numbers are reflective of the data available at the time of submission. Our impact includes administering 1,606+ COVID vaccines, conducting 1,081+ health screenings, collecting data from 944 screenings, providing 265 Flu vaccines, supporting 267+ community health events, and serving 25+ communities. The Clinical Research Vehicle facilitated 6 IRB-approved studies, administration of monoclonal antibody infusions, extended the capabilities of the Clinical Research Center, and enabled clinical trials aimed for novel treatments for COVID-19 positive participants. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Championing this initiative has shown an impact on vaccination rates and health education in communities. Experience and knowledge gained by our team throughout the pandemic while engaging with community members provided a platform from which to build generalizability of research outcomes and support translational science.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The Community Engagement and Advisory Board (CEAB) has been an active and sustainable source of expert recruitment, retention, and community engagement advice. Our goal is to describe the strategies offered by the CEAB to university researchers and discuss which are most and least likely to be implemented. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The University of Illinois at Chicago’s (UIC) Center for Clinical and Translational Science’s (CCTS) CEAB was established in 2009 and is one of the longest-standing boards across the CTSA network. Our CEAB consists of 28 members, each representing a community-based organization or underrepresented community, which has provided 16 consultations since 2021. Our analysis consisted of: 1) reviewing and coding consultation notes (n= 16) to extract common recruitment and retention strategies provided to researchers; 2) reviewing feedback forms (n = 10) completed by the research team to code the strategies most likely to be implemented by researchers; 3) analyzing the codes to identify the strategies least likely to be implemented. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Our preliminary analysis indicated that the majority of researchers reported they are most likely to implement strategies to reduce burden for research participants (make study participation more convenient, e.g., allowing participant accompaniment, avoiding commuting to study site, providing transportation provide them with resources to their healthcare) and enhance recruitment from trusted community sources (e.g., Aldermen, local agencies, libraries). Researchers are least able to follow recommendations to alter their budget (e.g., increase participant stipends, hire community staff). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: In a previous paper focused on this CEAB, Matthews etal. (2018) found researchers indicated that they plan to implement at least one recommended strategy. In this follow-up examination, we describe the recommended strategies to guide CEABs to align recommendations with researcher priorities to best assist with their translational science goal.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Improving physical activity of African American women experiencing disproportionate health risks from sedentarism, educational and socio-environmental barriers. BeFit: Building Empowerment through Fitness is based on “What I Learned At Home” project, run by Women Under Construction Network, for residents of the Birmingham Housing Authority. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A qualitative study design to understand unique cultural context and challenges faced by African American women residing in the Birmingham Housing Authority, regarding physical activity engagement, including sedentarism. A needs assessment approach will help determine barriers, support systems, and social networks. Semi-structured, pre, mid, and post program focus groups will identify challenges and opportunities for health, such as diet and exercise, and will be analyzed by hand with a thematic analysis. The project framework uses exercise and home repair tools with a life-building/life repair curriculum to influence health, self-efficacy, and program engagement. The Study enrollment will include 50 women over two cohorts in a 12-week project. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: This research addresses the urgent health needs of African American women in low-income communities. These women face heightened health risks due to sedentary lifestyles, educational gaps, and socio-environmental barriers. This project targets the pronounced prevalence of allostatic burden in this population by applying a culturally sensitive, bottom-up approach. Our goal of incorporating healthy lifestyles to improve health in at-risk women and their families requires multiple projects. This project is a necessary first step in engaging with a community to identify local environmental circumstances and barriers to increasing the relevance of physical activity within the home. These barriers can then be addressed by adapting an exercise promotion program to the needs of this community. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Black women in under-resourced communities are more likely to be sedentary and have poor health. Exercise programs can be a powerful tool to address disparities and help prioritize health. The circumstances of women in public housing in Birmingham, AL, need community partners to adapt exercise engagement programs to meet environmental challenges.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: We aim to identify neurodevelopment delays among children who were born prematurely. We will also calculate the sensitivity and specificity of the assessment tools used to measure the neurodevelopmental profile in early childhood of children exposed to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: This cross-sectional study will include 100 premature children who were born between 32 to 37 weeks of gestational age and admitted to NICU at the University Pediatric Hospital in Puerto Rico. Their neurodevelopment will be measured with the Bayley III. Statistical analysis will be performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 25.0. Descriptive statistics will be used, normality distributions among all continuous variables, frequency distribution for categorical variables and logistic regressions to test association of GA and neurodevelopment delay. We will use the raw item scores for each domain of the Bayley III assessments to measure internal consistency using Cronbach’s alpha and factor analysis. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We anticipate identifying the ND among children born prematurely between 32 to 37 weeks of gestational age and who were admitted to NICU at the University Pediatric Hospital in Puerto Rico. We also expect to find if gestational age impacts adversely ND in children who were born between 32 to 37 weeks of gestation. We will be able to assess if lower gestational age will impact global ND in contrast to higher gestational age neurodevelopment delays in one specific area of development. We will also be able to assess the sensitivity and specificity of the Bayley- III. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Premature is a major global health problem with a 12.0% prevalence. We want to promote early identification of ND in a diverse Hispanic Puerto Rican population so we can guide public health decisions and lead research initiatives to improve outcomes in the future or facing prematurity.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Transportation is a barrier to research participation, especially for participants from disadvantaged backgrounds. Our goal was to review existing policies and create recommendations for institutional guidance on research-related transportation to support a long-term birth cohort study. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: To summarize existing institutional policies on research-related transportation (i.e., transportation of participants or research staff travel to/from research activities), we requested and, in addition, searched for such policies across 28 sites involved in the NIH HEAL Initiative’s HEALthy Brain and Child Development (HBCD) study. The HBCD study plans to enroll 7,500 pregnant/postpartum persons, follow their children and families long-term, and assess factors influencing brain and child development. The obtained policies were then summarized, followed by identification of gaps in their recommendations and guidance. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Outreach to the HBCD study sites and search of their institutional websites resulted in identification of 6 institutional policies or other guidance related to research-related transportation across five HBCD study sites. Three policies/guidance related to ride-share programs in research, two related to reimbursement for participant travel, and the fifth was about car seats. Through the online search, we also found policies or written guidance about employee-related transportation within 15 HBCD study sites in total; they largely pertained to employee business travel and did not specifically address research-related transportation. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: To optimally support research teams, participants, and to promote the enrollment and retention of participants from diverse backgrounds, it is critical for research institutions to develop and implement guidance on research-related transportation and remove barriers to participation in research.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: A primary care clinic is opening in the Eva Rothwell Center (ERC) located in the Keith Neighbourhood of Hamilton, Ontario. This new clinic aims to address rampant health disparities in the community. Effective delivery of health services requires a robust model of care that meets and sustains the specific needs of the community and clinic providers. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The primary objective of this study is to describe the current health needs of Keith Neighbourhood residents. The secondary objective is to describe the needs of health providers working within the ERC health clinic. Data collection will involve the collection of primary data (through methods such as surveys and interviews) and secondary data (including historical and current census data). Primary data analysis for primary will use conventional quantitative and qualitative methods. Finally, researchers will use the analyzed data to develop a context-appropriate initial model of care for the ERC health clinic and a subsequent evaluation plan to assess the model’s effectiveness and sustainability. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: All primary and secondary data will be synthesized into a report that will inform the development and implementation of two main deliverables. The first deliverable will be a framework for the clinic’s initial model of care that is context-appropriate to the current needs of the Keith Neighbourhood. The model of care will be culturally sensitive and trauma-informed. The second deliverable will be an evaluation plan for the clinic that can be used to continuously iterate on the initial model, ensuring its sustainability. Furthermore, the project’s process may be extrapolated into a framework that could be used to establish primary care clinics within other priority communities. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The proposed model of care will enable practitioners to deliver relevant and timely health services while being adaptable to the community’s evolving needs. It will help improve the Keith Neighbourhood residents' long-term health and social outcomes. This project will contribute to and inform the development of the field of translational science.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Building community-engaged research capacity is imperative to improve translation, but not everyone exhibits capacity to conduct research, especially community. We modified the research institute planning and implementation process between 2022 and 2023 to increase community appeal and engagement. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The 2022 and 2023 Community-Engaged Research Institutes (CERI) varied in their formats. For 2022, we hosted a one-hour planning session with community-academic dyads from our Community Advisory Board facilitated by the CEO director and co-director. The 2022 CERI consisted of five sessions totaling 12 hours. The first session was hybrid, followed by four virtual sessions. For 2023, we hosted two, facilitated one-hour planning sessions with community partners who attended the 2022 CERI, based on feedback and attendance from 2022. The 2023 CERI was consolidated to a seven-hour, one-day hybrid session. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: In 2022, two community partners participated as CERI panelists. There were 95 unique attendees spanning five days. Of the 95 attendees, 67% (n=64) were researchers and 33% (n=31) were community members. In 2023, eight community partners participated as CERI panelists and presenters. There were 57 unique attendees, of which 61% (n=34) were researchers and 39% (n=23) were community members. When comparing attendance for 2022 (29%, n=28) and 2023 (86%, n=49), in-person attendance was increased by 57%. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: In 2023, we focused on research capacity building for community partners to align with community engagement principles and increasing research impact across the translational spectrum. Partnering with community elevated appeal for community participation and an increase in-person attendance.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The process of decision making in serious illness and end-of-life care needs to be culturally appropriate, relevant, and equitable. For Chinese Americans, family and filial piety have been shown to impact this process, yet it remains poorly understood how. The purpose of our study is to explore this decision-making process qualitatively. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We created semi-structure interview guides, based on a literature review of values salient to serious illness and end of life care for Chinese Americans. The guides will be used to conduct three focus groups, each with ten participants who identify as Chinese American stratified by highest attained familial role (grandparents, parents, and adult children). This will be done in partnership with Greater Boston Chinese Golden Age Center, a local community organization, in English, Cantonese, and Mandarin using our interview guides with live interpretation. Focus groups will be audiotaped, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic content analysis and modified grounded theory. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We anticipate that we will identify how, by whom, and why Chinese Americans in Boston’s Chinatown make decisions during serious illness and end-of-life. We anticipate that we will clarify cultural values, the balance between individual and collective values, intergenerational processes, individual and family suffering, and themes salient to this process. We expect to elucidate the role of family and filial piety during serious illness and end-of-life decision making and compare how these processes differ by generation and familial role for this population. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Using the family as a unit of investigation and focusing on intergenerational processes represent a novel approach to understanding decision making during serious illness and end of life care for Chinese Americans.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Goals: Engage in collaborative approaches that target health disparities, especially among communities experiencing poverty or ethnic/racial minorities. Develop and sustain effective community-academic partnerships that foster trust through bidirectional communication and shared leadership leading to improved translational research. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The Community Health Science model was developed at UTSW over the past 20 years in efforts to integrate practices across 3 component areas – clinical practice, population health, and community organizations – into a single collaborative effort to improve health and reduce disparities. As part of the CTSA Program’s translational science efforts, we have extended this model to promote community engagement in research as an additional strategy needed to achieve health equity. Our Office of Community Health & Research Engagement operates 9 programs that each fit within one or more of 4 overarching conceptual pillars - Education/Resources, Collaboration/Partnership, Outreach/Service, Priorities/Perspectives - serving to bridge the community-academic divide and build strong, trusting relationships. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The implementation of our model has resulted in measurable outcomes. To date, we have hosted 23 HealthStreet community events resulting in 464 health screenings, 203 health needs assessments completed, and 123 individuals joining our Community Research Registry allowing for future contact to participate in research. Our Community Health Coalition, comprised of 32 organizations, provides a forum for co-learning between researchers and stakeholders. We have awarded 9 grants ($175,800) for community-engaged projects. Our Community Advisory Panel has participated in 8 sessions with research teams. A total of 13 projects utilized the Spanish Language Resource, for a total of 30,617 translated words. Finally, we have hosted 9 Community Engagement Grand Rounds lectures, which included a total of 559 attendees. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Our model strengthens our capacity to build trust with communities and facilitate sustained community-academic partnerships. By prioritizing community engagement in research, we improve health equity by understanding community perspectives and increasing diversity in trials. We hope our model can be disseminated and scaled for greater impact.