OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Sexism harms women’s well-being, affecting life satisfaction and self-doubt in complex ways (Shattell etal., 2008; Oswald etal., 2018). This study examines how hostile and benevolent sexist attitudes moderates the link between experiences of benevolent sexism, self-doubt, and life satisfaction in Latinx women. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Participants included 57 English-speaking Latinx women residing in the United States, with a mean age of 31.89 (SD=10.14) years. The majority (61.4%, n=35) identified as Mexican, and most identified as second generation or later (80.7%, n=46). Participants completed surveys assessing hostile and benevolent sexist attitudes (Glick & Fiske, 1996), self-doubt (Oleson etal., 2000), life satisfaction (Diener etal., 1985), and experiences with three aspects of benevolent sexism – protective paternalism (PP), heterosexual intimacy (HI), and complimentary gender differentiation (CGD) (Oswald etal., 2018). RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Moderation analyses were conducted to examine the moderating role of hostile and benevolent sexist attitudes between experiences of benevolent sexism (PP, HI, & CGD) and well-being measures (self-doubt and life satisfaction). An example finding revealed a significant interaction effect between benevolent sexist attitudes and experiences with CGD on satisfaction with lifeF(1,53)=8.34,p<.01. For participants who endorsed high benevolent sexist attitudes, experiences with CGD was associated with increased satisfaction with life (b=.78, p<.001), while the effect of experiences with CGD on life satisfaction was attenuated for those who endorsed low benevolent sexist attitudes (b=.30, p<.05). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: These findings have important implications on the well-being of Latinx women as they indicate that those who reject sexist attitudes risk their well-being when confronted with benevolent sexism, unlike those who endorse to such beliefs, potentially gaining increased life satisfaction at the cost of embracing benevolent sexist behavior.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Older adults are often underrepresented in research due to recruitment and retention barriers, among others. Frameworks have been developed to address these barriers but have not been disseminated to research teams without aging expertise. We aimed to test Age-Friendly tools among non-aging-trained research teams. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Our team developed and/or adapted seven Age-Friendly research tools to improve inclusion of older adults in research. Tools included a communication guide, Age-Friendly research checklist, knowledge consent check, and condolence card template, among others. Non-aging-trained research team members (n= 21) were invited to pilot test them and share strengths, limitations, and areas for improvement for each tool. Feedback was collected for up to 4 months using REDCap surveys and analyzed for common themes. Participants provided written informed consent and received a stipend of $1000 upon the completion of the surveys. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Sixteen participants (76%) from primarily cancer and neurology departments completed at least one survey. The communication guide, research checklist, and knowledge check were implemented the most within the participants' study populations. Participants shared that the tools were user-friendly, easy to access, and well-explained through webinar trainings (offered separately) or instruction sheets. The most frequently reported barriers were lack of time, industry-sponsored trial restrictions, and lack of age-appropriate study populations. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Age-Friendly tools were acceptable and valuable among non-aging-trained research members. Dissemination of these tools could improve the experience for research teams and older adults and help align demographics of enrolled study populations with demographics of the condition being studied.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The objectives of this workshop were to: (1) provide learners with a space to become aware of and discuss the history of the LGBTQ+ community in medical and public health research; (2) apply frameworks for LGBTQ+ inclusivity in research, inspired by lived experience and multimedia; and (3) assess LGBTQ+ research inclusivity best practices. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The CTSC provided the LGBT Community Center of Greater Cleveland (Center) with access to academic resources via an affiliate account and insights on the clinical and translational science research process. Members of the CTSC Research Equity, Accessibility, Diversity, and Inclusion team met regularly with the education and programming team at the Center to review research findings for workshop segments, ideate and provide feedback on activities, and strategize to ensure a psychologically safe virtual environment for learners. Zoom registration was used for workshop registration. An evaluation survey, created by the LGBT Community Center of Greater Cleveland (Center), was deployed by the CTSC to learners after the workshop. Respondents reported that the LGBTQ+ terminology focus was most valuable. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: To maximize investment in and scale theLGBTQ+ Inclusivity For Researchers workshop, the LGBT Community Center of Greater Cleveland offered a shortened version to their Youth Participatory Action Research group and will continue to offer the workshop in their suite of program/educational offerings. The CTSC plans to offer opportunities to co-host the workshop at its hospital system partner institutions, with room to tailor content based on internal LGBT resources (e.g., gender care offered at the institution). We hope to see a remarkable increase in LGBTQ+ identifying researchers, LGBTQ+ participation in research studies and clinical trials, and LGBTQ+ research topics/ideas/questions in response to CTSC pilots, local, national, and global funding opportunities. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: LGBTQ+ people are less likely to have a regular health care provider—impeding screening, diagnosis, and treatment. This is reflected in health research where clinical research participation may follow a diagnosis. By providing tools for LGBTQ+ research inclusion, we will catalyze more research with LGBTQ+ people—as researchers and participants.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The objective of this project was to evaluate the factors that contribute to LGBTQIA2+ patient comfortability. This information was then used to understand how best to create a comfortable space for LGBTQIA2+ patients. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: This survey was focused on underinsured and uninsured patients seen at the Rainbow Clinic - a free student-run LGBTQIA2+ clinic. Surveys were distributed by undergraduate volunteers on tablets as a qualtrics survey. Surveys collected demographic information in addition to 5 questions that assessed patient comfortability. These questions included evaluating the patient’s comfort with sharing information with the provider and the patient’s comfort of coming into clinical spaces. These surveys were distributed before and after clinic appointments to capture any changes in comfortability that could have occurred as a result of the appointment. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Up to May of 2023, 49 patients were seen in Rainbow Clinic. 33 patients filled out the intake survey and 31 patients filled out the check-out survey resulting in a 67% and 63% response rate respectively. Questions were asked on a likert scale (1-5) from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. Questions evaluating patient comfort in sharing information with their provider yielded an average score that was statistically significant, suggesting patients felt comfortable at the Rainbow Clinic. Additionally, patients indicated that the LGBTQIA2+ specific labeling of the Rainbow Clinic made them significantly more comfortable coming into the clinic. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This project suggests that patient comfortability can be improved by training and intentional LGBTQIA2+ labeling. Considering the hesitancy of this community towards healthcare, improving comfortability not only benefits clinical care and outcomes but can also bolster the body of research on this community.

In underserved communities across New York City, uninsured adults encounter a greater risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes. The Heart-to-Heart Community Outreach Program (H2H) addresses these disparities by screening for CVD risk factors, identifying healthcare access barriers, and fostering community engagement in translational research at the Weill Cornell Medicine Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hub. Screening events are hosted in partnership with faith-based institutions. Participants provide a medical history, complete a survey, and receive counseling by clinicians with referrals for follow-up care. This study aims to quantify H2H screening participant health status; identify socioeconomic, health access, and health-related barriers disproportionately promoting the onset of CVD and diabetes; and develop long-term community partnerships to enable underserved communities to influence activities across the translational research spectrum at our CTSA hub. The population served is disproportionately non-white, and uninsured, with many low-income and underserved individuals. The program was developed in partnership with our Community Advisory Board to empower this cohort to make beneficial lifestyle changes. Leveraging partnerships with faith-based institutions and community centers in at-risk New York City neighborhoods, H2H addresses the increasing burden of diabetes and CVD risk factors in vulnerable individuals while promoting community involvement in CTSA activities, serving as a model for similar initiatives.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Compiling information about characteristics and progress of scholars is required for career development applications and progress reports. The range of information is substantial, and preparation is onerous. We sought to create a tool to facilitate gathering key data about trainees and mentors who participate in programs like NIH K- and T-awards. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Using the REDCap platform, we developed forms and surveys to support intake of applicants, updates from scholars, and information about their participation in activities and use of resources. We deployed application programming interfaces (APIs) to automate capture of publicly available data about publications, impact metrics, and federal grant funding. Similar tools capture descriptions of mentor expertise including grant funding, prior trainees, and publications with mentees We also built modules to 1) allow connection to institutional grant and contract data to capture foundation and other funding; 2) pre-populate follow-up surveys to update information about career trajectories with minimal scholar effort; and 3) support mentee-mentor agreements as living documents. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: After a pilot period at our institution, we disseminated Flight Tracker to more than 50 academic institutions, most of whom are CTSA hubs. They track scholars in TL1/T32s, KL2/K12s, MSTP programs, and academic groups. Beyond federal reporting, uses now include publication impact factors (relative citation ratios, Altmetrics scores), grant funding of groups, maps of network relationships among investigators, scholar receipt of internal pilot awards, and statistics about transition to independence and time-to-promotion. Scholars can be separated into smaller cohorts by demographics, training dates, and funding dates. Over 34,000 scholars are tracked nationally among over 260 programs. Having structured data supports program evaluation, continuous improvements, and documents program strengths. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: We informally estimate Flight Tracker reduces staff and leadership effort in preparation of program data by 75%, preserving time to focus on service to scholars. Ready access to data over time and within and across institutions creates new opportunities for collaborative data analysis to support evidence-based career development.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Academic research centers often struggle to recruit and retain a diverse and competent clinical and translational science (CTS) workforce. Specifically, the clinical research professional (CRP) career pathway is not well known to undergraduate students and other individuals outside of academic medicine despite various potential career routes. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: To address these workforce challenges, the CRP Task Force at the University of Cincinnati (UC) aims to train a competent and diverse CRP workforce through targeted educational programming in the UC undergraduate population. Using a six-step curriculum development process that included: 1) performing a needs assessment, 2) determining content, 3) writing goals and objectives, 4) selecting the educational strategies, 5) implementing the curriculum, and 6) evaluating the curriculum, we designed an undergraduate certificate program in CTS. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The needs assessment included both internal and external data gathering to inform curriculum development and program decisions. Content was determined using the CRP Competency Framework 2.0, and program learning outcomes were written with both the competency framework and local workforce needs in mind. Educational strategies were selected based upon optimization of available resources and local expertise with an emphasis on interactive didactics complemented by experiential learning. Implementation is underway and evaluation will follow once students begin enrolling. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: We anticipate an increase in numbers of well-qualified, diverse applicants who pursue CRP careers locally and regionally. In addition, we expect that the certificate program will build competency earlier in CRP staff, improving job satisfaction and retention as a result of a stronger foundation from which to build their professional skills.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: 1. Standardize pathways, training and evaluations 2. Expose apprentices to a variety of research experiences 3. Remove barriers to hiring early talent 4. Expand opportunities for underrepresented minority applicants to obtain clinical research professional positions METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Collaborators connected by the Clinical Research Professional Taskforce ACTS SIG conducted a landscape analysis survey to identify aspects of CRP Apprentice models and formed a Subgroup. Members will share plans for multiple apprenticeship programs, including specific training modalities and skill sets used to prepare apprentices for a successful clinical research professional career. Methods across institutions include: • Increasing awareness of the profession • Facilitating talent identification for managers • Making the business case for funding and staffing • Implementing work-based learning for fundamental competency development Survey results from CRP institutions demonstrated apprenticeships are value added to teaching how to conduct research. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The landscape survey of Apprentice programs revealed multiple models in use. The newly formed Apprentice subgroup is engaging in analysis and actively working to build a standardized repository of competency-aligned, research courses and experiences for apprentices. Results will help make the business case for starting or growing programs. Subgroup members have focused on a shared goal of expanding opportunities for underrepresented minority applicants, with current outreach efforts that are extending awareness of the CRP profession. We anticipate a continuous strengthening of connections between institutions to share a variety of models to implement, develop shared tools (e.g., proficiency tests), and share existing tools to standardize pathways and training for CRP apprenticeships. #_msoanchor_1 DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Academic Medical Centers (AMCs) need novel strategies to support clinical research portfolios.Innovative Apprenticeship Models improve efficiency and sustainability of the clinical research professional (CRP) workforce to train the next generation of CRPs in an effective and timely way.

The survey investigates COVID-19 information source trust levels and Vietnamese Americans’ willingness to participate in clinical trials. An analysis of 212 completed surveys revealed that trust in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) clinical trial information from university hospitals and drug companies was associated with willingness to participate in clinical trials. Trust in COVID-19 information from federal governments and state governments was also associated with willingness to participate in clinical trials. However, trust in local health facilities was linked to trial participation reluctance. The results suggest that Vietnamese Americans’ participation in clinical trials can be increased by identifying and using trusted sources of information.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Minority faculty have inequitable access to information, professional development, and research resources. A structured research-mentoring program could help strengthen the research acumen of underrepresented (UR) faculty, provide a community, and support to ensure their success in becoming independent investigators. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The Translational Research Institute (TRI) STARs program aims to build a peer support community of UR in biomedical, clinical, behavioral and social sciences to support career development and research success. The program provides a structured peer support group with a 3-month grant training and development program and addresses issues of isolation often felt by UR faculty in academic settings. It encourages the development of innovative research ideas in a safe environment. This peer support group can also help improve confidence and self-efficacy in clinical and translational research development and execution by UR faculty. At the didactic program’s conclusion and seed grant application submission, STARs provides $10,000 as a TRI DEI Equity, Diversity, and Grantsmanship Expertise project. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Since its launch in 2021, 11 scholars have enrolled in the program;three have fully completed the program, and all three have received subsequent grant funding. Four scholars have completed the didactic program and are in the process of using seed funding to collect initial data and working on initial publications. The remaining scholars are currently in the didactic program. Initial scholar satisfaction with the program is high: 100% reported satisfaction with their participation (Very Satisfied/Satisfied), and 100% agree the program provides adequate support to their research project (Strongly Agree/Agree). Overall, scholars reported an average increase in confidence of 7.9% in grantsmanship skills (Scale 0-10). The return on investment is 3106%, with over $1.9 million in subsequent funding. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Research shows diverse teams working together, capitalizing on innovative ideas, and distinct perspectives outperform homogenous teams. Our preliminary experience demonstrates success for the model. Additional, long-term support will be furthered developed to address additional challenges experienced by UR faculty across their careers.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: In 2014, Johns Hopkins Pediatric ICU (PICU) implemented the PICU Up! early mobilization program. Subsequent studies have shown that these protocols increase mobility of PICU patients. Process improvement requires accurate documentation. Our aim is to evaluate differences in nurse documented and actual reported mobility of PICU patients. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A quality improvement project evaluating the impact of a simulation-based early mobility training program is being conducted, with initial analysis of pre-intervention data. Inclusion criteria includes children age 1 day to 17 years old admitted to the PICU for ≥ 3 days during a day shift and exclusion criteria includes specific mobility contraindications. Data on the number of daily mobilizations, highest level of mobility achieved during each mobilization, and occurrence of safety events is captured via direct query of the bedside nurse at the end of a 12-hour shift by a research team member using a standard data collection tool. We also recorded documented events in the electronic medical record (EMR). Paired t-tests were performed for continuous data and McNemar’s test for categorical data. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: In total, 50 patients were enrolled between February and April 2023. The nurses reported that patients participated in a median of 5 mobilizations (Interquartile range [IQR] 4-6) in a 12-hour shift, whereas nurses documented in the EMR that patients participated in a median of 1 mobilization (IQR 0-3; P <0.001). On direct query, the nurses stated that a total of 8 individual safety events occurred during mobility, representing a 3% (8/259) safety event rate. In the EMR, the nurses documented 1 individual safety event during mobility, representing a 1% (1/84) safety event rate (P = 0.008). Nurses reported that they mobilized 50% (25/50) of the patients out of bed; however, they documented that they mobilized only 32% (16/50) of the patients out of bed (P = 0.007). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Compared to EMR documentation, nurses report more mobilization of critically ill children during the day, including more out of bed mobilization and safety events. Future nurse education should focus on mobility documentation to ensure that it reflects mobility at the bedside to facilitate process improvement and optimize care for PICU patients.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To demonstrate the value of the Competency Index for Clinical Research Professional (CICRP) as a tool in program evaluation using a pre- and post- design to evaluate student perceived self-efficacy in clinical trial competencies at program entry and at program completion. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Using a separate-sample pre-post study design, we administered the CICRP questionnaire to students in the entry and exit courses of the Master of Clinical Research (MCR) Program during the 2021-2022 academic year, using QualtricsTM (Provo, Utah) survey instrument for use on desktop or mobile device. We included the 20 CICRP competency items asking students to rate their self-efficacy in performing each item using a Likert Scale (from 0-10) (0=not at all confident; 10= extremely confident). Links to the survey were included in the courses for the foundational entry course and for the final culminating project course. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Overall, 54 students took the CICRP during the entry course and 56 during the exit. Cronbach’s alpha for each assessment ranged from 0.93 to 0.98. Both the Welch’s two-sample t-test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test show very significant differences between the group of students entering the program and leaving the program (p value < 0.001). A significant increase in mean CICRP total score is seen at each experience level between program entry and program exit (p<0.001) A linear regression, adjusting for available covariates, individuals taking the exit course have a mean CICRP total score 92.690 (p value < 0.001) higher than individuals taking the entry course. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Competency indices have been used to measure self-efficacy in translational research scientists, thus the use of CICRP to measure self-efficacy can be useful in assessing whether our competency-based program is meeting the JTF Competency needs of students.