OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To construct an assessment scale capable of evaluating a trial’s gender literacy or the extent to which biologically assigned “sex” is understood as separate from culturally defined and personally embodied “gender”. This scale in tandem with a policy brief will outline recommendations for inclusive medical nomenclature in the clinical space. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Using clinicaltrials.gov, inclusion/exclusion criteria was recorded for PrEP interventional trials (i.e., Truvada, Descovy). To evaluate these trials, an assessment scale for “gender literacy” is necessary. This scale relies on the fact that sex and gender are distinct elements to one’s identity and ought to be reported as such. As a form of content analysis, where literary information (eligibility criteria) is evaluated based on set rubric, this scale will require validation through inter-coder agreement. Evaluated in a group of 5 college-age students, this scale was used on selected PrEP clinical trials to verify if there was high agreement in the scores given. After validation, the dataset from clinicaltrials.gov underwent evaluation using the proposed assessment scale for gender literacy. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The student coders had a Kalpha of 0.4 in the first round of grading. After retraining, their Kalpha increased to 0.68. The grading involved a subjective language rating (LIR), evaluating the usage of inclusive language, and a numerical score (GR) for the demographics of inclusion in a trial. After this inter-coder agreement validation, 216 active PrEP clinical trials (as of March 2023) were downloaded from clinicaltrials.gov. Grading of these trials showed that cisgender males represented 40% of participants, while 28% represented both transgender men and women, and less than 1% represented non-binary individuals. Moreover, more than half of the trials (52%) exhibited cisgender-oriented language or made no reference to gender identity. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: It is a scientific imperative for clinical trials to have representative participant bases in order to derive data that is generalizable to afflicted populations. Especially for PrEP clinical trials, where gender-diverse individuals need visibility, trial design must be carefully crafted so as not to exclude through dated or exclusionary language.