OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The present study investigated contextual factors linking rural Black American mens experiences of racial discrimination to their COVID vaccine hesitancy. Specifically, we investigated two potential mediators of the link between racial discrimination and COVID vaccine hesitancy: (1) medical mistrust, and (2) COVID conspiratorial beliefs. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Hypotheses were tested using structural equation modeling with 7 waves of data from 504 Black American men participating in a longitudinal study of risk behavior and substance use during young adulthood. At baseline, mens mean age was ~20. Data were collected before and during the COVID pandemic. The COVID pandemic began after Wave 4 data had been collected. A series of 3 online surveys, at 3-month intervals, were conducted to examine acute COVID-related stressors and impacts. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The dual mediation model fit the data as follows: χ2(7) = 19.00, p < .008; χ2/ df = 2.71; RMSEA = 0.06; CFI = 0.95; SRMR= 0.04. Results indicated that racial discrimination was directly associated with increases in COVID conspiratorial beliefs (B = .14, p<.05) and medical mistrust (B = .22, p<.001). COVID conspiratorial beliefs was directly associated with increases in COVID vaccine hesitancy (B = .11, p<.05). Indirect effects were detected whereby racial discrimination was associated with increases COVID vaccine hesitancy indirectly via increases in COVID conspiratorial beliefs (B = 0.016; 95% CI [0.001, 0.048]). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Investigating race-related factors in the context of vaccine hesitancy is a novel area of inquiry that could facilitate the development of targeted interventions for Black Americans to increase their vaccine uptake. Future research is needed to more thoroughly examine the relationship between racial discrimination and conspiratorial beliefs.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Last year, we reported on storytelling events highlighting the experiences of Black biomedical professionals. The goal of this continuation study was to put Black Voices into action through a companion curriculum, instructional materials, and facilitated meaningful discussions around racial justice. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We developed instructional materials and pilot-implemented the curriculum in a 250-student Healthcare Leadership class. Prior to viewing the video, participants were asked to provide a definition of diversity, inclusion, and equity. Afterwards, the students reflected and suggested changes to the definition. Throughout the class, instructors facilitated group discussions about the role of diversity. As a culminating activity, students submitted a written reflection summarizing their understanding of the role of diversity, inclusion, and equity in healthcare. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Instructional materials included videos, a facilitators guide, a reflection worksheet, and online course modules. The facilitators guide included an overview of best practices in the facilitation of group discussions, common rules groups can establish for open dialogue, and discussion questions specific to the Black Voices videos. In-class and lab discussions brought up several prominent metaphors for diversity and inclusion. For example, students first defined diversity as pieces of the puzzle that somehow fit together, but later surmised that the pieces do not need to fit, or be from the same puzzle. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Our pilot showed that participants experienced the power of storytelling, particularly for amplifying Black voices, gained a vehicle to expand awareness and consciousness of diversity, equity, and inclusion, and identified plans to promote and facilitate stories of race, equity, and diversity.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: In spite of significant growth in undergraduate research, there is little accessible RCR training material targeting this group. The goal of this project was to develop level appropriate RCR materials and test them for effectiveness of teaching basic knowledge of RCR. It was developed cognizant of the type of learning preferred by this group. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Todays undergraduate students are digital natives accustomed to using on-line resources for learning and value the ability to work independently. An asynchronous, online series of eight RCR modules were developed using PowerPoint. Audio instruction was overlaid over the presentations and uploaded to YouTube. Each module includes quiz at the end that must be completed with a 90% score in order to continue and students can retake each quiz until correct. Case studies, a plagiarism game, and additional resources such as infographics created by the Office of Research Integrity were included. 275 first year undergraduates completed the pilot and the on-line retrospective pre-post assessment that included 28 Likert scale items and two open-ended questions that were analyzed with RapidMiner. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Participants rated their ability prior to and after the course to recognize the roles/responsibilities of a mentor, maintain and organize data records, recognize what constitutes research misconduct and multiple types of plagiarism, define ethics of authorship and the types of peer review, recognize responsible handling of human and animal subjects and to define collaborative research. Responses were analyzed using t-Tests and all items showed a significant increase. Students reported between a 28% and 50% increase in knowledge in each topic and gains in understanding where to report RCR violations. Text analysis using RapidMiner provided developers with suggestions on how to enhance the project. Students reported finding the course concise and easy to understand and valued the included case studies. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This study demonstrated that RCR materials developed specifically for todays undergraduate students, presented an easily accessible format, effectively conveys the basics of RCR. The on-line, asynchronous format made it accessible to those for whom in person course is not possible. This model fills the gap in RCR training for early researchers.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Uterine fibroids (UF), non-cancerous myometrial neoplasms, affect 11 million women in the US. In qualitative research, experiences of Black women (BW) and Latinas (HL) with UF are understudied. UF etiology is poorly understood, and most symptoms are focused on decreasing UF symptoms. This study will showcase a translational approach in studying UF. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A community-engaged research process will be used throughout the study. We have a partnership with the Fibroid Foundation (FF), a UF advocacy organization. For our first aim, we have held community-engagement (CE) studios to provide insight for best practices in creating and implementing culturally appropriate studies with ethnoracially diverse women regarding topics of UF. Our CE studios set the foundation for the second aim, which will be in-depth interviews assessing the sociocultural impacts among pre-menopausal BW and HL with UF. The women will be recruited through the FFs social media platform. To address lack of treatment options in UF, we will be focusing on JAK 2/3 pathway. We will be performing immunofluorescence on tissue microarrays on over 100 patient samples with extensive clinical and survey data. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We held two CE studios, one with BW with UF and another with HL without UF. These participants were chosen as patient stakeholders. One theme from the CE studio was that both groups mentioned a cultural impact around menstrual health and UF discussions. The participant stakeholders provided insight to other influences in their journey that will be used to develop the interview guide questions for Aim 2. We expect the individual interviews to show similar experiences as our CE studio experiences. We anticipate more in-depth conversations about the sociocultural and ethnoracial factors impacting UF treatment. For Aim 3, we hypothesize that there will be increased JAK 2/3 expression in UF of patients with higher sympton burden and larger fibroid volume. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Implementing a community-engaged research framework provides a foundation for qualitative and translational gynecologic research in BW and HL. This project will contribute insight to their UF experience. There is a lack of innovative treatments, and we have access to valuable patient tissue and data that can be used for potential molecular targets.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The purpose of this study is to evaluate average pain scores in patients with Hidradenitis Suppurativa (HS) and determine if racial disparities influence HS-related pain management. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We surveyed 3,140 adult patients about demographics, HS, pain levels, medical history, and health-related quality of life. Among respondents (N=162), pain scores (0-10) were grouped as high (8+, N=54) and low (<7, N=108). We used logistic regression to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Respondents were female (88.9%), Black race (59.4%), with a median age of 36 (IQR 25-42) and a mean pain score of 7 (IQR 5-8). Half (48.2%) of respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with, “I am satisfied with how my pain related to HS is being managed by my doctors.” Independent risk factors for high pain included Black race (aOR=7.95, 95% CI 3.11-20.26), history of prescribed pain medications (aOR=2.37, 95% CI 1.06-5.30), and former/current tobacco use (aOR=4.12, 95% CI 1.76-9.64). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The preliminary data support the hypothesis that race influences HS-related pain. In addition, less education, a history of prescription pain medication use, and tobacco use are all independent risk factors contributing to higher pain scores in patients with HS. Further analysis will be conducted to evaluate racial influences on pain management.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To describe and evaluate an innovative university-community vaccination and food access model for minority, immigrant, and underserved individuals experiencing food insecurity during a global pandemic. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The Purdue University Center for Health Equity and Innovation (CHEqI) partnered with the two largest food banks in the Midwest and Walgreens to offer free COVID-19 and Flu vaccinations alongside food distribution. Goals included addressing food insecurity, increasing vaccine access, and decreasing vaccine hesitancy. CHEqI acquired funding, recruited volunteers and interpreters, assessed interest and addressed vaccine hesitancy. Food bank/pantry partners distributed food and provided access to clientele and marketing assistance. Walgreens procured, administered, and documented vaccinations. The Model accommodated drive-through and indoor processes. Unidentifiable observational and self-report data were collected. Descriptive statistics were computed to characterize program outcomes. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: A total of 11 vaccination events occurred between June and October 2021 at three food bank/pantry locations. Of these 11 events, nine (82%) were drive-through and two (18%) took place indoors, eight (72%) offered COVID-19 vaccinations only, and three (27%) offered both COVID-19 and Flu vaccinations. Food was distributed to a total of 5,108 families and 416 vaccines (314 COVID, 102 Flu) were administered. Of the 396 individuals who received at least one vaccine, 20 (5%) received both a COVID and Flu vaccine. Of the 386 individuals who received at least one vaccine and reported their sex, 194 (50%) identified as female and the average age of those who received at least one vaccine was 45 years old. Of those who reported race (N = 228) or ethnicity (N = 253), 43% identified as Black or African American and 53% identified as LatinX. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Findings offer an innovative vaccination and food access model for diverse individuals experiencing food insecurity during a global pandemic. By drawing on cost effective, accessible, and culturally contextualized practices to optimize the reach and quality of vaccination services we can improve access barriers and mitigate health disparities.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Health inequities represent complex structural and systematic processes that lead to disparate outcomes for populations or subgroups within populations. This project aims to improve the available structural and systematic approaches to the study of such inequities at the population level. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Using examples from diabetes research, two critical factors that may impact the validity or utility of health equity models will be examined; and proposed methodological approaches to offsetting potentially resulting biases will be offered. The factors include: (1) inequitably missing and misclassified data in large datasets and (2) the presumed positioning of socially constructed variables such as race, ethnicity, and gender within modeled structural and systematic mechanisms. This examination intersects theories and praxis in epidemiological modeling and health equity promotion with the goal of advancing rigorous, equity-focused epidemiological methods. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Inequitably missing and misclassified data are generally expected to obscure inequities. Treatment of missing or misclassified data as informative measures of inequity is expected to partially offset this bias. The implicitly modeled components of socially constructed variables are expected to be non-uniform across structural and systematic mechanisms of inequity. Models that apply these variables as informatively heterogeneous constructs, using multi-phase analyses to test modeling assumptions and to assess intersectionality, may provide better context about the mechanisms by which inequity has been distributed and, perhaps, by which equity may be achieved. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Equitable epidemiological methods are essential to the advancement of evidence-based health equity on the population level. Potential structural or systematic inequities in large-scale datasets and traditional data analyses should be thoughtfully reviewed through a health equity lens.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: We were interested in health equity research for each CTSA-affiliated institution, specifically focusing on cross department and cross-campus co-authorship. We conducted a bibliometric analysis of our CTSA-funded papers relating to diversity and inclusion to identify cross department and cross-campus collaborations. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We worked with our CTSAs Racial Justice, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Task Force to conduct an environmental scan of diversity and inclusion research across our CTSA partner institutions. Using the Scopus database, searches were constructed to identify and retrieve the variety of affiliations for each of the CTSA authors, a health equity/health disparities search hedge, and all of our CTSA grant numbers. We limited the dates from the beginning of our CTSA in 2008-November 2021. We used PubMed to retrieve all MeSH terms for the articles. We used Excel to analyze the data, Python and NCBIs Entrez Programming Utilities to analyze MeSH terms, and VOSviewer to produce the visualizations. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The results of this search yielded 94 articles overall. We broke these up into subsets (not mutually exclusive) to represent five of the researcher groups across our CTSA. We analyzed the overall dataset for citation count, normalized citation count, CTSA average authors, gender trends, and co-term analysis. We also developed cross department co-authorship maps and cross-institutional/group co-authorship maps. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This poster will demonstrate both the current areas where cross-departmental and cross-institutional collaboration exists among our CTSA authors, as well as identify potential existing areas for collaboration to occur. These findings may determine areas our CTSA can support to improve institutional performance in addressing health equity.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Observational studies suggest unequal effects of COVID-19 on the population of the U.S. distinguished by race and ethnicity. Our primary research question: what are the demographic differences among patients identified with concurrent ischemic stroke and COVID-19 positivity? METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The National Covid Cohort Collaboration (N3C) data was used to identify patients with concurrent COVID-19 and stroke, operationally defined as those with a COVID diagnosis and inpatient admission for ischemic stroke 1 week before or 6 weeks after their COVID diagnosis. The data was further age restricted (18-65 years) and a categorical variable was created representing payer plans (Medicaid, Medicare, Other insurance). Data on patients race/ethnicity, comorbidities, treatments administered (Remdesivir and ECMO) and insurance information was analyzed using various exploratory data methods and visualizations. Logistic regression was implemented to model the relationship between variables (dependent/independent) in the cohorts. Model complexity was analyzed using the F test of significance. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Taken as a whole, the data contained over 7 billion rows and around 6.4 million persons (~ 2.15 million of whom were COVID+). The main cohort of individuals with concurrent COVID positivity and ischemic stroke made up around 0.29% of the original COVID+ group, and the payer plan sub-cohort consists of around 29.26% of our main cohort. Black/African American (AA) and the Hispanic/Latino any Race have younger distributions (median ~ 65 years), while the White Non-Hispanic group has the oldest distribution (median ~ 70 years). Black/AA had the highest average number of comorbidities per patient (4.49), compared to white non-Hispanic (3.39) and Asian non-Hispanic (2.59). In our analysis, Medicaid patients had lower odds of obtaining ECMO (p < .01), there was no significant difference in Remdesivir treatment. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: We found the N3C data to be useful in studying a distinct group of patients, and exploring COVID-19 and ischemic stroke treatment across patients’ race/ethnicity identities and insurance status. Our exploratory analysis provides a foundation for further insight into demographic trends and discrepancies in apportionment of treatment.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To engage community partners in full spectrum of translational sciences participants will: 1. Develop community-based research projects. 2. Evaluate pilot awards submitted to the Community Advisory Board for funding. 3. Actively participate in the research cores at the CTSC METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The Academy workshop curriculum supports an in-depth examination of the translational research process, introduction to the CTSC Community Advisory Board; as well as to community based participatory research; grant evaluation process, and the need for active community involvement in various cores, and clinical trials. Workshops presented by tenured professionals and community leaders with multi-media out of class assignments. Scheduled sessions were 1 hour, and 15 minutes. Exams given post class session with a mean score of 22.8/30 for session 1 and a mean score of 23.80/30 for session 2. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The Community Research Academy (CRA) has thus far held for two sessions. Of the 45 enrollees, 20 completed the entire program. Of those, ten have joined the CAB board; and three have actively participated in the pilot award review process. One of the CRA graduates will be publishing her photo novella assignment in Health Affairs. One person changed careers,: and several people have taken all the classes for a second time. Many participants originally came from our faith-based connections. Now word of mouth is expanding the program. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Community engagement ensures that the fresh voices of diverse populations are involved in translational science. Their input ultimately leads to creating novel clinical innovations; such community-driven ingenuity which addresses the deeply felt needs of those communities.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Alachua TranQuility was formed in early 2016 to address needs of transgender people in Alachua County, Florida and surrounding areas. Increasing awareness of gender identity issues created a growing population in need of additional health and social services to counter the negative health outcomes traditionally experienced by transgender people. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The group met monthly at UF HealthStreet, a CTSA community engagement program, where social and medical referrals and opportunities to participate in research were made available to attendees. Those attending included transgender and gender non-conforming individuals as well as family, friends and other allies. Outreach was conducted through social media, physical fliers, and tabling at community events. TranQuility partnered with local LGBTQ organizations to promote activities. Leadership was provided by a steering committee that changed over time, with feedback from attendees guiding planning. Simultaneous to TranQuilitys founding, a Youth Gender Clinic was established at UF Health, clearly demonstrating the need for services aimed at the transgender population. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Between February 2016 and September 2019, attendance at meetings was logged per HealthStreet protocols. Age of attendees ranged from 10 to 75, and most were non-Hispanic whites. More than 300 individuals attended meetings across time, and many attended multiple meetings, with greater than 15% having attended five or more meetings. Attendance averaged around 30+ each month, with a high of 76. Educational programming was offered, such as information on hormone therapy and name/gender marker change, and a parent support group was formed to meet concurrently with the main group. Social opportunities were very popular, as a safe place for people to present as their authentic selves. The coronavirus pandemic curtailed in-person meetings at HealthStreet in 2020, but the group plans to return to this format in 2022. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: TranQuility has become an established organization to which other groups provide referrals. Qualitatively it is clear that many people have been positively impacted. An ongoing discussion for the group, however, has been to improve outreach to transgender people of color, who typically suffer from the most discrimination and anti-trans violence.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To increase diversity in clinical and translational research (CTR), to strengthen protections for uninsured and under-insured study participants from vulnerable groups by addressing their medical, ancillary care and psycho-social needs and to develop a systematic ethically sound approach to addressing such needs in the study protocol and budget. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We conducted) ethical analyses of: (1) the regulatory and ethics scholarship concerning protections and duty of care to research participants from vulnerable groups, and 2) arguments concerning the nature and scope of ancillary care obligations of researchers, as well as 3) a review of the applicable local, federal, and international regulations and practices concerning the duty of care to CTR participants and potential participants who are uninsured, under-insured and/or undocumented members of vulnerable groups. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Uninsured and underinsured study participants pose major ethical challenges for CTR as medical needs arising during a study are usually covered by the participants own insurance. Lack of health insurance increases vulnerability and creates (1) a barrier to research participation for members of socially disenfranchised groups, (2) risk of discriminatory exclusion of such participants from clinical studies, and (3) inter-institutional inconsistencies in meeting their medical needs; thus limiting diversity in CTR. To address the challenges, we propose an inclusive, systematic, ethically sound approach, which deliberately plans for and provides resources within a study protocol to address the medical and psycho-social needs of uninsured participants during and beyond the study. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Including diverse participants in CTR ensures data quality and social justice. PIs and IRBs should adopt an inclusive approach to the medical needs of vulnerable uninsured participants, plan for their medical and ancillary care needs in the protocol and budget, list community resources, provide follow-up support and note assistance in their files.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Our goal is three-fold: (1) to enhance protections for research participants in decentralized clinical trials (DCT) by (2) identifying the ethical and regulatory challenges posed by DCT and (3) considering possible solutions to the ethical and regulatory challenges of DCT. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A literature review was conducted to identify the ethical and regulatory challenges of DCT. The review showed that, with few exceptions, the publications on DCT have been written by IT experts, researchers or representatives of the pharma industry. There are hardly any independent or multidisciplinary analyses of DCT, e.g., by ethicists, medical sociologists or patients. This suggests that, currently, the potential advantages of digitized clinical research are still to be tested empirically and confirmed independently. Ethical analyses of DCT are particularly scant, which points to a gap in the current understanding of the ethical and regulatory implications of DCT and the issues they raise. Our research used the method of ethical analysis to examine the ethical challenges and to consider possible solutions. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We identify the following ethical challenges of DCT: (1) challenges related to modifications of research protocols to allow for decentralized activities; (2) lack of expertise for ethical review and approval of digital tools; (3) different regulatory standards of privacy for clinical trials and for commercial digital tools, (4) risks to participants privacy and confidentiality involving both data and physical privacy; (5) the impact of the digital divide on DCT, (6) technology-related subject selection bias and marginalization of vulnerable groups, (7) imposing new burdens on research subjects and caregivers due to technology needs and smaller research teams, (8) restricted access to the study team, and (9) impact of digital technology on informed consent and participant understanding. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: DCT became the primary form of clinical research during the COVID-19 pandemic. DCT rely on a wide range of internet-based tools for recruitment, informed consent, data collection, health monitoring, and communication with participants. The tools pose ethical and regulatory challenges, which should be addressed to ensure participant well-being.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The Indiana CTSI Strategy Committee charged the Racial Justice and Health Equity Taskforce to identify priorities with short-term and long-term goals consistent with the I-CTSI mission. In addition, I-CTSI leadership asked for a general description of current state and the resources necessary to achieve the proposed goals. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The Taskforce applied an inclusive excellence model to the way we look at the I-CTSI structure, policies, and programs while performing an environmental scan within and across I-CTSI partner institutions. In order to reach equitable solutions and consensus, listening tours were held with partner stakeholders guided by the SOAR framework for strategic planning. This approach allowed us to assess current resources, needs, and gaps across the system, along with a baseline of measures currently monitored. Taskforce members openly discussed strengths and opportunities for enhancement of current programs and services. In addition, these conversations offered an opportunity to disrupt existing practices and through collective agency we identified priority areas that promote equity, diversity and inclusion. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The Taskforce identified recurring themes in conversations with all partners, which led to the formation of three working groups that examined recruitment broadly: workforce, staffing, and research participation; professional development across all stakeholders from community members to I-CTSI staff; and data-centered metrics informing current state, decision-making, and accountability. Recommendations included these priorities, content, and implementation strategies. The Taskforce delivered a report to the I-CTSI leadership fostering the promotion of diversity, equity and inclusion along with a systematic collection of gender, race, and ethnicity data for individuals utilizing I-CTSI services and resources requiring additional metrics and tracking. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The pandemic shed light on the manner in which marginalized groups are rendered particularly vulnerable to death and disease by systemic and structural racism. The I-CTSI recognized that we cannot advance population health without attending to root causes of inequity and that includes our internal structure. We offer a potential model for other CTSAs.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The goals of the proposed project are to 1) identify the critical components of trust required by Black Women to build a visible expression of trust within their reproductive health space, and 2) incorporate the elements of trust identified into a mindfulness-based communication tool, for reproductive health care providers. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We will be applying a mixed-methods approach inclusive of questionnaires and focus groups. Aim 1: Our study population consists of persons who identify as 18+ Black Women in Alachua County, Florida.Aim 2: Our Population within the reproductive health space (e.g., ob-gyn, midwives, nurse practitioners, etc…) at the University of Florida Shands Hospital. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We anticipate that our results will fully engage with our Black Women in dialogues about key components of trust they want to experience and have within their reproductive space. This will inform the development of the mindfulness-based tool which will be incorporated with continuous insights with our Black Women. The proposed research project will contribute to the call for health equity. We aim to address this barrier by recognizing the agency of Black women to conceptualize trust on their terms, which we then would incorporate into applied trainings of reproductive health providers to establish trust. Health equity will take a considerable amount of social change at many levels and this study aims to better understand the process. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Structural racism and health disparities are linked with the disproportionate loss of Black women and associated negative birth outcomes. Our work will provide needed insights regarding mistrust in patient-provider relationships. Inform the development of a feasible tool challenging implicit bias in health provider spaces.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Many older sepsis survivors develop chronic critical illness (CCI) with poor outcomes. Sepsis is caused by a dysregulated immune response and biomarkers reflecting PICS. The purpose was to compare serial PICS biomarkers in a) older (versus young) adults and b) older CCI (versus older RAP) patients to gain insight into underlying pathobiology of CCI. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Prospective longitudinal study with young (≤ 45 years) and older (≥ 65 years) septic adults who were characterized by a) baseline predisposition, b) hospital outcomes, c) serial SOFA organ dysfunction scores over 14 days, d) Zubrod Performance status at three, six and 12-month follow-up and e) mortality over 12 months. Serial blood samples over 14 days were analyzed for selected biomarkers reflecting PICS. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Compared to the young, more older adults developed CCI (20% vs 42%) and had markedly worse serial SOFA scores, performance status and mortality over 12 months. Additionally, older (versus young) and older CCI (versus older RAP) patients had more persistent aberrations in biomarkers reflecting inflammation, immunosuppression, stress metabolism, lack of anabolism and anti-angiogenesis over 14 days after sepsis. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Older (versus young) and older CCI (versus older RAP) patient subgroups demonstrate early biomarker evidence of the underlying pathobiology of PICS. The population of older sepsis survivors is need of interventions to lower systemic inflammation and stimulate anabolism to prevent skeletal muscle wasting and disability.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The overarching objective is to assess the value of promoting team science practices across a diverse clinical translational science community through the development of learning modules. We aim to share lessons learned to help inform best practices for CTSA hubs interested in promoting team science. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We recently created a series of self-paced learning modules focused on the science of team science, which include a variety of text and multimedia content. A preliminary assessment was conducted to determine the perceived value of six video team science Learning Shots and to identify areas for improvement. Significant content revisions are underway based on respondent feedback. In early 2022, a follow up survey will solicit feedback from a larger sample of researchers to reassess the learning modules and to ensure that desired improvements were achieved. We will incorporate continuous improvement cycles to gather future feedback, track improvements, and identify potential future direction for new content. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The preliminary assessment identified the most effective aspects of the modules to be the variety and knowledge of speakers, diversity of topics, organization of the content, and appropriateness of length. Least effective aspects included a desire for more information in some content areas and not enough focus on the challenges of team science for junior faculty. Suggested areas for improvement include a desire for supplemental descriptive text, links to tools that enable teams to be productive, and additional examples from researchers. The follow up study is expected to yield more detailed information on the impacts of the improvements and the overall effectiveness of the modules. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This project provides insights for CTSA Hubs interested in promoting team science and best practices when developing learning modules. Results contribute to what is known about researchers interest in learning about team science and the effectiveness of using online formats for delivery.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Diabetes is related to risk for heart disease, stroke, high blood pressure, and COVID-19. It is exacerbated by built/social environment issues, e.g., food insecurity, access to healthy foods and health care, and other poverty-related factors. Our goal is to assess the efficacy of an integrated care model for patients with poorly controlled diabetes. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We utilize an integrated, team-based approach to diabetes treatment. In a traditional care model, too little focus is on social determinants and their impacts on health and well-being. Our project involves enrollment of patients with diabetes in an intervention whereby their medical care is integrated with intensive diabetes education and provision of social and other health services, including diet and nutrition, exercise, provision of foods and nutritional supplements, and other support services as needed to achieve optimal health and to reduce morbidity and unnecessary hospitalization and emergency room visits. Subjects are underserved patients treated through our non-profit community clinic partners. We track metrics including individual outcomes, organizational outcomes, and collective impact. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We anticipate that patients enrolled in this study will demonstrate significant improvements in diabetes control and management. Clinical improvements will include better glycemic control, improved hypertension and dyslipidemia management, reduced complications, and increased preventive measures including foot, eye and oral health exams and monitoring of microalbuminuria. Overall, we anticipate decreased frequency of hospitalizations and readmissions as well as decreased frequency of emergency care visits for treatment of diabetes-related issues. We expect patients to experience enhanced self-efficacy, increased physical activity, and improved quality of life. Their outcomes will be compared to controls receiving the standard medical regimen, matched on age, race, gender, and time of onset. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: These activities will improve understanding of factors influencing diabetes outcomes at individual and upstream levels. It will inform food distribution and models of care for improved patient outcomes, including social determinants of health and will establish new protocols for community-based provision of health care to our most vulnerable.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Our primary objective was to determine the demographic and linguistic characteristics of research coordinators (RCs) in a large pediatric emergency medicine research collaborative network. Our secondary objective was to determine if the RCs perceived any impact of those characteristics on their duties. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We conducted a 15-question electronic survey of RCs at the member institutions of the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN). A total of 74 potential respondents were identified and received the survey. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Fifty-three surveys (71.6%) were completed. Most respondents identified as female; white; and not Hispanic or Latino. Fourteen respondents (26.4%) identified as underrepresented minorities in medicine (UIM), which is similar to the percentage of UIM among the general population (30%). Twenty-eight respondents (52%) felt that their race/ethnicity positively impacted recruitment efforts. Twenty-three respondents (43%) felt that their ability to speak a language other than English positively impacted recruitment efforts. Four female respondents felt that their gender hindered their recruitment activities and impacted their sense of belonging within the research team. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: RCs felt that their backgrounds and attributes positively impacted subject recruitment. However, some female coordinators felt negatively impacted by their gender. Increasing diversity amongst clinical research professionals and incorporating team cultural humility practices, may help increase diversity among clinical research subjects.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The use of Human Centered Design (HCD) to improve the quality of team science is a recent application, and HCDs benefits and challenges have not been rigorously evaluated. We conducted a qualitative study with health sciences researchers trained in HCD methods to determine how they applied HCD methods and perceived its benefits and challenges. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The University of Pittsburgh offered HCD training to three cohorts of research scientists (staff as well as faculty) over a three-year period. The training was provided by the LUMA Institute, a premier HCD design firm with a highly regarded training program. We then evaluated this training by conducting 1-hour, semi-structured interviews with trainees from three training cohorts. Interviews focused on perceptions of the training, subsequent uses of HCD, barriers and facilitators, and perceptions of the utility of HCD to science teams. Data analysis was conducted using Braun and Clarkes process for thematic analysis. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We interviewed 18 researchers (nine faculty and nine staff) trained in HCD methods and identified distinct themes regarding HCD use and its perceived benefits and challenges. Trainees found HCD relevant to research teams for stakeholder engagement, research design, project planning, meeting facilitation, and team management. They also described benefits of HCD in five distinct areas: creativity, egalitarianism, structure, efficiency, and visibility. We also identified challenges, including tensions between HCD approaches and academic culture. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Our data suggest that HCD has the potential to help researchers work more inclusively and collaboratively on interdisciplinary teams and generate more innovative and impactful science. The application of HCD methods is not without challenges; however, we believe these challenges can be overcome with institutional investment.