OBJECTIVES/GOALS: During earlier periods of the pandemic, Black and Latinx populations in Michigan have suffered higher rates of infection, hospitalization, and deaths when compared to Whites. We conducted this study to understand how Black and Latinx residents perceived this disproportionate burden. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: In 2021, 40 semi-structured interviews were conducted virtually in English or Spanish with Black (n=24) and Latinx (n=16) residents in Michigan areas highly impacted by COVID-19: Genesee, Kent, Washtenaw, and Wayne counties. Using a Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) approach, we partnered with leaders from 15 community-based organizations and health and human service agencies to develop research questions, an interview protocol, and to interpret the data. We used the data analysis software Dedoose (ver 4.12) for inductive coding (IRR=0.81). This study is a part of the NIH Community Engagement Alliance (CEAL) Against COVID-19 initiative. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Participants described the significant impact of the pandemic in terms of physical and mental health, job security, and the sheer number of deaths among loved ones. They attributed the impact to comorbidities and social determinants of health disparities exacerbated by the pandemic, including income, housing, access to healthcare, as well as systemic racism. They noted being overrepresented among frontline workers with higher exposure to COVID-19, limited or misinformation about the virus, language barriers, and difficulty with social distancing. Cultural norms that promote being in close proximity, such as intergenerational households, and loss of trusted community leaders were also noted. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Findings reflect the needs of Black and Latinx community members in Michigan and the discussions they feel are important to highlight. We must work strategically with partners and the community to provide transparency and effective leadership, and prioritize addressing systemic disparities in SDoH.

Objectives/Goals: Trainees in clinical and translational science (CTS) must learn to effectively communicate their research ideas and findings to a range of audiences. As part of our science communication curriculum, we developed ORAL and WRITTEN science communication rubrics for our trainees to use across their courses and research activities. Methods/Study Population: The Tufts CTS Graduate Program is the training core of the Tufts CTSI and its associated pre- and post-doctoral T32 awards. Approximately 10 trainees with a range of backgrounds (e.g., physicians, medical students, master’s-level researchers, and basic science PhDs) matriculate each year. Faculty members and staff with expertise in science communication and pedagogy formed a committee to develop the rubrics. Because oral and written communication require different skills, we developed separate rubrics for each. We reviewed our current science communication curriculum, reviewed existing communication rubrics, and identified common mistakes students make. Following pilot testing by students and faculty pilot for one semester, we modified the rubrics based on informal feedback. Results/Anticipated Results: Both rubrics include a section to identify the target audience and specific items organized by theme. Oral rubric themes include presentation content, slides, verbal communication, nonverbal communication, and following instructions. Written rubric themes include overall, manuscript/proposal sections, and following instructions. The rubrics serve as feedback tools for faculty and students to evaluate work others produce and as self-evaluation tools. Feedback elements include a 4-point rating for each rubric item, open text feedback for each theme, and an open text holistic assessment. We now use the rubrics in our study design course, which features student presentations of planned research, and in our writing course. We anticipate collecting formal student feedback to further evaluate the rubrics. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Our rubrics can supplement existing science communication training and can be integrated into all CTS coursework and research activities. For future clinical and translational scientists to have the greatest impact, they must learn to effectively communicate findings to multiple audiences, ranging from experts in their field to the general public.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: HelpBeatCOVID19.org, a novel self-reporting symptom tracking surveillance system, is based at the University of Alabama, Birmingham. Helpbeatcovid19.org captures social determinants of health (SDOH) data. This presentation will report research in progress to understand the utility of self-reported data with communicable disease outbreaks. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Individuals voluntarily completed an online questionnaire at HelpBeatCOVID19.org which captured SDOH data and other disease surveillance variables including zip code, gender, age group, race, ethnicity, symptoms, underlying conditions, type of home (e.g., single-family, mobile home, etc.), and household COVID-19 diagnosis status. The data are stored on HIPAA-compliant servers. De-identified self-reported data were culled from the HelpBeatCOVID19 database, cleaned, sorted, and analyzed by zip code. Using STATA/SE 16.1, we employed regression analysis to determine if there might be any statistically significant associations that could be made based on zip codes, especially where there are health disparities in historically African American neighborhoods in Jefferson County. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: To date, 102,308 people have reported their symptoms in HelpBeatCOVID19. Of those, 77,903 are from Alabama. More than half of the people who completed HelpBeatCOVID19.org reported zero symptoms. However, 19.3% of Alabamians reported having underlying health conditions. Midfield, AL, a predominantly African-American neighborhood (81.1%), has 74.1% of people reporting underlying conditions where the median household income is $38,750. By comparison, Vestavia Hills, AL, a more affluent neighborhood with an 88.8% White population and median household income being $109,485, had more people participating in HelpBeatCOVID19 (3,920), yet a smaller percentage (15.2%) with underlying health conditions. Final results will be reported during the ACTS Conference. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Our analysis of the data reveals that in Jefferson County, AL, a greater number of people in affluent communities participated in the study. Whereas state-wide, a greater percentage of individuals indicated that they had zero symptoms. Identifying self-reported underlying conditions that impact persons with COVID-19 symptoms will be significant.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Penn State CTSI supports KL2 career development awards for faculty seeking to become leaders in clinical and translational research. CTSAs can benefit from a better understanding of KL2 applicant profiles and trainee outcomes. Predictive modeling of KL2 records provides insights into institutional processes and continuous improvement goals. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Collecting KL2 application records at Penn State CTSI from 2017 to 2023, comprising both accepted and not accepted candidate profiles, this study used a generalized logistic mixed model with binomial distribution to understand the factors predictive of KL2 trainee acceptance, (n=47). The following factors were modeled as potentially predictive of scholars’ acceptance: Institution-specific Processes—Campus; Terminal Degree Type; College of Residency, Applicant Demographics and Portfolio—Minoritized or Protected Groups; Mean Application Score; Rurality Focus; Gender, and Outcomes—Post-Program h-index. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Only Campus and Degree were significant factors predictive of trainee acceptance (r<.0001), with a particular campus and the MD degree-designation both exerting selectional pressures on acceptance rates. Applicant demographics were not significant historical factors in selection despite the most recent trainee cohort comprised of all women. Similarly, while our CTSA focuses on rural inequality and accessibility, a research proposal focused on rurality was not a significant factor for acceptance. Notably, NIH-scaled application scores and post-program h-indices were not significant for accepted and non-accepted applicants. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The absence of applicant-focused selectional pressure is striking—Penn State CTSI does not significantly select for gender, URM, or URP status. Administration is now empowered to intentionally engage, recruit, and retain from our other affiliated campuses and colleges.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Metabolic syndrome (MetSyn) is a risk for World Trade Center-Lung Injury (WTC-LI; defined as developing FEV1<lower limit of normal [LLN]). Metabolic health is a modifiable disease risk factor. We propose to characterize how time-dependent covariates of MetSyn are longitudinally associated with WTC-LI. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: WTC-particulate exposed firefighters, consented, with pre-9/11 FEV1 LLN (N = 5,746). Data assessed from last pre-9/11 till August 1, 2017. Longitudinal MetSyn characteristics were assessed using 3 models: i. A linear mixed effect model to assess the effect size of longitudinal MetSyn and its components on longitudinal FEV1% predicted as an outcome; ii. a time-dependent Cox regression to assess the associations of MetSyn to time of onset of WTC-LI; iii. a novel, partially linear single index regression model with repeatedly measured MetSyn to assess their joint effects and delineate their relative contribution on the longitudinal lung function in the WTC-FDNY cohort. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: In Model I, BMI 30 kg/m2 had the largest effect size compared to ever-smoking, with −2.524 (95%CI: −2.708,−2.340) compared to −1.681(−2.325,−1.038) respectively. Having MetSyn, defined as 3/5 risk factors, had an effect size of −2.319(−2.526,−2.112). In Model II, hazards of triglycerides 150mg/dL were highest at 1.497(1.336, 1.677), followed by BMI 30 kg/m2 at 1.406(1.256, 1.575), and HDL<40mg/dL 1.355(1.176-1.561), compared to ever-smoking (1.201, p = 0.002). Having high exposure to PM by being present in the morning of 9/11 was a significant covariate only in Model II investigating HDL<40mg/dL or triglycerides 150mg/dL. Model III The proposed methods will be applied to our cohort study. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: MetSyn is both a predictor and concurrent marker of WTC-LI. The single index model can not only reduce dimensionality of the covariates, but also provides efficient estimates of the joint MetSyn effects, allowing linear or nonlinear effects. Future studies will investigate dietary intervention as a potential disease-modifying factor. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DESCRIPTION: NA, nothing to disclose.

ABSTRACT IMPACT: E-values can help quantify the amount of unmeasured confounded necessary to fully explain away a relationship between treatment and outcomes in observational data. OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Older patients with HL have worse outcomes than younger patients, which may reflect treatment choice (e.g., fewer chemotherapy cycles). We studied the relationship between treatment intensity and 3-year overall survival (OS) in SEER-Medicare. We calculated an E-value to quantify the unmeasured confounding needed to explain away any relationship. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: This retrospective cohort study of SEER-Medicare data from 1999-2016 included 1131 patients diagnosed with advanced stage HL at age ≥65 years. Treatment was categorized as: (1) full chemotherapy regimens (‘full regimen’, n=689); (2) partial chemotherapy regimen (‘partial regimen’, n=175); (3) single chemotherapy agent or radiotherapy (‘single agent/RT’, n=102), or (4) no treatment (n=165). A multivariable Cox regression model estimated the relationship between treatment and 3-year OS, adjusting for disease and patient factors. An E-value was computed to quantify the minimum strength of association that an unmeasured confounder would need to have with both the treatment and OS to completely explain away a significant association between treatment and OS based on the multivariable model. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Results from the multivariable model found higher hazards of death for partial regimens (HR=1.81, 95% CI=1.43, 2.29), single agent/RT (HR=1.74, 95% CI=1.30, 2.34), or no treatment (HR=1.98, 95% CI=1.56, 2.552) compared to full regimens. We calculated an E-value for single agent/RT because it has the smallest HR of the treatment levels. The observed HR of 1.74 could be explained away by an unmeasured confounder that was associated with both treatment and OS with a HR of 2.29, above and beyond the measured confounders; the 95% CI could be moved to include the null by an unmeasured confounder that was associated with both the treatment and OS with a HR of 1.69. Of the measured confounders, B symptoms had the strongest relationship with treatment (HR=2.08) and OS (HR=1.38), which was below the E-value. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDINGS: Patients with advanced stage HL who did not receive full chemotherapy regimens had worse 3-year OS, even after adjusting for potential confounders related to the patient and disease. The E-value analysis made explicit the amount of unmeasured confounding necessary to fully explain away the relationship between treatment and OS.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Enhancing Patient Safety for hospitalized patients is a priority for healthcare facilities, providers, and federal funding agencies. Multidisciplinary partnerships in clinical and translational research better defines the scope of complex patient-safety issues, and is part of more effectively developing interventions. The discipline represented by engineering-trained partners brings valuable perspective to patient safety problems through their training background in human factors and systems analysis. The objective of this education program was to create and implement a collaboration between engineering students and clinical providers. Through the Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, a multidisciplinary partnership was created, to identify contributing factors, and suggest novel solutions, to key patient safety problems using an ethnographic research approach. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The collaboration was formed between the following Johns Hopkins (JH) groups: (1) The Institute for Clinical and Translational Research (ICTR), (2) The Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety, (3) The JH Hospital Clinical Engineering Services, (4) The Homecare Group, (5) The Masters of Science in Engineering Management Program at the Whiting School of Engineering, and (6) The JH Hospital Risk Management. All 6 provided representation to contribute to the planning, structure, and implementation of the project. The initial cohort was 24 masters students enrolled in the JHU Whiting School of engineering, and included 46% men, 54% women, and 75% international students. Students were placed in teams of 2–3 to work on 9 distinct patient safety concerns, as provided by the Armstrong Institute as priority. Potential clinical hosts from the appropriate clinical departments were vetted for feasibility and scope before students were assigned to them. Students and clinical hosts were oriented to the process. The students then spent 3–6 hours a week, for 7 weeks, observing and interacting with patients and health professionals at their specific clinical sites, conducting ethnographic research under the guidance of their hosts. Ethnographic research is the systematic investigation of a culture or system; in our application, teams were looking at the environment, culture, and its contributing factors, with respect to patient safety issues. Teams made observations, then formulated hypothesis and collected data relevant to what systems factors may be contributing to the patient safety issue. Following data collection and analyses, teams made recommendations for culture and/or systems shifts that could impact change and improve patient safety. Ethnography research process training is a tenet of the training undertaken by all Masters of Science in Engineering Management Students. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: At the end of the 7-week project, each team generated a comprehensive report suggesting potential solutions for each problem, and gave presentations on their findings to their peers, clinical hosts, and JHU steering committee representatives. Requirements on the student side included a midterm, final presentation, and report. Both students and site leaders submitted mid- and final program evaluations. Based on follow-up survey data, 71% of students said that the course may impact their career choice, 57% said the collaboration changed the way they viewed themselves, and 28% elected to continue working or were planning to work with their site in some fashion after the course ended. Nearly 60% of students believed additional funding or resources would benefit the course and 71% thought they would benefit from more or similar experiences with their clinical partners. Furthermore, 85% wanted to see the course expanded. Of the clinical hosts, 71% said that students added value, 86% believed students changed their perspective on their problem, unveiled new areas of investigation, and improved or likely would improve patient safety in their department. Seventy-one percent of hosts were actively acting on the students’ findings, and over 86% shared findings with their colleagues. Following the 7-week program, 2 teams also presented their findings to committees within the hospital departments, 2 patient-safety projects are being continued with engineering teams, and 2 new collaborative projects have been initiated. Based on the popularity of this program with the students, hosts, and teaching faculty, this will be implemented within the engineering curriculum for a second time next year. Additional outcomes data collection are currently ongoing, and we plan to continue to monitor and analyze results. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: In its first year our engineering collaboration exceeded expectations. Engineering students and clinical providers successfully worked toward tangible solutions that were directly applicable to patient care. Furthermore, interactions were both personally and professionally beneficial for students while simultaneously adding value to clinical hosts. Beyond the collaboration, this initiative allowed for secondary connections between engineers and clinicians that are also have great potential for resulting in translational innovation. Despite the overwhelming success of this project, it highlighted the need for increased resources for sustainability. Our pilot highlighted a role for funding with regards to: (1) students in the execution of their projects (eg, transportation to sites, prototype materials); (2) clinical hosts, particularly protecting time to interact with and lead student teams; (3) the Armstrong Institute—to aid the identification and prioritization of high impact, patient safety projects; and (4) the ICTR for staff to facilitate placements, student orientation to the hospital setting, and program execution and maintenance. Ultimately, this collaboration addressed an unmet need for the clinical providers as well as the engineering students: thus, all partners agree that (1) the impact of this pilot would be greatly magnified by more time, longer duration, and additional resources; and (2) this collaboration could provide a useful model for approaching other complex health care problems. In terms of larger and longer-term impact, engaging engineers at the training level together with clinicians provides early exposure, and could potentially prime them to continue collaborations with clinical and translational science, across their careers.

Student Research Assistant Acknowledgements: The authors thank Manik Arora, Alexandra Morani, and Thomas Cornish -- Johns Hopkins University.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The study aims to utilize event-related potentials (ERPs) coupled with observable reports of symptoms to comprehensively understand neurological and symptomatic profile of individuals at risk for developing psychosis. The study is a short-term longitudinal design which allows for examination of course as well as structure of illness. The primary outcome is to map known neuroclinical deficits among individuals with schizophrenia onto a high-risk, non-clinical sample. A secondary aim of the study is to demonstrate prediction of symptom severity over time measured by a combination of ERPs and clinical symptom scores. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Recruited participants are pre-screened for eligibility via telephone interview. This process includes administration of Community Assessment of Psychotic Experiences (CAPE), and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). During in-person lab assessment, participants provide written informed consent and complete a battery of ERP tasks, semi-structured clinical interviews, and self-report questionnaires that assess for presence and severity of sub-threshold psychotic-like experiences. Six months following the laboratory visit, participants will be provided a link to online questionnaires that were completed during laboratory visit in order to reassess presence and severity. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The target number of participants included in this study is 60. We hope to recruit individuals who range in symptom severity as measured by CAPE. It is of interest to determine relationship among known deficits in individuals with schizophrenia and individuals exhibiting sub-clinical symptoms of psychosis. Additionally, we plan to examine ERPs and symptoms together as a “profile” of high risk psychosis, yielding more robust information about this population than any one ERP or symptom measure alone. The within subjects design of this study allows for examination of symptom progression and potential prediction of symptoms based on brain activity. Many studies examine only single ERP components thus limiting the ability to draw broader conclusions regarding general cognitive frameworks among populations. We use a combination of well-validated ERPs (i.e. P300, N400, ERN) with behavioral and symptom data in order to predict variation in symptoms over the course of 6 months. The project aims to take a novel approach at identifying high-risk profiles based on neurophysiological and behavioral data and using this as a basis for predicting symptom severity across time. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Individuals endorsing psychotic-like experiences are at heightened risk for developing a psychotic disorder in the future, and have been linked with similar social, behavioral, and emotional risk factors similar to those of schizophrenia. Subjective data (e.g. self-report, interview) sheds light on important information regarding observable symptom manifestation; however, neural measures can detect relatively subtle deficits in information processing that precede and predict overt symptom onset, which necessitates other important methodological considerations. Specifically, extant literature has shown that quantifiable indices of cognitive deficits may represent a vulnerability to psychosis in high-risk populations, and can be measured using event-related potentials (ERPs). This study integrates a psychophysiological approach by mapping neural deficits from schizophrenia onto a high-risk sample. Many studies examine only single ERP components thus limiting the ability to draw broader conclusions regarding general cognitive frameworks among populations. We use a combination of well-validated ERPs (i.e. P300, N400, ERN) with behavioral and symptom data in order to predict variation in symptoms over the course of 6 months. The project aims to take a novel approach at identifying high-risk profiles based on neurophysiological and behavioral data and using this as a basis for predicting symptom severity across time. We will parse heterogeneity within a high-risk group in order to create innovative profiles and potentially predict variation in course of symptoms. In other words, a “fingerprint” physiologic aberration may be exhibited within high-risk individuals and can be used as biomarkers to identify those at risk even before onset of observable symptoms.

Translation of critical and broadly impactful health advancements is stymied by insufficient scientific scrutiny of barriers and roadblocks in the process. The Clinical & Translational Science Award (CTSA) funding opportunity announcement released in July 2021 makes clear the distinction between translational research and translational science (TS) and urges a shift from the former to the latter. This represents a significant shift in the overall scientific direction of the CTSA program and necessitates corresponding shifts in CTSA hub operations. To better support TS, the Team Science Core of the Duke CTSA hub designed and facilitated a virtual retreat for hub personnel that (1) enabled organizational learning about TS and (2) identified anticipated challenges and opportunities. A post-retreat survey was utilized to assess the degree to which the retreat met its stated goals. Our survey received a 62% response rate; 100% of respondents would recommend the session to others. Respondents also reported gains in all areas assessed, with evidence for greater understanding of TS and increased perspective of the value and relevance of TS. In this paper, we provide a roadmap for designing and implementing facilitated TS retreats, which we argue is a key step in TS capacity building through workforce development.

The Physician-Scientist Trainee Diversity Summit, hosted by the American Physician Scientists Association and the Burroughs Wellcome Fund, was conceived in 2019 with the mission of developing strategic plans to diversify the physician-scientist community using human-centered design thinking. In June 2024, the second iteration of this conference was held in Raleigh, North Carolina, and brought together a network of scientific and medical organizations to discuss issues of justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion facing physician-scientist trainees. This article summarizes the progress made from the first meeting, the proceedings of the 2024 Summit, and a thematic analysis of the recent meeting, offering tangible solutions to the physician-scientist community for supporting diversity and accessibility.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Prostate cancer treatment is associated with significant genitourinary side effects. There is a critical need for treatment with decreased morbidity. We report the development of a novel treatment paradigm combining irreversible electroporation and lower dose radiation to provide prostate cancer patients with a less morbid treatment. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Intermediate risk prostate cancer patients will undergo focal irreversible electroporation followed by low dose, whole gland radiation therapy. The primary endpoint is freedom from clinically significant cancer on biopsy at 12-month follow up. Secondary endpoints include safety profile, oncologic efficacy, effectiveness of RT and need for secondary treatment. This trial (NCT05345444) and currently actively recruiting patients after initial feasibility trial. Sample size is calculated to detect an increase in the proportion of patients who are cancer free at 1-year, from 0.80 to 0.95. An exact binomial test with a 10% one-sided significance level will have 94.3% power to detect the difference between the null and alternative hypothesis when the sample size is 42. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: This is a clinical trial in progress. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Combined irreversible electroporation (IRE) and a lower dose radiotherapy (RTIRE) may provide prostate cancer patients a treatment with minimal side effects.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Although parent involvement is recognized as an integral autism intervention component, and two-thirds of children are currently raised in 2-parent families, the majority of ASD parent research to date has focused on mother-implemented interventions, and fathers have been largely overlooked. However, fathers use interaction styles and language models that are different from mothers and may benefit children with ASD in unique ways. Thus there is a critical need in the field to expand our understanding of the potential contributions of various caregivers to communication outcomes. This investigation aimed to address this void in the research literature and contribute to clinical practice by including fathers in parent-implemented intervention, and adapting parent-implemented autism intervention to fit paternal interaction and communication styles. Specifically, this pilot study investigated the effects of a father-mediated intervention on parent use of responsive verbal and play strategies. Distal effects on child communication and pre-post changes in parental stress levels were also investigated. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A single subject, multiple baselines across strategies experiment was conducted with one dyad (i.e., father, child with ASD). In-home father coaching sessions were delivered weekly, targeting 4 responsive strategies (i.e., follow-in comments, follow-in directives, symbolic object play, rough-tumble play). Single subject designs are particularly suitable for autism interventions, as they allow for experimental control with participants who are from heterogeneous populations (McReynolds and Kearn, 1983). Child participant was 3 years, 1 month at the start of intervention and had previously received a received community diagnosis of ASD by a psychologist. Throughout the duration of the study, the child participant attended part-day community-based day care and received 20 hours per week of Applied Behavioral Analysis intervention both in-home and community daycare, as well as occupational therapy and speech-language therapy for 1 hour per week. The participating father was a biological parent who resided with the child continuously since birth. In addition, the father had no other formal parent training in communication intervention before participating. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The results of the father-implemented intervention program yielded positive results for both father and child participant. The father quickly achieved a high level of competency using 3 of the 4 targeted strategies (i.e., follow-in comments, follow-in directives, and rough-and-tumble/physical play). Follow-in comments were used more frequently than follow-in directives and rough-and-tumble play strategies were used more frequently than symbolic play. Child use of single words increased over baseline and beginning use of multiword utterances was documented. Pre-post changes in parental stress for participating father and his spouse were not significant, however patterns of change across Parental Stress Index subscales scores were noted. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This pilot investigation provided information regarding the treatment efficacy of a clinically relevant instructional program designed to enhance fathers’ ability to use responsive strategies to increase communicative acts or children with ASD. The results of this investigation advance clinical practice in the ASD field by providing intervention data relating to the efficacy of father-implemented instructional programs on child communication goals.

Objectives/Goals: The clinical research professional (CRP) workforce suffers from high turnover. Stay interviews have led to increased satisfaction and reduced turnover in other industries. We describe a multi-institutional project to develop, disseminate, and evaluate a CRP-tailored Stay Interview tool reimagined as the Individual Retention Conversation (IRC) toolkit. Methods/Study Population: In August 2022, following on the heels of a series of un-meeting conversations focused on CRP workforce development, the CRP taskforce initiated a working group to tackle issues related to CRP workforce retention. As a first initiative, this multi-institutional working group set out to develop, disseminate, and evaluate a Stay Interview tool tailored for a CRP audience and reimagined as the IRC toolkit. A 2-phase pilot study was initiated across six academic medical centers (AMCs: ASU, Duke, MUSC, UAB, UPenn, VCU) to: 1) optimize the toolkit for the CRP audience and 2) evaluate the impact of the toolkit using a standardized CRP satisfaction survey. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected via surveys using the REDCap platform. Results/Anticipated Results: The optimization phase of the pilot included 69 participants (16 managers and 53 of their CRP team members) from 6 AMCs. Respondents identified most and least useful questions for stimulating meaningful conversations regarding job satisfaction and retention issues with additional feedback on the IRC experience and tools. CRPs and managers represented a variety of roles, with 77% patient facing. The majority were satisfied with the IRC experience (82%) and found the experience personally beneficial (76%). Managers were satisfied with the manager’s guide (90%). Quantitative and qualitative feedback was used to optimize the toolkit prior to launch of phase 2 in September 2024, which includes a longitudinal survey-based assessment of CRP job satisfaction and IRC-consequent work environment changes. Discussion/Significance of Impact: CRP retention is impacted by complex factors, many related to job satisfaction, supervisor /employee relationships, and beneficial work environments. Initial evaluation of the IRC suggests that this intervention fosters positive supervisor/employee relationships and beneficial work environment changes, which may lead to improved retention.

Objectives/Goals: We designed a forum to educate participants about bioethical issues in the application of big data (BD) and artificial intelligence (AI) in clinical and translational research (CTR) in underrepresented populations. We sought to determine changes in participants’ interests in ethics, bias, and trustworthiness of AI and BD. Methods/Study Population: 141 individuals registered for the forum, which was advertised to our partner institutions, minority-serving institutions, and community organizations. Registrants received email instructions to complete an AI Trustworthiness (AI-Trust) survey, a questionnaire with integrated qualitative and quantitative measures designed to better understand learners who engaged with the institution-specific AI/Data Science curriculum. Respondents completed the survey using personal devices via a link and QR code, with anonymized responses and enhanced privacy features. 82 people attended; 22 responded to the survey pre-forum and 22 post-forum. Pre- and post-forum responses were qualitatively compared to assess shifts in attitudes toward AI and BD and related interests in ethics, bias, and trustworthiness. Results/Anticipated Results: We found increased interests post- vs. pre-forum in the use of AI for CTR, AI bias and its effects on underrepresented populations, and ethical risk assessment and mitigation strategies for the use of BD to empower research participants. In contrast, trust in AI was lower post- vs. pre-forum. Moreover, respondents also indicated that the current application of AI in healthcare practice would result in increased racial, economic, and gender bias. In comparison, interest in ethical challenges, bioethical considerations, and trustworthiness regarding use of BD and AI in health research and practice did not differ pre- vs. post-forum. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Interest in the application of BD/AI in CTR increased post-forum, but AI distrust and bias expectations also increased, suggesting that learners become more skeptical and discerning as they become more knowledgeable about the complexity of the ethics of AI and BD use in healthcare, especially its application to underrepresented populations.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Our project aims to assess the composition or characteristics of research papers that score high on alternative metrics. These alternative metrics including the number of newspaper mentions, social media mentions, and the attention score as catalogued on Altmetric, a tool used to document community attention for a given research paper. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Our study intends to 1) Utilize topic modeling to identify prevalent themes on Altmetric, and 2) Apply network analysis to elucidate the interconnectedness among universities, funding sources, journals, and publishers associated with high-attention papers. 3) Examine how these patterns vary when attention metrics shift, such as social media mentions, newspaper mentions, or the Altmetric score. We'll first perform this analysis on all types of papers and then limit the networks to Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, and Public and Allied Health Sciences to help inform what health topics garner attention. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Our initial Altmetric topic models revealed sustained attention for COVID-19 and vaccination-related publications well beyond the pandemic (specifically, papers from January 2023). Health topics like cancer, dementia, and obesity also garnered high attention. Additionally, political papers (elections, democracy), climate change, and battery research had notable attention values. Further analysis needs to be done to explain why these topics gain attention and the type of attention they garner. We will construct networks to see the relationship between attention and entities like universities, funding sources, journals, and publishers. This will identify whether certain clusters of these entities produce papers with high attention or if attention is distributed evenly amoung them. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: To gauge the broader impact of scholarly research alternative metrics beyond citations are needed. Altmetric is used widely by CTSA’s to measure the community interest in research. Understanding the types of research that gain traction on Altmetric can help researchers understand how to garner interest from the community.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Afebrile septic patients are twice as likely to die and develop nosocomial infections as compared with those with fever; the reason for these differences is unknown. One hypothesis is that elevated temperatures directly boost immunity and inhibit microorganism growth. However, there is little data examining the clinical effects of warming septic patients. The goal of this study was to determine whether warming afebrile septic patients to fever-range hyperthermia with noninvasive forced air warmers is feasible and safe. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: This is an ongoing randomized trial on afebrile mechanically ventilated patients with severe sepsis. The intervention consisted of 48 hours of external warming with a forced air warming device to a goal core temperature of 1.5°C higher than the lowest recorded temperature within the 24 hours preceding enrollment. Efficacy of the intervention and adverse event data (i.e., increases in heart rate and vasopressor doses) were collected. Clinical outcomes included 28-day mortality and acquisition of secondary infections. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: In total, 18 patients were randomized to the control and warming groups, respectively. Baseline characteristics (including demographics, comorbidities, and illness severity scores) were similar among the 2 groups, except the control group had more males (61% vs. 28%, p=0.04). Median (IQR) body temperature averaged over the 48-hour intervention period was higher in the warming group [38.2 (37.6, 38.6) vs. 37.1 (36.4, 37.4) °C, p<0.001). Patients in the warming group achieved core temperatures above their goal for a median of 37 (IQR 11, 45) hours during the 48-hour intervention period. There were no differences in heart rate or vasopressor dose changes or acquisition of secondary infections between the groups. Eight (44.4%) control patients and 3 (16.7%) warmed patients died by day 28 (p=0.07). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Externally warming severe septic patients with forced air warming devices effectively raises core body temperature and is safe. Additional research will focus on cellular and immunological changes seen in warmed Versus control patients.

ABSTRACT IMPACT: By outlining telehealth access disparities in the vision-impaired population, this scoping review has identified a set of effective and clinically appropriate implementation strategies and interventions for improving the technical, provider-level, and system-level accessibility of telehealth for vision-impaired patients. OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Evidence-based recommendations that ensure telehealth access for vision-impaired patients are critical to reducing health disparities. This review identifies, evaluates, and proposes strategies for public and private sector stakeholders to increase telehealth access for vision-impaired patients during the pandemic and beyond. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: This scoping review included five steps: 1) the implementation of an iterative search strategy using relevant keywords to query 4 electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and Europe PMC) for relevant articles, 2) the application of a set of inclusion criteria to filter database results for article evaluation, 3) a quality assessment of the articles retained, 4) the extraction and summary of data from each assessed article, and 5) a narrative synthesis of the qualitative literature reviewed. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: To date, 21 articles that fit the inclusion criteria, published between 2006 and 2020, have been identified. To ensure the most robust collection of existing literature is aggregated, the iterative search strategy and inclusion criteria sorting process will be underway until December 20. The assessment of articles, and extraction and summary of data contained within said articles, will be finalized on January 20. The narrative synthesis will be complete on February 1. The poster and abstract will be complete by February 20. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDINGS: Future research should examine outcomes associated with the implementation of accessible telehealth programs to identify remaining barriers. To improve outcomes for vision-impaired patients, policymakers, providers, payers, and industry must collaborate to promote accessibility in telehealth design and implementation.