Strengthening the research workforce is essential for meeting the evolving needs and challenges in the health and biomedical fields. To do so effectively, it requires an understanding of how the experiences of a researcher shift over time and how one’s research career evolves, particularly as supports are put in place to foster research. This narrative review provides a summary of published individual-level assessment measures and survey tools from 2000–2024. All measures were abstracted, classified, and coded during analyses to describe the areas of focus, and they were organized into one of six research categories. The review identified a range of measures and methods across all categories. However, the measures were often narrow, focused on outputs, and not ideal for assessing the full range of experiences a researcher may have throughout their career. The most common metrics were related to research productivity and bibliometric measures. Our review of survey tools revealed a gap in comprehensive approaches available to assess an individual’s research experience, efforts, supports, and impact. As efforts expand to evaluate and study the research workforce, tools that focus on a broad range of individual-level measures, tied to specific underlying constructs and drawn from the literature, may prove useful.

Rutgers Health, Clinical Research Management (CRM) program with support from New Jersey Alliance for Clinical and Translational Science (NJ ACTS) provide scholarships to establish a “Clinical Research Experience” (CRE). The CRE focuses on building an entry-level Clinical Research Coordinator (CRC) workforce. The six-month precepted CRE is embedded in an accelerated master’s degree and demonstrates a skill-based approach to developing CRC resources. The CRE structure affiliated site collaboration; competency based curriculum objectives; standardized competency aligned on-boarding; and preceptor-evaluated performance. The experiential education is designed for academic medical centers (AMCs) to foster the development of qualified research coordinators. The CRE model supports “teach one, see one, do one” coupled with preceptor-evaluated feedback to cultivate clinical research competency.

Objectives/Goals: Competencies of a principal investigator (PI) in clinical research are crucial for ensuring the success, integrity, and ethical conduct of a study. This protocol aims to assess training offerings focused on improving clinical investigator competency and build a set of best practices for training. Methods/Study Population: The authors have started by creating a committed group of key opinion leaders at Rutgers Health and across industry to advise on the process. A mixed-method assessment of the current state of clinical investigator training/education in the conduct of T1-T4 clinical trials is currently being conducted to identify existing practices. An evaluation and assessment of key competencies will be initiated. Education and training objectives and modules will subsequently be developed from this process. The program will be piloted to early career clinicians, faculty, fellows, investigators within NJACTS, and other CTSAs and later assessed for efficacy. Results/Anticipated Results: A summary and descriptive statistics of the landscape of training opportunities and the variabilities of these offerings to address the needs of these investigators is projected to exhibit the gaps in knowledge and skill set required for a PI to effectively conduct a clinical trial. This will serve as the basis for developing a micro-credential (PI Badge) by the NJACTS’ Workforce Development group. Variability across educational offerings from academic institutions, sponsor/CRO protocol/study training, and online courses may not foster applicable skills. This badge is focused on addressing a clinician’s understanding of the roles and responsibilities as they align to the Principal Investigator commitments listed in the FDA form 1572. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Whether or not micro credentialing will enhance principal investigator competency, this mixed-method assessment is poised to identify a common benchmark for success. The ability to deal with increasing protocol complexity requires investigators to be more adept at implementation and compliance to sustain their ability to conduct clinical trials.

Objectives/Goals: Obtaining reliable clinical research professional (CRP) employment data within and across Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) institutions is an ongoing challenge. We describe an intra-institutional approach implemented to generate routine and accurate CRP data reports to monitor and evaluate CRP career progression and assist in formation of an institutional CRP network. Methods/Study Population: A research job family with 47 job series including human, animal, and laboratory research positions was implemented at Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU). However, CRP job satisfaction surveys and evaluations could not be confidently interpreted due to the confounding animal and laboratory research positions. Led by VCU Clinical and Translational Science Awards Workforce Development a cross-functional team was formed to isolate specific CRP positions. The team included CRP front-line staff and managers partnering with VCU Human Resource Information Systems. Identified were 39 unique CRP positions across 13 distinct job series. This identification provides CRP new hire and job specific data for evaluation and tracking as well as the ability for CRP directed communications. Results/Anticipated Results: Initial and monthly HR data reports were used to develop an institutional CRP list-serv for 325–350 allowing for targeted CRP communications within a decentralized environment. Bimonthly HR data reports identify university new hires and internal transfers into any of the 39 unique jobs within 0 – 12 days of hire. Twelve unique data points are provided (name, email, current position hire date, job code, job title, working title, department, division, supervisor’s name, job title, email, and job code) allowing for tracking and analysis of retention rates, career progression, and lateral movement among other outcomes. Collaboration led by VCU Clinical and Translational Science Awards Workforce Development team provides the representative CRP staff, managers, and institutional leadership with a renewed confidence interpreting CRP employment data. Discussion/Significance of Impact: The team science approach to identify and develop routine and real-time reporting of CRP job specific data provides a rich source of information. The information is used to evaluate CRP job satisfaction and factors contributing to CRP retention, engage in future mixed-methods research, and support the formation of an institutional CRP network.

Objectives/Goals: The Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science Institute (CTSI) has integrated academic goals of T0-T4 translation, scholarship, and education into our Academic Learning Health System (aLHS) framework. Our Translation Research Academy (TRA) provides rigorous training for outstanding and diverse K12 and early-career faculty to develop LHS core competencies. Methods/Study Population: The TRA Forum is the main vehicle for delivering an aLHS-oriented curriculum. Currently, the program includes six K12 scholars and 18 other early-career research faculty with facilitated access to CTSI resources. The TRA Forum is a 2-year seminar series that meets twice a month to discuss topics relevant to the aLHS, leadership, and career development. Inclusion of first- and second-year scholars facilitates peer mentorship, allowing Year 2 scholars to share insights with new scholars. Forum sessions are developed around adult learning theory: Each participant is asked to contribute their experience to discussions, and sessions focus on real-world examples. Results/Anticipated Results: Scholar and faculty commitment is very high. For the first 30 min., scholars present their work in small groups. This extends the range of disciplines exposed (64% of TRA graduates found this very helpful) and promotes translational traits of boundary crosser, team player, and systems thinker. Participants view the TRA as an opportunity to form internal peer networks, promote peer mentoring, and establish new collaborations. The remaining 60 minutes are used for education. Sessions include nominated topics and those providing a solid foundation in core aLHS competencies and characteristics of translational scientists. Educational sessions (97%) were rated as helpful or very helpful. Discussion/Significance of Impact: TRA scholars receive rigorous training in a highly supportive environment to produce aLHS researchers with skills to transcend boundaries, innovate systems, create new knowledge, and rigorously evaluate results.

Mentorship is a vital part of the training provided in the K and T programs funded by the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA). However, the inputs, indicators, and outcomes associated with a successful mentoring relationship remain poorly understood. In this review, we critically examine the current body of literature on mentorship in a CTSA context. We conducted a comprehensive search of the literature for relevant research articles. We included articles that were contextualized within a CTSA hub, examined a mentorship program, and conducted evaluation research. Through an initial search of online databases and by reviewing reference sections of relevant articles, we identified 141 potentially relevant articles. Twenty-five of these articles met our inclusion criteria. We identified three categories of research: nationwide institutional surveys of CTSA mentorship programs, mentored research training programs, and mentor training programs. While the findings highlighted the effectiveness of mentor training and mentored training programs, there is a notable lack of assessment of mentoring inputs and indicators. Based on our review, we propose a model for the evaluation of CTSA mentorship that includes measurable inputs, indicators, and outcomes. This model provides a holistic framework for evaluators and CTSA program directors to better understand their mentorship programs.

Objectives/Goals: The Clinical and Translational Research (CTR) pathway aims to increase the number of health science professionals participating in CTR in their careers throughout the WWAMI Region (Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho). Methods/Study Population: The first cohort of thirty-one students started in January 2024 and were organized into three groups that met weekly. One in-person group of students in Anchorage, AK; one in-person group in Seattle, WA; and a group of students from across the WWAMI region convened virtually. Students completed a year-long series of elective courses addressing fundamental concepts of designing, conducting, and presenting the results of a research project. Over the summer between year 1 and year 2 of medical school, students dedicated 8 weeks to full-time research activities under the supervision of their research project mentor. In Fall 2024, students prepared and presented research posters at regional poster sessions and abstracts and oral presentations for submission to the Western Medical Research Conference in January 2025. Results/Anticipated Results: The ultimate goal of the CTR pathway is to increase the number of medical providers across the WWAMI region with significant awareness, interest, and experience in research. Many students hesitate to engage in research due to a perceived lack of necessary skills. The CTR pathway addresses this gap by equipping students with the research competencies needed to participate confidently in scientific inquiry. Feedback from the inaugural cohort has been overwhelmingly positive, with many students highlighting how the CTR pathway enhanced their confidence and knowledge, empowering them to execute their proposed research projects successfully. Our second cohort of students joined the CTR pathway in January 2025. Discussion/Significance of Impact: The CTR pathway positions early medical students to engage in research more deeply during their medical training and prepares them to seek additional training opportunities toward a career in research. The majority of students in the first cohort were located at regional sites and many have interest in practicing in rural or underserved areas.

Alcohol misuse among women has risen compared to men. Women experience barriers to engaging in patient-centered comparative effectiveness research (CER) that, in turn, limits the evidence base for addressing alcohol misuse in this population. In this manuscript, we describe WomenWise, a community-partnered project and outline how we co-developed community focused CER training curriculum and collaboratively planned future partnered learning sessions (PLSs) with Community Advisory Board (CAB) feedback. Through this approach we aim to empower women to contribute to future patient-centered CER and enhance the stakeholder capacity for future patient-centered research.

Objectives/Goals: The goal of this poster is to 1) describe the development of a graduate certificate program for community-engaged research for health (CEnRH) in a Clinical and Translational Science Awards-funded institution; 2) describe the initial impact of the program; and 3) discuss strengths, implications, and potential improvements for the future. Methods/Study Population: The CEnRH graduate certificate is a 12-credit, postbaccalaureate program offered at the University of Cincinnati co-created by faculty from the Community Engagement and Translational Workforce Cores of the CCTST with community partners. The goal is to support learning about community-engaged research (CEnR) and enhances capacity for academic-community partnered research. Student demographics are collected as part of university registration. Quantitative course evaluations are collected each semester. Program evaluations including qualitative data are collected from students enrolled in the program during and upon completion of the certificate. Results/Anticipated Results: The CEnRH curriculum includes 3 existing courses/electives in the College of Medicine and Psychology and three new courses in social justice and action research methodologies. Notably, the committee advocated for a scholarship to cover tuition for the certificate program to promote access for community partners. Since the fall of 2022, 17 students have enrolled in the CEnRH program, including 9 Faculty/Staff within CCTST institutions, 2 University of Cincinnati PhD Students, 5 Fellows, and 1 Community Member (who receives the scholarship). Notably, 24% of these students are from underrepresented minority backgrounds. Impact and evaluation data, as well as lessons learned, will be presented. Future directions for the CEnRH program will also be discussed. Discussion/Significance of Impact: The CEnRH is an impactful program for trainees, faculty, and staff who are planning to conduct CEnR, while also strengthening research capacity among community partners and advocates. This certificate program may be especially valuable to academic researchers as more funding agencies require community and stakeholder engagement in their proposals.

Objectives/Goals: Clinical research professionals (CRPs) are vital to the conduct of clinical research and require ongoing, high-quality training to be effective. This poster will explore participating CRPs’ assessments of the impact of the inter-institutional Research Professionals Network (RPN) Workshops on their work and ability to perform their roles. Methods/Study Population: The RPN Workshops are a consortium of four academic medical centers and their affiliates that collaborate to host peer-led workshops for CRP continuing education. CRP presenters and attendees include a wide variety of roles, responsibilities, and levels of experience. From September 2023 to December 2024, workshop attendees received bi-annual evaluations to assess the workshop impact, including skill application and understanding of topics. Responses from these bi-annual evaluations, along with monthly session evaluations, were analyzed to identify key outcomes on the workshops’ impact in regard to participating CRP application of learnings and confidence in their role. Results/Anticipated Results: Preliminary review of the bi-annual RPN Workshop Impact Survey data, alongside monthly workshop evaluation responses from workshop participants, revealed attendees indicated that they valued the topics presented. Key findings indicated that CRPs’ participation in the workshops: reinforced their existing practices,tncreased their confidence in knowledge and/or skills discussed, enhanced their collaboration with CRPs from other institutions, and more detailed results of the analysis will be presented. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Overall results demonstrated increased confidence in CRP roles. Participants valued the inter-institutional collaboration, which is facilitated by the sharing of best practices and diverse perspectives within the workshop format.

Early career researchers have unique demands, many of which contribute to increased stress, decreased professional fulfillment, and burnout. Consequently, academic institutions and government organizations, such as the National Institutes of Health, are beginning to embrace structured coaching as a tool to support physician wellbeing. To date, such coaching programs have demonstrated promising results, but little is known about whether early career research faculty find coaching feasible, accessible, or helpful. To explore this question further, we developed a novel group coaching intervention for clinician researchers and scientific faculty at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center based on the concept of appreciative inquiry, grounding the program in a positive and hopeful approach to the challenges faced by clinicians and researchers. Results from our program indicate this intervention is feasible, satisfactory, and helpful, with participants reporting enhanced self-reflection and empowerment. Effective for a wide array of research faculty, our program brought together diverse faculty, fostered connections, and encouraged future collaborations among this translational group. This suggests that our program provides a foundational blueprint that can be used by other academic medical centers who aim to develop group coaching efforts.

Objectives/Goals: The Clinical Research Education in Genome Science (CREiGS) program was developed to address the need for faculty and trainees conducting biomedical research to gain foundational training in genome science and accelerate the clinical adoption of genomic medicine. CREiGS, funded by NHGRI, offers comprehensive training in genomic analysis and statistical computing. Methods/Study Population: CREiGS targets a diverse pool of medical/doctoral students, postdocs, and faculty from academic institutions nationwide. The hybrid program included an 11-week online phase and a 3-day in-person phase, focusing on genomic science, statistical analysis and R programming, rigor and reproducibility, and engaging diverse populations in genomics research. Advanced special topics lectures included: decision analysis for genomics research, bioethical engagement of indigenous communities in genomics research, elucidating gene networks for advancing human health, etc. Strategies for recruiting diverse participants and ensuring an inclusive learning environment were informed by the Diversity Recruitment External Advisory Board. Participants’ skills were evaluated via pre- and post-course surveys. Results/Anticipated Results: Of 187 participants over 5 cohorts, 68.4% were female and 47.0% from underrepresented groups. The cohort spanned career stages, with 35.3% students, 34.2% postdocs, and 30.4% faculty, most of whom were at the junior level. Competency evaluations showed improvements in all core competencies of the course: (1) independently carrying out small-scale research improvements, (2) confidence collaborating with statisticians, bioinformaticians, and other genome science experts, (3) applying appropriate statistical methods for the analysis of genetics and genomics data, (4) accurately interpreting findings from genome research studies, (5) critiquing the internal/external validity of genome research studies, and (6) effectively engaging diverse populations and community stakeholders. Discussion/Significance of Impact: CREiGS successfully provided inclusive, high-quality, genomic and statistical training, to diverse scientists enhancing their research capacity and methodologic competency. Findings from longer term evaluations examining the contribution of CREiGS to participants’ genome science-related scholarly productivity are forthcoming.

Objectives/Goals: This study objective is to evaluate the prevalence and risk factors of burnout in practicing radiologists, with a focus on personal as well as systemic factors. It aims to identify and assess the existing strategies to mitigate burnout, enhance radiologist performance, and improve the quality of patient care. Methods/Study Population: The present study is a systematic review that summarizes existing literature on burnout in radiology, examining its prevalence, risk factors, and effect on diagnostic accuracy, decision-making, and job satisfaction. The review will synthesize validated evidence for emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and professional fulfillment. The review discusses trends and solutions that have emerged from analysis of data within differing countries, subspecialties, and career stages, focusing on elevated risk of burnout in radiologists. It also assesses downstream effects on patient care quality such as missed diagnoses and increased medical errors. The review also discusses potential strategies for mitigating these negative effects on healthcare delivery. Results/Anticipated Results: The anticipated results of this review are expected to reveal significant variability in burnout rates across radiology subspecialties and practice settings, with prevalence ranging from 33% to 88% (Fawzy et al., 2023). Emotional exhaustion and depersonalization emerge as the most reported symptoms as consistently highlighted in previous studies. Major contributors such as workload, administrative burdens, and technological isolation (e.g., remote work and reduced face-to-face interaction) are anticipated. Radiologists in high-demand areas like interventional radiology and those in private practice may show higher burnout levels than those in academic settings. Protective factors, like exercise, supportive environments, and work-life balance, are expected to reduce burnout levels. Discussion/Significance of Impact: This study calls attention to the importance of addressing radiologist burnout as a key institutional priority. Early and effective interventions are essential for improving job satisfaction, reducing medical errors resulting in enhanced patient care. Addressing burnout is crucial for maintaining a sustainable and effective radiology workflow.

Objectives/Goals: The National Research Mentoring Network Coordination Center (NRMN CC) received funding from NIH to create an Online Community of Practice (OCoP) for Research Managers (RM). These RM contributed to advancing the research on the science of mentorship in STEMM. In a Proof of Concept, RM explored various aspects of their mentorship research support work. Methods/Study Population: An OCoP met 18 times across the 5-year grant to share experiences working to advance the science of mentorship in STEMM. Topics, frequency, and length of meetings were selected based upon several needs assessments surveys from the RM community. RM were invited to join the OCoP based on their roles as the point people for administrative activities in research projects (e.g., finances, budgets, training, and project management). RM often supervised staff, collected data, monitored IRB protocol compliance, and conducted research. RM played a pivotal role in the gathering and sharing of common measures across the 11 U01 studies to allow for greater confidence in research findings on mentorship (McConnell, 2021). Results/Anticipated Results: Our primary goal was to provide a supportive community for RM contributing to mentorship research and data sharing. The results from several needs assessments exemplified a request for this support from the community to engage in an OCoP focused on their professional development. Therefore, the OCoP served as a starting point to explore the duties, functions, roles and responsibilities of RM, and extended into providing professional development. Although the number of RM attending decreased as the grant entered the no-cost extension phase, a subgroup of RM expressed interest in continuing the OCoP to focus on dissemination of research findings, further supporting the need for this community. Discussion/Significance of Impact: RM supported 11 research projects and contributed to the data collection for over 6,000 participants. Few opportunities exist to create an OCoP for large scale data collection on experiences with mentorship in STEMM. RM were pivotal in their role with the NRMN to enhance the training and career development of individuals from diverse backgrounds.

Objectives/Goals: A limited number of Hispanic researchers compete successfully for NIH career development and research grants. We adapted an established K Club model from the University of Pittsburgh with high success rates to Hispanics in Puerto Rico (PR). The K to R Club’s goal is to increase the successful submission of K- and R-type NIH grants in the HCTRECD Program. Methods/Study Population: K to R Club is an inviting environment that exposes scholars to established funded investigators in PR from all career stages. It creates a forum to discuss different grant mechanisms and explains the selection, submission, and review process. The Club promotes the right mentor selection and mentoring team. It facilitates networking with principal investigators local/external to share their success stories, career development experiences, and grant submission tips. It offers mock review sessions of sections of the grant proposal to provide feedback from invited established investigators during the grant writing process. The Club meets 1–2 times per month in-person or virtual for 1 hour and anonymous evaluations were submitted after each session. Results/Anticipated Results: K to R Club 1st year had 11 sessions with 15 invited speakers. Sessions included: 1 Kickoff, 2 funding opportunities, 2 coaching, 7 successful stories of Diversity Supplement, and F99/K00, K22, K23, K99/R00, R01, and R21 awardees. The highest attendance was for the Kickoff (48). Evaluations response rates ranged from 15 to 62 with the highest participation from women (78% vs. 22% men). Most respondents were PhD (45%) and MD (29%). K to R Club sessions were rated as excellent (84%), 74% agreed that the sessions changed their knowledge very much, and 78% reported it changed their ability to apply for funding very much. Interest in submitting NIH supplements in 12 months was higher (68%) vs. 6 months (48%). Interest in requesting mock reviews for K or R grants in 6 months (91%) vs. 12 months (17%). Discussion/Significance of Impact: The 1st year of the K to R Club had an active attendance and increased the interest in submission of NIH grants. We are working on strategies to increase evaluations’ response rates to improve and address future session needs due to the low response rates recorded. Currently, the semester is full of mock review sessions for grant applications (4 Ks and 1 R01).