OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The primary goal of the project was to conduct a narrative review of the published literature to identify and summarize best practices for developing oncology-focused research and training experiences for AI/AN undergraduate, graduate and professional students. A secondary goal was to identify methodological limitations and areas for future research related to rigorous educational program evaluation. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION:. Published literature was searched using databases relevant to oncology (PubMed, Web of Science) and sociology (PsychINFO, SocIndex). The bibliographies of identified relevant papers were searched for additional references by title. Search terms included synonyms and commonly used terms for three general areas: (1) target population (e.g., American Indian), (2) training area (e.g., oncology), and (3) educational program (e.g., undergraduate). RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS:. A current total of 107 original publications and 33 review papers that are relevant to the project goals have been identified. Key areas of program development and implementation relate to advertising and recruitment; didactic curriculum in research methods, cancer health disparities, and professional development and career planning; research immersion experiences through shadowing, networking, application of research skills, and opportunities to develop oral and written communication skills; ongoing career development support; mentoring by faculty, advanced trainees, and peers; and culture-specific enrichment. Important areas for program evaluation relate to measures of reaction, knowledge, practice and long-term outcomes. Evaluation design approaches include observational and experimental designs with recommendations for identifying relevant control groups. Strategies to ensure complete long-term follow-up are also summarized. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT:.Successful programs address barriers related to perceived lack of abilities, lack of AI role models, limited culture-specific enrichment, and limited mentoring and ongoing career development support. Program directors should work with local tribal and community leaders when creating a new program. A high degree of coordination is needed to create a bicultural program to interest students in a research career and avoid the creation of barriers hidden to the program director. There are opportunities to improve the rigor of educational program evaluation in this setting by including measures beyond self-reported reaction and knowledge to focus on educational program enrollment and completion and long-term career outcomes. Methodologic challenges include identification of relevant control groups for comparison and the use of experimental designs.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The goals of this project are to develop, disseminate, and evaluate an online, self-paced training module designed to help mentors better understand and support their mentees’ motivation. The module introduces learners to the CARES mentoring model, which is rooted in Self-Determination Theory (SDT), one of the leading theories of motivation. According to SDT, an optimal mentoring environment provides support for mentees’ psychological needs for Competence, Autonomy, Relatedness, Equity in extrinsic resources, and Structure (CARES). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Content for the CARES online module was drawn from a previously developed two-hour mentor training workshop designed for delivery in a face-to-face, small group setting. Content experts developed a slide deck and speaker notes. These materials were edited, adapted into a storyboard, and translated into a 60-minute interactive online module created with e-learning authoring software (Articulate Storyline). An evaluation survey was developed to assess mentors’ perceived skills gains related to course content (e.g., “Encouraging my mentees to think about how well their psychological needs are being met within the work/training environment,” “Recognizing how diversity, equity, and inclusion can be salient issues that impact a mentee’s motivation”) and mentors’ confidence gains in their ability to implement motivation-focused practices into their mentoring relationships (e.g., “Autonomy: Giving my mentees freedom in deciding what goals to pursue and how they to do their work,” “Competence: Working with my mentees to establish appropriate challenges to stretch their abilities”). The module was beta tested in October 2018 by 11 individuals with experience as mentors and in facilitating mentor training. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The beta testing process produced useful recommendations for improving clarity of content, visual design, and navigation. Users expressed a high level of enthusiasm for the content, which included a combination of practical information and empirical support for the CARES mentoring model. They also appreciated specific functionality in the module, including the presentation of brief case examples of mentoring scenarios that enhance or diminish motivation, opportunities for self-reflection, and a downloadable guide for initiating conversations with mentees about different domains in the CARES model. Evaluation data (quantitative and qualitative) from beta testers (n=11) are being analyzed. A preliminary examination of these findings found that mentors report gains from before to after the training in their self-perceived skills and confidence levels. Moreover, all expressed an intention to makes changes in their mentoring practices as a result of the training. Comments indicated potential value in offering a follow up face-to-face experience in which mentors can hear from others who have successfully implemented the CARES approach and acquire practice in skillfully implementing the CARES conversation guide with their mentees. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This innovative e-learning module offers a readily accessible and theoretically driven training approach to help mentors recognize the value of supporting their mentees’ motivation, and become more intentional in implementing motivation-focused practices into their mentoring relationships. In future work, the CARES module will be pilot tested with specific cohorts and in different implementation scenarios (as a standalone training, or combined with other programming) and made available to users nationally with support from the University of Minnesota Clinical and Translational Science Institute and the NIH National Research Mentoring Network.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The goal of the Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science Institute (WF CTSI) Mentor Academy is to contribute to increasing the next generation of faculty with competencies specific to research mentoring. The curriculum of the Mentor Academy is adapted from an evidence-based national curriculum developed by the National Research Mentoring Network and includes 20 contact hours of didactic and experiential training, complemented with outside readings and assignments. A pre-post-follow-up competency assessment is built in as part of the curriculum for both participants and their current mentees. The purpose of this study was to assess self-rated research mentoring competencies among the Mentor Academy participants to better understand the effectiveness of the Mentor Academy. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A total of 37 mid-level or early senior faculty members from WF have participated in the 3 Mentor Academy cohorts that have completed so far. All of the participants receive 5% salary support and are expected to regularly participate in Mentor Academy sessions; complete a pre, post, and 6-month follow-up self-assessments; and provide a list of their active mentees. The identified mentees are also asked to assess the participating mentors’ research mentoring competencies before the start and 6-months after the end of the Mentor Academy. The same list of 26 mentoring competencies are included in the self-assessments for both mentors and mentees. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The initial results of the self-assessments suggest that mentors are coming into the academy with a rather high self-assessed competency ratings. The change in competency ratings pre/post is not as significant. On average the change in self-assessed competency ratings increases by 1.0 on a 7-point scale. Interestingly enough, for 2 of the cohorts were mentees were also asked to assess their mentors’ competencies, the mentees rated their mentors as having a higher competency (for all 26 items) than what the mentor rated themselves, at both pre and 6-month follow-up assessments. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: After compiling data for 3 different cohorts, we are consistently seeing similar patterns in self-assessed competency ratings; participants are coming in with a high level of competency and an increased level of competency rating by mentees. These findings need to be further considered. For example, the program administrators need to discuss how participants are recruited, if we are recruiting the intended users, and what should we be expecting as an outcome(s) of the program. We also need to further explore different perceptions of mentor-mentee relationships and expectations to see how reliable are the data from mentees. A collaboration with the National Research Mentoring Network is also needed to see how the self-assessed competencies compare to those utilizing their curriculum outside of WF.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The study aims to (1) investigate the structural patterns of professional communication that exist at the Mount Sinai Health Hackathon (2) explore if and how the professional networks of the participants change after engaging in the Mount Sinai Health Hackathon (3) explore any associations between the characteristics of participants’ professional networks and successful innovation development. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The recruitment pool consists of all 78 Mount Sinai Health Hackathon 2018 participants. Characteristics of the social network of Health Hackathon participants are assessed via an SNA data collection instrument at three time points: T1 directly before the Health Hackathon event, T2 directly after the event, T3 six months post-event. The Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Institutional Review Board approved this study as exempt. In order to explore patterns of communication between Health Hackathon participants during event, whole network data is collected at T2. Participants are provide with a roster of Mount Sinai Health hackathon participant names and asked to report the nature, frequency and perceived importance of their interaction with each of the other participants over the duration of the 48 hour event. In order capture any network change in the wider professional networks of the individual participants, known as “ego networks”, participants are asked to complete an SNA ego network survey at time points T1, T2 and T3. Open ended questions asked participants to report up to 20 people they consider being most important to them in their professional network and record the professional background of each person, the nature of the communication and the importance of each person to their success. Finally, at T3 participants are also asked to report on their project success (determined by businesses formed, filed provisional patents, financial income generation). This will be reviewed in relation to their social network data, to see if there is any relationship between the two. Data is analyzed using the specialized SNA software, UCiNET, which creates network sociograms to visualize network data. Descriptive statistics are used to report individual-level characteristics of respondents.RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: To describe the structural patterns of communication at each time point, the following network-level indices are calculated: density (a measure of network cohesion), degree centrality (how many connections the individual has), betweenness centrality (whether the individual provides connections to other people in a network) and closeness centrality (how close the individual is to other people in the network). Network sociograms are generated for each time point to provide a visualization of the network. To explore the hypothesis that participating in the Mount Sinai Health Hackathon increases diversity of a professional network, analysis will focus on whether and how network-level indices change pre- and post- Hackathon. It will also explore any association between network characteristics and project success. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Social Network Analysis of the Mount Sinai Health Hackathon provides an understanding about the structure of relationships that are formed as a result of participation in this event. Although, the design of this study does not allow for inferences of causality, the SNA approach enables an in-depth exploration of Hackathon participants’ professional networks, how these evolve over time and how certain network characteristics may be associated with project success. This information will be used to inform the development, content and delivery of future Health Hackathon initatives.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The objective of this session is to support and encourage novice, unpublished researchers to turn their poster content into a manuscript publishable in a scholarly journal, by showing them concrete steps to follow and research study reporting standards to use as a template. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We will cover the following topics: choosing a journal, finding the journal’s requirements, locating the reporting standard for the study type (e.g., CONSORT for randomized trials), and structuring the manuscript appropriately per International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations (e.g., Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion). RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: It is anticipated that by the end of the session, attendees should be able to: Select an appropriate journal; Organize a manuscript according to ICMJE guidelines; Compose a manuscript based on the applicable reporting standard (e.g. CONSORT). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Providing novice researchers with information and resources that demystify the process of writing a manuscript suitable for a scholarly journal, is expected to bolster their confidence and increase the likelihood they will create and submit publishable manuscripts; thereby improving the dissemination of research findings and increasing research impact.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: This project presents the implementation of research tracks instructional design using a learning management system (LMS). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: On January 2018, a Novel Methodologies in Health Disparities Research Symposium was held, with participation of local and national collaborators. The purpose was to identify the most important areas of knowledge, essential skills, available online resources and conferences associated with each research track. The recommendations provided contributed to the instructional design of novel methodologies research tracks aiming to improve health disparity research. The LMS includes general documents, instructional materials and assessment instruments, among others. Scholars are required to comply with 30 contact hours. The content and strategies utilized will be evaluated. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Active scholar participation through the LMS is expected. Evaluation results will reflect the strengths and challenges of the implementation of instructional design. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This strategy will engage scholars in an active learning experience enhancing their career development as independent researchers to eliminate health disparities.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The Title V Cooperative Project of the UPR-MSC and UCC has demonstrated that educational interventions in CTR are very effective in fulfilling the objective of promoting awareness, stimulate interest and increase the knowledge, skills and opportunities, to US, GS and F (participants) in CTR. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The training sessions (TS) offered through the Title V initiative have become an engine for the involvement in CTR for participants from higher education institutions island-wide. TS consisted of cycles –level 1 and 2–: Research Education Towards Opportunities (RETO,I,II) and Mentorship Offering Training Opportunities for Research (MOTOR,I,II), ending in the formation of the Clinical and Translational Mentoring Teams (CTMT)s, in which participants, paired by their research interests, were mentored by a well-established CT researchers in their research project, to be developed in the Intensive Development and Experiences in Advancement of Research and Increased Opportunities (IDEARIO). RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Up to date, 4 TS-level 1 and 2 TS-level 2 were offered. Eighty (80) participants completed level 1, distributed: 42 (52.5%) US in RETO, 21 (26.25%) GS and 17 (21.25%) F in MOTOR and 17 participants completed level 2, distributed: 4 (23.52%) US in RETO, 6 (25.29%) GS and 7 (41.17%) F in MOTOR. From which, 15, with 8 CT researchers, formed 5 CTMTs in different research areas – cardio, neuro, liver, renal, Zika–. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: US, GS and F were integrated in the active process throughout educational levels for their development in CTR.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Program Directors and Ph.D. students within the Clinical and Translational Science (CTS) track identified mentorship development as a knowledge gap and educational priority. Most mentors are not provided education in how to be an effective mentor. Similarly, most mentees are not provided education or training on how to optimize a mentoring relationship for their learning and professional development (Ramani, 2006). We adapted mentor training curriculum developed by the University of Wisconsin and facilitated an eight-hour program to better prepare learners to be empowered mentees as well as future mentors. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We utilized the Mentoring Competency Assessment (MCA) to measure CTS Ph.D. students’ self-perceptions of eight competencies through a pre and post-intervention survey design (Fleming, etal., 2013). We adapted an evidence-based curriculum (Pfund, etal., 2014) to be delivered to Ph.D. students within an existing structure of educational offerings and incorporated case based discussions, frequent low-stakes formative assessments, and peer-to-peer facilitation to heighten authenticity, relevance and immediacy to the learning experiences. This structured curriculum, intended to increase skills, knowledge, and behaviors to make students more active participants in their mentoring relationships, focuses on one competency area per monthly session and was implemented May-December 2018. Session participation by program alumni allows for contextual demonstration and competency application. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Preliminary data demonstrates heightened perceived competency in most domains assessed. We found mentors generally rated their mentee’s skills at a higher level than the mentees’ perceived ratings. We also saw significant differences between groups in a few domains e. g. new vs. established relationships, females vs. males, etc. Individual session evaluations are extremely positive, and the students routinely report behavioral changes as a result of these sessions. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: We have demonstrated the successful adaptation and innovative facilitation of a successful mentorship development program for Ph.D. students. We propose that several factors discussed are critical in the success of this type of curriculum. Preliminary conclusion: A structured curriculum in mentoring relationships increases Ph.D. mentee empowerment and readiness to lead future mentoring relationships.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Diet-related diseases such as obesity, hypertension, diabetes, and irritable bowel syndrome comprise a large portion of primary care visits in the United States. However, primary care physicians seldom prescribe dietary interventions that effectively treat these conditions, and their rate of use has declined in recent years. There are many plausible reasons for this decline, including baseline nutrition education, perceived efficacy of the intervention, time limitations, and compensation. No study has been conducted to assess which of these factors physicians perceive as relevant to their decision to use dietary interventions in their practice. Our study aims to identify key factors that ubiquitously limit physicians’ use of dietary interventions. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We created a 30-item survey designed to evaluate physicians’ self-reported use of dietary interventions, relevant knowledge base, comfort employing these interventions, and attitudes regarding the importance of such interventions in their practices. This survey was was distributed to internal medicine, pediatrics, and family medicine residents and physicians at Michigan Medicine and St. Joseph hospitals in Ann Arbor, MI. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Socio-demographic data, knowledge base and attitudes will be summarized and analyzed using descriptive statistics and simple regression modeling following the administration of the survey. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: We hope that our study may elucidate identify specific avenues of increasing the use of dietary interventions, and thus of improving treatment efficacy for diet-related disorders in the United States.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: INTRODUCTION: Many of the innovative therapies used in regenerative medicine, such as additive manufacturing and stem cell engineering, rely on novel technologies and techniques for which standards for safety, efficacy, and quality have not been fully explored and established. As these therapies and technologies develop at a rapid pace, there is a need for the development of scientifically-based metrics to assess whether new treatments are effective and safe for clinical translation. Research and development of such standards is known as “regulatory science,” and is needed by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to support the creation of the evidence-based guidances and regulations that are used in review of product submissions. As outlined by the FDA’s description of their Centers for Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation (CERSIs) and the Association for Clinical and Translational Science’s (ACTS) Regulatory Science Working Group, here is a need to train investigators and clinicians to conduct regulatory science research to support successful clinical translation of regenerative treatments. OBJECTIVE: To develop a course to expose scholars to regulatory science concepts, to empower them to apply these concepts to their personal areas of research, and to challenge them to engage in the dialogue surrounding regulatory science on a national level. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: METHODS: The “Introduction to Regulatory Science” course was developed jointly by the Yale-Mayo CERSI and the Mayo Clinic Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCaTS) in 2017 as a didactic in-person survey course. The course objectives included exposing scholars to the ideas of regulatory science and affairs; reviewing the FDA’s Priority Areas for Advancing Regulatory Science; and determining what safety, quality, and efficacy concerns may need to be addressed when using new technologies, such as those used in regenerative medicine research. To meet these intended learning objectives, the course addressed one FDA Priority area each week, with a team of experts providing one-hour of lecture and discussion each class session. Regenerative medicine-related topics included a bioethics of stem cell therapy development, evaluation of additive manufacturing as an emerging technology, and the application of cGMPs to the manufacture of new therapies. Assignments and assessments included a quiz each week, which served as a knowledge check of that week’s lecture content, and a final paper analyzing regulatory concerns associated with a technology or product of the scholar’s choosing. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: RESULTS: The course was first delivered as an elective in 2017, with an enrollment of 8 scholars and 3 auditors. Scholars enrolled included 7 trainees and established investigators from Mayo Clinic Rochester and one from Arizona. Of the 8 scholars enrolled, 7 completed the post-course survey. Scholars strongly agreed that the “course objectives were met” (7/7) and that the “course was well worth the effort I put into it” (7/7). Five scholars stated that they learned “a lot” during the course; two said they learned “an incredible amount.” Scholars unanimously gave the course a grade of “A.” Qualitative feedback was positive, indicating that the team-taught and in-person course design choices were highlights for trainees. The course is currently in its second delivery (2018), with an enrollment of 16 scholars across Mayo Clinic Rochester, Arizona, and Florida. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: CONCLUSIONS: The developed course was successfully piloted and well-received. Scholars reported that they agreed that the course aims were achieved, and indicated that they would like to see additional coursework to continue to learn how to engage in regulatory science. Next steps include utilizing course feedback to iterate on the current course, expanding course delivery to include scholars at the Yale site of the Yale-Mayo CERSI, and the creation of a second course.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS:. The study aims to understand the characteristics of junior investigators who are supported by the CTSI, their knowledge of CTSI services and resources, as well as the perceived effectiveness of CTSI research training and career development. The primary outcome is scientific productivity that enhances career development and promotion. The secondary outcome is to inform and improve CTSA research training and career development, not only for the UCLA CTSI hub but also for the CTSA Program nationally. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION:. The study sample includes post-doctoral and junior investigators who have received UCLA CTSI support between 2011 and 2017 (n=319). These junior investigators conduct research at our four partner sites (UCLA-Westwood, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, The Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science). The CTSI administered the LSAS and the Career Development module in 2018 using Qualtrics, a subscription software for collecting and analyzing survey data. In order to reduce the burden on the survey respondents, the survey team pre-populated their previously reported publication in the Qualtrics survey system. Qualtrics sends customized email invitations containing a link to start the LSAS survey and subsequently automated sequences of reminder messages for non-responders and partial completers. The survey team initiated telephone call-backs and engaged partner site leaders to achieve a high response rate. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS:. Preliminary results show a response rate of 83% (n=264). Respondents include K-to-R workshop participants (n=192), core voucher co-investigators (n=38), Training Program in Translational Science (TPTS) trainees (n=82), and junior investigators who participated in two or more of these activities (n=48). Trainee characteristics include degree, gender, and partner site location. The distribution of advanced degrees among the junior investigators include: PhD (29%), MD (55%), MD/PhD (13%), or other degree (3%). Forty-four percent (44%) respondents are male and 56% are female. Seventy-two percent (72%) have a primary appointment at UCLA-Westwood, while 28% have academic appointments at the partner institutions. Twenty-five percent (25%) received CTSI research training and 49% received CTSI career development support. Regarding scientific productivity, 58% reported having at least one peer-reviewed publication and 29% reported subsequent grant funding. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT:. We are in the process of identifying the predictors of scientific productivity and the characteristics of the junior investigators most significantly correlated with productivity using multiple logistic regression analysis. We will analyze qualitative responses to examine the facilitators and barriers to conducting research at the CTSI and explore ways to improve administrative and clinical research processes. The significance of this research is to inform research training and career development programs within our CTSA hub and the CTSA Program nationally.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Our primary objective was to understand the relationship between incident or recent stressful events and adherence to HIV care in the context of other person, environment, and HIV-specific stressors in a sample of Black women living with HIV (WLWH). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Thirty in-depth interviews were conducted with Black women living with HIV who receive care at an academic HIV primary care clinic in the Southern region of the United States to elicit stressful events influencing adherence to HIV care. Semi-structured interview guides were used to facilitate discussion regarding stressful events and adherence to HIV care. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were independently coded using a theme-based approach by two experienced coders, findings were compared, and discrepancies were resolved by discussion. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Participants described frequently experiencing incident stressful events including death or serious illness of a close friend or family member, and relationship, financial, and employment difficulties. Furthermore, participants reported experiencing traumatic events such as sexual and physical abuse during childhood and adolescents. While experiencing traumatic events such as sexual and physical abuse during childhood and adolescence may be distressing, these events did not influence adherence to HIV care. However, incident stressful events as defined above did influence adherence to HIV care for some participants, but not for others. For participants who reported that stressful events did not influence adherence to HIV care, factors such as personal motivation, access to social support, and adaptive coping strategies facilitated their engagement in care. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Experiencing stressful events, incident or traumatic, is common among Black WLWH and have the potential to negatively influence adherence to HIV care. Thus, Interventions aimed at identifying and addressing stress, social support, and coping are essential to improve adherence to HIV care behaviors.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: We aimed to explore the impact of leadership training on student’s abilities to work in interprofessional research teams successfully. The Translational Research Design and Interprofessional Skills Development Course (shortened, Interprofessional Research Design) brings together students from different disciplines (science & medicine) and education tracks (PhD, MD, MD/PhD training) in a seven-week course to learn interprofessional collaborative skills and leadership styles that support success in translational research environments, while undertaking a research grant writing project. Part of the course involves a two-day leadership training workshop (12 hours) with the goal of understanding leadership styles and how to develop productive working relationships with team members to help students work more effectively in high-performance, interprofessional team environments. The course incorporates personality testing to develop self-awareness, with various exercises meant to build empathy, as well as knowledge of project management and effective leadership. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Nine teams of 32 students (23 MD; 9 Ph.D.) who took part in the Interprofessional Research Design course in 2017 and 2018 were required to write a reflective essay at the end of the course. We used an inductive thematic analysis to evaluate the essays. Reflective essays were coded openly by one study member. Codes were rationalized; then codes were collaboratively developed into themes by the study authors. We identified issues of integration between student groups that functioned well together and those that did not. Reflective writing responses were grouped into overall positive experiences and negative experiences. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Seven of the nine teams collectively described their experiences positively. Themes related to positive team experience were “empathizing with group members”, “sophisticated communication” and “collaborative workflow/styles.” We found that those who had a positive experience utilized knowledge and skills learned during leadership training to better understand and communicate with their teammates leading to a more collaborative and dynamic workflow. These groups had higher degrees of communication both between their task assignments and within task completion periods. They also showed more awareness of others’ needs in work and communication styles. For those that had a negative experience, themes were related to “basic communication”, “poor integration” and “theory-practice gap of leadership training.” Those who struggled showed much less in- and between-task communication and showed an inability to address the personal needs of other members in communication and workflow (while still often being able to identify them). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: These findings demonstrate the usefulness of leadership training that facilitates student self-awareness and empathy, as well as effective communication, leading to collaborative high-functioning interprofessional teams. Further work incorporating conflict management and exercises to overcome the theory/practice gap of leadership and teamwork training are recommended.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The aim of this program is to provide early support to motivated medical students interested in a career as a physician-scientist in a framework of competency-based medical education. The CTSA creates an opportunity to provide clinical research education and protected time for research for medical students in clinical and translational research. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: This physician-scientist experience offers research opportunities in a wide variety of research disciplines, focused on clinical and translational investigations. The program offers both five-month and one-year blocks of protected research time. The five-month option is integrated into the four- year medical curriculum. The one-year option requires enrollment in an established Master of Clinical Research degree. Both options provide research experience under the mentorship of a physician-scientist. The five-month option aligns with UME competencies categorized under the six ACGME Domains of Competence. The one-year option includes coursework in research design, biostatistics, research ethics, data management, scientific communication, and proposal development within the CTSA-based education program. All students in the program attend a bimonthly journal club and seminar series starting in year one and extending through the research experience. This includes discussion of the importance of mentorship, selecting a residency, scientific writing and presentation, and personal narratives of physician-scientists and their pathways to this career. All students will be followed to determine career outcome. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2018, 67 students entered the program 46% selected the year out, and 56% selected the 5-month option. Students selecting this program constitute about 10% of the medical student population overall. We have had 17 graduates of the program to date. 55% of the cohort is women which parallels the OHSU medical student population. Long-term follow-up of at least 10 years will be needed to determine career outcomes. We assess student productivity by traditional measures of submitted abstracts, manuscripts, and presentations as well as longer term outcomes such as career orientation in medicine such as entry into a research-oriented residency and ultimately into an academic medicine or research. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The OHSU physician-scientist experience successfully matches medical students with a diverse set of research mentors focused on the CTSA. Although institutional structures determine the variety of specific research opportunities, the integration of physician-scientist training into a CTSA-based training program expands the reach of training programs such as the TL1.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Verbal communication is a critical component for professional development and leadership. Yet, many clinical translational scientists lack the skills in communication of their scientific work in a meaningful and exciting manner that conveys the potential impact of their work on human health to the lay public, stakeholders, and to other scientists in different fields. We hypothesized that formal communication training could improve information transfer by trainees that would enhance their career development. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We therefore formalized a program for the KL2 scholars at the Ohio State University Center for Clinical and Translational Science that provided training from communications experts to develop a short, concise, and relevant talk about their field of research to general audiences. The program was a hybrid of workshop and individualized training. It culminated in each of the six scholars presenting public talk at the OSU STEM research dissemination and outreach space, the STEAM Factory. The scholars were administered a survey to assess their knowledge of the concepts presented in the training prior to and following the receiving the treatment, as well as their overall assessment of the experience. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The poster will present the positive results of this evaluation and the impact of the training on the KL2 scholars. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The poster explain the training as a model that other CTSA KL2 programs could adapt for their trainees.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: -Transmit learning and wisdom from past scholars -Predispose new scholars towards a receptive attitude -Normalize struggle and failure on the road to success -Encourage a community of accomplishment and celebration -Connect the scholar METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The exit presentations were given by NCATS funded junior faculty in the CTSI KL2 Scholars Program who had graduated. All KL2 Scholars take part in the K Scholar Multidisciplinary Seminar Series that meets weekly during the academic calendar. The departed scholars returned for the presentations the following semester. The audience was made up of KL2 who had started with a later cohort, the CTSI KL2 program is a 3-year program, and newly appointed scholars. Scholars were given 12-15 minutes to cover: 1) What was learned, 2) Accomplishments on specific aims, 3) Next steps for project and career, and 4) Recommendations for other scholars. Presentations were collected and reviewed for recurring themes. Themes were grouped and quotes were included to identify nuance. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: From the 17 exit presentations, six themes were identified: 1) Don’t miss the forest for the trees (x10) – “the KL2 program helps to fill in gaps scholars don’t realize they have – it is about more than just the research project, trust in the process and let the program help keep you on track.” 2) Diversify and keep an open mind (x7) – “focus is important but diversifying research and reorganizing priorities is ok.” 3) Don’t be discouraged by failure (x6) –” perseverance is key, all success comes on the heels of many failures.” 4) Importance of building network inside and outside of Scholar program (x6) – “importance of exploring and establishing collaborations” 5) Learn to say no and yes (x5) – “protect your time but be open to opportunities” 6) Seek advice and criticism but don’t follow blindly (x4) DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The use of exit presentations for graduating KL2 Scholars is a useful tool in transmitting wisdom and enhancing subsequent KL2 cohorts. The Scholar’s experience and trajectory, share personal insights and recommendations to help other Scholars get the most out of their KL2 experience, give the community a chance to celebrate the Scholar’s accomplishments, and provide the Scholar with a sense of closure in their KL2 journey. Within the exit presentations, six common themes emerged relating to best practices on making good use of resources and guidance, and learning to interact and navigate within networks and responsibilities in a mature way. Scholars in the audience benefit from hearing the insights and advice from their predecessors. The identification of themes helps the program to understand where it adds value.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: In the US, 60-90% of adults have experienced emotional trauma-- defined as an event or series of events (such as abuse, loss, or chronic stressors) that negatively affect health. Trauma exposure is strongly associated with proportional increases in chronic diseases, behavioral health disorders, and risky behaviors. These negative sequelae disproportionately affect ethnic minorities and urban, underserved populations. Physicians and healthcare providers can play important roles in intervention or re-traumatization of victims. However, current standard medical training does not include trauma or Trauma Informed Care (TIC). We aimed to examine the knowledge, attitudes, perceived skills, and behaviors of internal medicine residents regarding managing patients with histories of trauma, as well as residents’ desires for additional training in trauma informed care. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We conducted an online survey of residents enrolled in 4 internal medicine programs in Baltimore, Maryland to assess the following behaviors: recognizing, screening, managing, and referring patients with trauma histories. The questionnaire was based on PREMIS (Physician Readiness to Manage Intimate Partner Violence Survey) and addressed residents’ knowledge, attitudes, self-assessed preparedness, and close personal experiences with trauma. Nonparametric tests (Kruskal-Wallis, Fisher’s exact, and Wilcoxon rank sum) were used for analysis. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Of the 168 residents who responded to the survey (54% response rate), 44% were female, 55% White, 28% Asian, 4% Black and 13.2% unknown/other. Knowledge and preparedness were very limited. 83% percent of respondents underestimated trauma prevalence; 31.7% felt inadequately prepared to appropriately respond to positive disclosures. 59.5% reported they seldom asked about trauma in the past 6 months, and 8.8% never asked. Factors significantly associated with higher frequency of screening patients include greater perceived preparedness to identify, respond to, and refer patients (p =.0001 −.012); familiarity with referral resources (p=.005); comfort in discussing trauma with patients (p =.003); and perceived faculty (p =.001) and workplace support (p =.038). 68.7% had previous training on some trauma-related topics in medical school, and 42.2% did in residency; 91.8% wished for additional training on trauma and trauma informed care. Differences among genders, races, years in training, and program sites were minimal. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Internal medicine residents in Baltimore had very limited knowledge about trauma prevalence and risks for comorbidities. Although most residents feel TIC is relevant to clinical practice, they feel unprepared to identify, respond to, manage, and refer patients with histories of trauma. Our results support the need for integration of trauma and Trauma Informed Care training into graduate medical education for internal medicine residents.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science Institute (CTSI) put in place a KL2 program in 2007 and introduced an 18-month Translational Research Academy (TRA) in 2010. The TRA provides education and leadership development training, research support services, mentoring, and networking opportunities to 15-20 early-career clinical and translational researchers, including those receiving KL2 awards. The KL2 and TRA programs make up the Mentored-Career Development Core that is administered by the Wake Forest CTSA Education Program. Over the years, the program administrators have collected feedback from the graduates on what they liked and did not like about the programs. However, a comprehensive evaluation to understand the impact of the trainings on helping scholars advance their research and their research careers was not conducted. The purpose of this evaluation was to assess if and how the KL2 and TRA programs are helping scholars advance their research and career in research. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Semi-structured phone interviews were conducted with 11 selected CTSI scholars from both KL2 and TRA programs. The interviews focused on 4 key areas: expectations coming into the program, role the program played in their career development over time, what else could/should have program done to support them and their research, and which of the other CTSI services were valuable in their career development. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Even though scholars joined the program as an early-career researcher, the amount of experience in research they had varied and so did their areas of interest. The participants in the program also included both clinician and basic researchers. Scholars came into the program with different level of expectations and drive to use this program as a platform to lift their research careers. The conversations during these interviews gave an insight on career trajectories that the scholars have taken before and after joining the academy. For example, among the scholars that had graduated from the programs, 5 of the 6 had received a career development award, all 6 had their own grants to support their research, 3 had received professional promotions, and all 6 have an administrative leadership role they play, in addition to focusing on their research career. The information on where the scholars were at the beginning and the pathway they have taken to get to where they are now allowed us to better understand what aspects of the program was most valuable. The scholars noted that sessions around grant writing and developing specific aims were very helpful. Among the services provided, having a grant editor support was something that everyone noted as the most important service to them, even after leaving the program. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The impact of the interviews and candid feedback provided by the scholars have been immensely valuable to program administrators to really understand the impact the program (and which components specifically) is having for the scholars. Looking at the career trajectories of the scholars, it was noted that scholars coming in to the academy with some experience doing research and ability to continue engaging in research benefited the most from what the program had to offer. Scholars that were still very early in their research career gained knowledge but were not always able to apply it because they were not working towards a grant at the time. Using the data on career trajectories, recommendations for improving the program, and other CTSI services that were most valuable, the program administrators decided to redesign the curriculum. The new version of the program is now tailored for scholars who have research experience and are working towards a career development grant such as a K or R. This will allow them to have a curriculum that is more intense and hands-on with an expectation that the scholars will submit the application towards the end of the program. A separate program is being developed for early-career researchers who are still setting their foot into t field to provide them basic research competencies through ad hoc courses and seminars.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Early career researchers at Mount Sinai have access to a wide range of resources and support. It can, however, be challenging for new investigators to know where to find information and who to ask for help. To address this issue, an Emerging Investigators website was conceived to bring together resources, provide educational support and foster a community of early career investigators at Mount Sinai. In order to ensure this resource effectively meets the needs of this cohort of researchers, and to determine the scope and content of the proposed website, a series of focus group interviews were undertaken with early career researchers at various stages of their careers. The aims of these focus groups were to 1) explore the self-perceived challenges faced by early career researchers that could be addressed through education and / or support, 2) explore the self-perceived learning needs of early career researchers that are not currently being addressed at Mount Sinai, 3) determine the website content that early career researchers would find valuable to support them in their development. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A convenience sample of early career researchers at Mount Sinai were contacted for participation (N = 20). A total of 13 participants responded and three focus groups were conducted, one with the KL2 scholars (N=4), one with TL1 postdocs (N=4) and one with PORTAL students (N=5) during Spring 2018. Participants were initially asked to consider the challenges that early career researchers face. They were subsequently asked to consider which of these challenges they thought could be addressed through education or support. Participants were then asked to consider what they wished they knew more about in relation to research knowledge, skills or behaviors. Participants were finally asked to discuss the resources or support they thought would help them to manage the challenges or meet the learning needs they identified. The interview questions were semi-structured to allow the conversation to flow, and to allow the participants to discuss issues of importance to them. At the end of the discussion, participants were asked to rank their top priorities for inclusion in an Emerging Investigators website, up to a maximum of 3 per person. Focus group sessions lasted between 1 and 1.5 hours. All key points were captured by the participants on flip-chart paper and sticky notes. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Interview data was transcribed and thematic analysis was used to identifying patterns or themes within the data. A theoretical thematic analysis was conducted, driven by the specific research questions. Each segment of data that was relevant to the research questions or captured something interesting was coded. These codes were examined and further grouped into six key themes that were consistent across all three focus groups. These themes were categorized as: Mapping the research pathway, Research skills, Personal development, Mentorship, Community of Practice and Opportunities at Mount Sinai. Within each of these themes, more specific codes align directly with learning needs for early career investigators at Mount Sinai. When asked to prioritize topics for inclusion in the website, the pre-doc PORTAL students selected research skills that included statistics, navigating the IRB and writing and publication, as well as mapping the research landscape at Mount Sinai. Both the post-doc TL1s and the KL2s also selected some research skills such as scientific writing and conference presentation, but also prioritized personal development and “soft skills” such as leadership, management, collaborating with others and finding a work-life balance. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The themes articulated by the focus group participants have formed the basis for developing the Emerging Investigators website. Each of the key themes will be reflected in the learning and resources provided on the website. The prioritization of topics differed between groups, reflecting the different stages and levels of experience of these researchers. As a result, the website provides key learning and “top tips” suitable for all levels of early career researchers, but with links to further reading and resources for those at a more advanced level who are interested in learning more. In addition, the reported need for communication, collaboration and social interaction with peers and other researchers across Mount Sinai resulted in the addition of further web-based resources such as a discussion forum, a blog to feature research and provide a sounding board for research efforts, and a calendar of events targeted specifically at early career researchers. The focus groups provided much valued insight to underpin this project and ensure that a valuable resource is created that will meet the needs of early career researchers. The website is currently under development with a view to launch a pilot site in early 2019.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: This project will present the analysis assessing which of the admission criteria is a useful tool to predict completion of all program requirements METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: All admission criteria from graduates (2003-2016) will be analyzed. Outcomes will be measured according to the scholar’s performance during the two-year of studies and its success in completing on time all program requirements. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses will be used to determine potential association in each criteria and in the total score. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We expect that the PPC and total score will be correlated with a higher rate of successful outcomes. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: A systematic admission process should lead to timely program completion.