OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Empowering the Participant Voice (EPV) is a Rockefeller-led 6-CTSA consortium that aims to collect research participant feedback through new Research Participant Perception Survey (RPPS)/REDCap infrastructure and data aggregation to a national database. Here we describe diverse Use Cases and launch dissemination to other hubs. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The EPV team refined the RPPS-S and developed fielding and data standards, a multi-lingual RPPS/REDCap project XML, At-a-Glance Dashboard, EPV Consortium Database, and Use Cases to align with local initiatives and stakeholder input. Sites ran full thread tests of the infrastructure before launch. To demonstrate RPPS/REDCap, 5 sites implemented Use Cases, surveyed diverse populations via email, patient portal or SMS, and analyzed results using the At-a-Glance Dashboard External module (which provides visual analytics and enables filtering by participant/study characteristics). Sites continue to collect, synthesize and respond to actionable data. To disseminate infrastructure, we will invite early adopters to implement the RPPS/REDCap infrastructure locally, joining the EPV learning collective. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: To date, 5 sites surveyed 10,199 research participants, at post-consent or end of study. 2833 (26%) research participants responded, from diverse demographic groups. More than 90% gave the Top Box score response regarding courtesy, respect for cultural background, privacy, and lack of pressure to join a study. Disparities were apparent in the informed consent experience, with a Top Box score range of 38-78% in different demographics. Dissatisfaction with out-of-pocket research costs was a recurring theme. Top Box scores varied for feeling like a valued partner in research (69-93%), would recommend research participation to friends or family (56%-81%), and Overall Experience (64%-90%) questions. Sites identified actionable findings in areas of consent, communication, partnership, and study conduct. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The EPV RPPS/REDCap infrastructure enabled sites to broadly collect participant feedback, identify actionable findings and make inter-institutional comparisons. Collaborators are designing local initiatives to increase response rate and diversity, address disparities in research participation experiences, and discover better practices.

As the COVID-19 pandemic took hold in the USA in early 2020, it became clear that knowledge of the prevalence of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among asymptomatic individuals could inform public health policy decisions and provide insight into the impact of the infection on vulnerable populations. Two Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Hubs and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) set forth to conduct a national seroprevalence survey to assess the infection’s rate of spread. This partnership was able to quickly design and launch the project by leveraging established research capacities, prior experiences in large-scale, multisite studies and a highly skilled workforce of CTSA hubs and unique experimental capabilities at the NIH to conduct a diverse prospective, longitudinal observational cohort of 11,382 participants who provided biospecimens and participant-reported health and behavior data. The study was completed in 16 months and benefitted from transdisciplinary teamwork, information technology innovations, multimodal communication strategies, and scientific partnership for rigor in design and analytic methods. The lessons learned by the rapid implementation and dissemination of this national study is valuable in guiding future multisite projects as well as preparation for other public health emergencies and pandemics.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Six CTSA sites formed a collaboration to DEVELOP, DEMONSTRATE, AND DISSEMINATE new infrastructure to streamline collection and analysis of research participant feedback, using the Research Participant Perception Survey (RPPS), common standards, and customized REDCap-based tools, to improve the clinical research enterprise. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: DEVELOP charter, consensus approach, core survey, deployment standards, data-use agreements; define meta-data, system requirements for the infrastructure, use-cases. Engage stakeholders for broad institutional and community input. Build RPPS/REDCap project, visual analytics Dashboard External Module, and Program Dashboard module for evaluation. Configure to use with Multilingual Module. DEMONSTRATE by implementing site-based use cases that reflect local priorities and span diverse populations, testing different methods of survey deployment (REDCap, patient portal, SMS) to showcase utility and flexibility. Generate data for local and inter-institutional benchmarking. Refine, then DISSEMINATE new infrastructure across the Consortium and REDCap community for broader testing and uptake. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The project team refined the RPPS survey for inclusivity and mode of informed consent; defined standards for survey timing, sampling, and study metadata; configured the data dictionary in English and Spanishfor use with the multi-lingual module ; developed tools for project evaluation. Stakeholder engagement identified themes of anticipated value and fears about feedback. We designed an At-a-Glance Dashboard to display survey results with detailed analytics and filters. A REDCap application programming interface will send de-identified site data to the EPV Consortium Database to support benchmarking. Full implementation began November 2021 and will scale in 2022. Dissemination to Consortium and REDCap users is ongoing through presentations and a project website (www.Rockefeller.edu/research/epv). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Direct feedback from representative populations about their experiences in research is essential to understand and resolve barriers to broad participation in research. Streamlined RPPS/REDCap infrastructure provides a platform for local and national benchmarking, and collection of actionable data to improve clinical research.

The Trial Innovation Network has established an infrastructure for single IRB review in response to federal policies. The Network’s single IRB (sIRBs) have successfully supported over 70 multisite studies via more than 800 reliance arrangements. This has generated several lessons learned that can benefit the national clinical research enterprise, as we work to improve the conduct of clinical trials. These lessons include distinguishing the roles of the single IRB from institutional Human Research Protections programs, establishing a consistent sIRB review model, standardizing collection of local context and supplemental, study-specific information, and educating and empowering lead study teams to support their sites.

There are many structural problems facing the UK at present, from a weakened National Health Service to deeply ingrained inequality. These challenges extend through society to clinical practice and have an impact on current mental health research, which was in a perilous state even before the coronavirus pandemic hit. In this editorial, a group of psychiatric researchers who currently sit on the Academic Faculty of the Royal College of Psychiatrists and represent the breadth of research in mental health from across the UK discuss the challenges faced in academic mental health research. They reflect on the need for additional investment in the specialty and ask whether this is a turning point for the future of mental health research.

The COVID-19 pandemic changed the clinical research landscape in America. The most urgent challenge has been to rapidly review protocols submitted by investigators that were designed to learn more about or intervene in COVID-19. International Review Board (IRB) offices developed plans to rapidly review protocols related to the COVID-19 pandemic. An online survey was conducted with the IRB Directors at Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) institutions as well as two focus groups. Across the CTSA institutions, 66% reviewed COVID-19 protocols across all their IRB committees, 22% assigned protocols to just one committee, and 10% created a new committee for COVID-19 protocols. Fifty-two percent reported COVID-19 protocols were reviewed much faster, 41% somewhat faster, and 7% at the same speed as other protocols. Three percent reported that the COVID-19 protocols were reviewed with much better quality, 32% reported slightly better quality, and 65% reported the reviews were of the same quality as similar protocols before the COVID-19 pandemic. IRBs were able to respond to the emergent demand for reviewing COVID-19 protocols. Most of the increased review capacity was due to extra effort by IRB staff and members and not changes that will be easily implemented across all research going forward.

Diets rich in fruits and vegetables (FV), which contain (poly)phenols, protect against age-related inflammation and chronic diseases. T-lymphocytes contribute to systemic cytokine production and are modulated by FV intake. Little is known about the relative potency of different (poly)phenols in modulating cytokine release by lymphocytes. We compared thirty-one (poly)phenols and six (poly)phenol mixtures for effects on pro-inflammatory cytokine release by Jurkat T-lymphocytes. Test compounds were incubated with Jurkat cells for 48 h at 1 and 30 µm, with or without phorbol ester treatment at 24 h to induce cytokine release. Three test compounds that reduced cytokine release were further incubated with primary lymphocytes at 0·2 and 1 µm for 24 h, with lipopolysaccharide added at 5 h. Cytokine release was measured, and generation of H2O2 by test compounds was determined to assess any potential correlations with cytokine release. A number of (poly)phenols significantly altered cytokine release from Jurkat cells (P<0·05), but H2O2 generation did not correlate with cytokine release. Resveratrol, isorhamnetin, curcumin, vanillic acid and specific (poly)phenol mixtures reduced pro-inflammatory cytokine release from T-lymphocytes, and there was evidence for interaction between (poly)phenols to further modulate cytokine release. The release of interferon-γ induced protein 10 by primary lymphocytes was significantly reduced following treatment with 1 µm isorhamnetin (P<0·05). These results suggest that (poly)phenols derived from onions, turmeric, red grapes, green tea and açai berries may help reduce the release of pro-inflammatory mediators in people at risk of chronic inflammation.

Over 40 years of archaeological investigations along the south coast of Papua New Guinea has identified a rapid succession of cultural changes during the late Holocene. The so-called ‘Papuan Hiccup’ (c. 1200–800 cal bp) is a poorly understood period of socio-economic upheaval along the coast, identified mainly from changes in archaeological ceramic styles and settlement patterns. During this period, the region-wide Early Papuan Pottery (EPP) tradition diverges into separate, localised ceramic sequences that have generic associations with local ethnographic wares. A correspondence between the timing of the Papuan Hiccup and a period of peak El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) activity implies a link between cultural and climate change. This paper explores this relationship further by examining changes in interaction networks along the south coast of Papua New Guinea, specifically focusing on chert artefacts. Chemical characterisation (portable X-Ray Fluorescence; pXRF) and technological analysis are used to map changes in lithic technology over time, including access to raw materials and technological organisation, at the site of Taurama, a prehistoric coastal village site that was occupied both prior to and after the Papuan Hiccup. Although the sample sizes are small and the interpretations necessarily circumscribed, it is argued that changes in the number of chert sources being exploited and in the intensity of core reduction at Taurama may be related to climate change in the region.

Acute psychological stress is positively associated with a cold/flu. The present randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study examined the effect of three potentially probiotic bacteria on the proportion of healthy days over a 6-week period in academically stressed undergraduate students (n 581) who received Lactobacillus helveticus R0052, Bifidobacterium longum ssp. infantis R0033, Bifidobacterium bifidum R0071 or placebo. On each day, participants recorded the intensity (scale: 0 = not experiencing to 3 = very intense) for nine cold/flu symptoms, and a sum of symptom intensity >6 was designated as a day of cold/flu. B. bifidum resulted in a greater proportion of healthy days than placebo (P≤ 0·05). The percentage of participants reporting ≥ 1 d of cold/flu during the 6-week intervention period was significantly lower with B. bifidum than with placebo (P< 0·05). There were no effects of B. infantis or L. helveticus compared with placebo on either outcome. A predictive model accounted for influential characteristics and their interactions on daily reporting of cold/flu episodes. The proportion of participants reporting a cold on any given day was lower at weeks 2 and 3 with B. bifidum and B. infantis than with placebo for the average level of stress and the most commonly reported number of hours of sleep. Daily intake of bifidobacteria provides benefit related to cold/flu outcomes during acute stress.

The commentaries provided an array of perspectives on identity management in our profession. However, there was general agreement on what should be central and distinctive about our field and on the need to cultivate a positive identity for the profession. The commentators also suggested a number of ways to cultivate this identity. For us, the commentaries also stimulated further reflection on our approach to training graduate students. We share our reflections and encourage readers to take the time to reflect on their own efforts to contribute to the profession's management of identity.

Using concepts from the literature on individual and collective identity, we argue that organizational psychologists are at a tipping point with regard to identity. Assertions regarding a lack of distinctiveness from other fields, ambiguity in individual identification with the field among new entrants, hyperadaptation to external forces, and a failure to manage within-identity dynamics associated with science and practice are presented. These assertions are supported with descriptions of the nature of growth in the field, challenges in academic psychology departments, and calls for changing research agendas. With the aim of engaging others in collective sensemaking, alternative future scenarios for organizational psychology are presented.