To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The Institute of Translational Health Sciences (Clinical and Translational Science Awards Program hub) developed a program coined Community Voices to invite communities to submit project ideas and be matched with academic researchers. We describe formative research to understand community and academic researcher perspectives on how the program could facilitate collaborations addressing community priorities.
We conducted four focus groups with 31 community-based organization (CBO) representatives and 11 semi-structured interviews with academic researchers in the Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho regions. Questions included the appeal of Community Voices to engage community and academic partners, potential program usefulness, and Community Voices’ potential role in building community–academic partnerships. We used an inductive, constant comparison approach to code transcripts and thematic analysis to generate themes.
Most CBO representatives were female (87.1%) and Hispanic/Latino (61.3%). Most academic researchers had a PhD (63.6%) and worked at a university (81.8%). The themes were: (1) community–academic partnerships built on trust will offer mutual benefit, (2) community-initiated project ideas should prioritize community needs, (3) matchmaking will accelerate connections but should not replace time to foster partnership, (4) Community Voices should go beyond matchmaking and provide ongoing support/training, and (5) fostering effective communication is key to partnership success.
Community Voices is a novel, bidirectional community engagement program model that advances current practices of prioritizing researchers’ project ideas. This community-driven program may shift the future direction of community engagement practices where prioritizing community’s ideas becomes the norm of community–academic partnerships in clinical and translational science.
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To test the effect of a trusted Community Health Worker (CHW) support model to increase accessibility, feasibility and completion of COVID-19 home-testing in Native American and Latino communities. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We conducted a multi-site pragmatic randomized controlled trial among adult Native Americans and Latinos from the Flathead reservation in Montana and Yakima Valley in Washington. Participants were block randomized by site location and age to either an active or passive study arm. Participants in the active arm received assistance with online COVID-19 test kit registration and virtual swabbing support from CHWs, while the passive study arm received the standard-of-care support from the COVID-19 home testing kit vendor. Simple and multivariate logistic regression modeled the association between home-testing distribution mechanism and test completion. Multivariate models included community and sex as covariates. Descriptive feedback was collected in a post-test survey. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Overall, 63% of the 268 enrolled participants completed COVID-19 tests, and 50% completed tests yielding a valid result. Active arm participants had significantly higher odds of test completion (OR 1.66, 95% CI: [1.01, 2.75], p-value=0.04). Differences were most pronounced among adults ≥60 years, with 84% completing testing kits in the active arm, compared to 58% in the passive arm (p=0.07). Ease of use and not having to leave home were top positive aspects of the home-based test while transporting and mailing samples to lab and long/overwhelming instructions were cited as negative aspects. Most test completers (93%) were satisfied with their experience and 95% found CHW assistance useful. Sample expiration and insufficient identifiers were top causes of non-valid test results. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: While test completion rates were low in both study arms, the CHW support led to a higher COVID-19 test completion rate, particularly among older adults. Still, CHW support alone does not fully eliminate testing barriers. Socio-economic differences must be accounted for in future product development for home-based testing to improve health equity.
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Test the effects of a community health worker supported model to deliver home-based COVID-19 testing in the Yakima Valley (Washington) and Flathead Reservation (Montana) METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A pragmatic, randomized controlled clinical trial evaluating the effects of a community health worker supported model to deliver home-based COVID-19 testing in the Yakima Valley (Washington) and Flathead Reservation (Montana) vs. a modified direct-to-consumer. 400 participants will be enrolled, 200 from each community. Outcomes include comparing the number of completed testing kits as well as the number of testing kits with successful (detected vs not-detected) results. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The poster presents preliminary results from 191 participants, blinded to study assignment. To date, 53% of enrolled participants returned a sample for testing and 39% received a usable (detected or not-detected) result. Our populations experienced a high-rate (16%) of sample errors, required 28 replacement kits and had 20 participants randomized to the control arm receive the intervention to ensure participants received testing during the pandemic. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Home-based testing models are build for those who are proficient in verbal and written English, have high tech. literacy and continuous access to internet. For home-based testing to have similar success rates as white Americans, cultural and demographic differences and disparities will need to be accounted for in development and implementation.
A collaborative research model was developed and tested to enable regional healthcare systems to join multisite clinical trials emanating from the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Trial Innovation Network (TIN) by the Institute of Translational Health Sciences at the University of Washington and the Northwest Participant and Clinical Interactions (NW PCI) Network. The NW PCI is a collaborative group of regional research programs located at medical centers, healthcare systems, and universities across Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho. This article describes the purpose, development, barriers, and initial experience with feasibility assessment for TIN-supported studies in the NW PCI. The tools and processes of the NW PCI Network were adapted to enable network sites to assess studies for clinical relevance and feasibility. Seven of seventeen TIN-supported studies were reviewed for consideration; three of which resulted in successful completion of study documentation for site selection by NW PCI sites. The NW PCI/TIN model can be adapted by other CTSAs to increase involvement of regional research programs in national multisite clinical research studies. Barriers to expanding TIN-supported trials to regional networks include short timelines for study document submissions, insufficient site reimbursement rates, and non-feasible study designs.
The Institute of Translational Health Sciences (ITHS) promotes and supports translational research collaboration between clinicians, communities, and investigators across the five-state Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho (WWAMI) region. The ITHS has developed a collaborative regional clinical research network, the Northwest Participant & Clinical Interactions Network (NW PCI), involving 12 diverse clinical health systems and academic institutions.
This descriptive article details NW PCI’s development, infrastructure and governance, tools, characteristics, and initial outcomes.
Regional NW PCI sites are conducting largely industry-sponsored studies; they are interested in including more grant-funded research. Regional NW PCI sites had over 1,240 open studies involving over 6700 patients in 2016. NW PCI trials are largely industry-sponsored; NW PCI sites are interested in including more grant-funded research. In its first three years, the NW PCI Coordinating Center facilitated regional sites’ participation in 34 new grant and contract applications across diverse topics.
The NW PCI model supports the goals of the developing CTSA Trial Innovation Network by increasing access to cutting-edge research across the Northwestern U.S., by supporting investigators seeking diverse populations, including those with rare diseases, for their research studies, and by providing settings to test implementation and dissemination of effective interventions.