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.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The Think Tanks’ aim to assist faculty innovators along the path from discovery to commercialization; serving as a one-stop-shop where investigators can access advice, pilot funds, and direction toward other available resources within the Indiana CTSI. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Faculty receive guidance from a pool of advisors in the drug and device industry, as well as their respective university commercialization offices; who serve as an essential resource for a wide range of scientific, technical, clinical, business, and regulatory questions. Investigators submit a simple intake form to connect with a project facilitator for detailed guidance prior to formal meetings. Projects are guided from start to finish with robust tracking and milestone-based funding to help generate data for Investigational New Drug (IND) or Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) applications. Project tracking is conducted using REDCap, which is used for all investigator submissions, with internal processes also tracked in REDCap. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: From Feb-Aug 2021; the Think Tanks provided feedback to 15 drug projects and 6 medical device projects. This included 12 from Indiana University; 4 from Purdue University; and 5 from the University of Notre Dame. Interestingly; drug innovations were submitted primarily by tenure track faculty (100%) with a history of NIH/NSF funding (50%); while device innovations were submitted primarily by clinical faculty without a history of NIH/NSF funding (66%). Based on first-round feedback, a total of approximately $3;400 in pilot funds were provided. Efforts are underway to obtain survey-based feedback from all applicants to date; which will be used to inform future program modifications. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The budding “Think Tank” program provides faculty with a broad perspective of the entire drug and medical device development process, helping investigators understand the critical interplay development stages. Future work seeks to enhance faculty engagement in, and understanding of the commercialization process across Indiana CTSI institutions.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To determine the utility of any standard, one must first evaluate whether or not the standard meets the needs of the use case it is meant to support. We aim to quantify data availability of the HL7 FHIR standard to support data collection for three state-based registries in a rural state and measure the potential effects on data quality and collection time. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: FHIR mapping will be performed to assess the level of HL7 FHIR standard completeness (or data element coverage) in supporting data collection for the three registries. A systematic approach, previously developed and used by Garza and Zozus, will be used to map registry data elements to corresponding HL7 FHIR standard resources. FHIR coverage will be calculated as a percentage (total data elements “Available in FHIR” vs. total data elements overall) and will be observed across different domain areas (i.e., demographics vs. medications vs. vital signs, etc.) in order to identify the domains with the least and most coverage. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Although there have been informatics solutions that relied on data exchange standards to improve data collection, none have actually evaluated the coverage of the standard for supporting the needs of clinical data registries. To address this gap, we aim to evaluate the availability of the HL7 FHIR standard to support data collection for three state-based registries. These results will provide insight into the generalizability of a FHIR-based solution to support data acquisition and processing across multiple registries and demonstrate the potential for seamless exchange of that data for secondary use in clinical and translational research. Quantifying the coverage will also be used to further advance its development in order to meet the data collection needs of state and national clinical data registries. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Registries often rely on manual abstraction of EHR data. These manual approaches have had a negative impact on data quality and cost, often due to the complexities associated with collection and mapping of the data to fit the registry model. HL7 FHIR has the potential to address these issues by automating part or all of the data collection process.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Writers with high self-efficacy perform better than writers with low self-efficacy regardless of writing ability. We investigated whether Shut Up & Write® (SUAW), a less-intensive writing intervention, produced gains in writing self-efficacy similar to those reported by intensive, longer-term interventions. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Meetings were held 2x/wk for 5 wks via Zoom, for 1 hour. Participants were encouraged to attend at least 1x/wk. The 1st few mins were devoted to a discussion of what each person planned to work on. Then, a timer was set and each writer muted themselves, shuttered their webcam, and wrote. When the alarm sounded, everyone returned to the group, and discussed what was accomplished. We measured writing self-efficacy before & after participating in SUAW using a pre-post survey design and used two-tailed paired t-tests to test for significant differences between pre- and post-test means. SUAW participants (n=23) were in 1 of 2 categories: 10 were self-selected LEADS scholars from MSIs, and 13 were medical students in a palliative care program. 86% were URB, 78% were female. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Seven (30%) SUAW participants completed both the pre- and post-survey. Individuals showed significantly higher agreement from pre-to-post on the self-efficacy item “I have a generally positive attitude toward writing” (p=0.047) using a 5-point Likert scale from “completely agree” to “completely disagree.” Most other items did not indicate significant change between pre- and post-survey. The mean of the question “How satisfied were you with this Shut Up & Write activity?” which appeared only on the post-survey (n=10) was 1.10 (1=extremely satisfied, 5=extremely dissatisfied). Anticipated result: We suspect that the benefits of SUAW are best actualized by ongoing attendance, and that benefits are cumulative. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: We found that participation in SUAW promotes writing self-efficacy in early-career URB researchers. This is an exciting finding because publishing ones research is essential for academic advancement, and research supports a relationship between writing self-efficacy and writing production. This may curtail URB scientists’ rate of attrition.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To maximize health outcomes from their work, basic researchers must understand the process by which lab discoveries are translated into clinical care. We developed an academic course designed to provide students in our Clinical and Translational Sciences PhD program with an in-depth understanding of translational applications of basic research. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A preliminary needs assessment was done with students, educators, and clinicians to identify the course content. Based on these data, didactic modules including research question identification, research team development, participant recruitment, and research data collection were piloted in a synchronous, virtual course. Then, for 6 weeks, students shadowed clinical mentors who worked in the students research areas. Finally, with their mentors, students developed and presented clinical research protocols. Student pre- and post-course surveys gauged alignment of course objectives and learning outcomes. A post-course, focus group with students gathered feedback on course content, structure, and students confidence in implementing their experiences from the course into real-world settings. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Six MD/PhD and PhD students participated in the pilot course. Pre/post-assessments (n=4) showed students were more confident in clinical question/research protocol formulation, development of patient recruitment/enrollment strategies, and integration of research methodologies into their research projects after completing the course. Students asked for additional content on budgeting and grant funding. Post-course focus group participants (n=2) appreciated the experience of writing a clinical protocol and the flipped classroom teaching style, which allowed them to network with clinical faculty leading didactic sessions. Students also noted course content was relevant and motivating, although they suggested adding content about clinical trials measures to enhance their shadowing experiences. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: A course that combines didactic and clinical experiential training provides a robust, translational research foundation for basic scientists. This training is critical to help them contribute to the effective/efficient translation of lab discoveries to clinical practice. Future course development will include students from other PhD programs.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Despite calls for the integration of Education for Sustainable Healthcare (ESH) into health professional training programs, most curricula have yet to adapt accordingly. This qualitative study sought to understand faculty perspectives on ESH knowledge, interest, barriers, and facilitators. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: From 2018 to 2020, 71 health professional education faculty from 6 University of California (UC) campuses participated in ESH integration workshops. Using purposeful sampling based on gender and campus, a subset of workshop faculty participants were selected to participate in individual interviews. Interviews were conducted via Zoom using a structured interview guide, eliciting participants experience integrating ESH, perceived barriers and facilitators, and perspectives on student, faculty, and health science leadership knowledge and interest. Transcripts were double coded with an inductive-deductive approach using Dedoose, reconciled, and analyzed to identify themes. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Participants included 17 faculty at 6 UC campuses representing diverse health disciplines. Although participants noted high general awareness of and interest in climate change among students and faculty, they observed a lack of specific, health-relevant knowledge, resulting in discomfort communicating with others on climate and health. Perceived barriers to expansion of ESH included limited curricular space, competing topics, and lack of faculty expertise. Participants posited that framing climate change in health terms, establishing learning objectives and protected faculty time, identifying connections to ESH within existing research and curriculum, and obtaining commitments from campus leadership would facilitate successful ESH integration. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Our findings reinforce student and faculty interest in ESH curricular integration and identify important barriers and facilitators, lending context for educators planning ESH infusion. Training of faculty on climate health is urgently needed for ESH integration in health professional education.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Project objectives: Collect, analyze, redesign, and redeploy the follow-up surveys sent after services rendered or educational offerings attended to improve outcome measurement. Presentation objectives: Provide a process for others to optimize their assessment surveys. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A team of interdisciplinary experts from Evaluation and Improvement, Workforce Development, and Administration took a systematic and collaborative approach to optimizing service and educational offering assessment. The team collected all 35 existing surveys currently in use at the CTSA, developed a matrix table to organize findings, cross-analyzed/normed to recognize and reduce bias, engaged other staff and faculty at specific intervals to encourage buy-in, and responded to feedback. The team then updated both surveys and format, programmed revised surveys into a centralized platform, and provided instructions and training for implementation. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: This effort resulted in streamlining both the assessment process and the surveys used by the Southern California Clinical and Translational Science Institute (SC CTSI). Instead of using different versions of surveys or none at all, now SC CTSI commits to using the same follow-up survey for events and for educational offerings institute-wide, and agrees to store and access that data via a single platform, REDCap, allowing any member to see data in real time. This will allow SC CTSI to monitor and evaluate its short-term outcomes at an institutional level, and determine areas for improvement or best practices. Future plans include training on survey data interpretation for decision making. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Presenters will share lessons learned and considerations when embarking on streamlining assessment practices institute-wide, highlighting the importance of leveraging educational methodology to go beyond measuring satisfaction and into measuring learning. Presenters will share revised surveys.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: This study examines faculty mentor experiences in a summer research program for students traditionally underrepresented in translational research. The objectives are to understand mentor perspectives of the program and how their views were impacted by the pandemic-related pivot to a remote format. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: During the summer research program, students work with a faculty mentor on an ongoing research project. Program staff pair students with diverse faculty members who share their research interests. Our program has traditionally been offered as a residential in-person program but in 2020 we moved swiftly to a fully remote learning format. Students continued to work on research projects remotely and interacted virtually with their faculty mentors. For the past five cohort years, we have collected comparable data about faculty perspectives of their program experience, which allows us to evaluate the impact of the remote format on the faculty experience compared to that of the in-person format. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: For this study, we will examine data from five cohort years (2017-2021). A survey questionnaire was administered to mentors each year at the end of the summer research program. Data were collected on faculty satisfaction with the quality and amount of student work, the amount of time students spent on their projects, and how mentors communicated with students. In 2020 and 2021, three questions were added regarding satisfaction with the remote format. Quantitative data collected from both the in-person and remote cohorts will be compared using independent samples t-tests. Select quotes from open-ended qualitative questions will be used to illustrate mentors attitudes toward the program. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This study addresses a gap in the literature about summer research programs, as previous work has primarily focused on trainees. As many training programs continue to remain remote or adopt hybrid models, these results have implications for the design of similar mentored research programs.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The “hidden curriculum” is a set of unofficial rules outside of the formal curriculum that allows medical students to succeed. It is often not accessible to those who are first-generation in medicine. This study created a novel survey tool to directly evaluate the hidden curriculum, its contributing factors, and its effects on students. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Using available literature as a guide, a novel survey tool to evaluate different aspects of the hidden curriculum was created. This survey consists of 17 Likert scale questions on topics varying from sense of belongingness to dress code, self-guided studying, mentorship, and confidence in knowing how to succeed. This survey tool was embedded into a larger survey evaluating health disparities and diversity, inclusion, accessibility, and justice (DEIAJ) in the curricular and extracurricular spaces. This survey packet was administered to all medical students at a large U.S. medical school. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: 166 medical students from all years responded to this survey. 70% were female, 27% male, and 3% non-binary or prefer not to say. 67% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that there is a hidden curriculum accessible to only those who have family members in medicine. 57% agreed or strongly agreed that the medical school gave them the adequate training and resources to succeed. 48% agreed or strongly agreed that they would perform better academically if they had more money with 11% stating they often feel embarrassed in a professional setting due to lack of money. Fellow classmen, faculty members, and upperclassmen were identified as the most useful resources to learn how to succeed in medical school. Students on average reported feeling like they knew what to do to succeed in medical school half of the time. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This data strongly supports the existence of a hidden curriculum and gives insight into the importance of financial support for low-income students and peer support groups for those who do not have family members in medicine. This data will be used to inform future interventions to address the hidden curriculum.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The goal was to develop foundational research knowledge and skills for clinicians interested in conducting clinical research. Emphasis was on the development of a research question and the iterative process necessary to transform a research question into a well-designed study and well-articulated research proposal for pilot grant funding. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The course took place over 10 sessions, May - September 2021. The application process required participants to provide an initial self-assessment of research skills and a proposed research question. 25 clinicians applied to the program, 11 were accepted, and 9 enrolled. All clinicians in the initial cohort were clinical faculty physicians. Because of the geographical distance of participants as well as the ongoing pandemic, the course used a blended learning approach with both synchronous and asynchronous learning. Participants viewed online lectures on core content coupled with live virtual sessions with opportunities for discussion and application of the content. Relevant CTSI and institutional resources were highlighted in each session. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Of the 9 clinician participants who enrolled in Research 101, the average attendance per session was 67% or 6 people. 89% or 8 participants attended five or more sessions. 5 participants submitted a letter of intent for the annual CTSI Pilot grant program, and of the five, two were invited to submit a grant application. Formal evaluation of the program is currently ongoing and will close on November 30th, at which time full results will be available. Research competencies will be assessed through a pre-post comparison, each self-rated by course participants. Additionally, participants were asked to provide input on the most and least valuable components of the course, as well as any open-ended feedback. Research 101 leadership will use these results to improve the course for future participants. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: A learning health system (LHS) is recognized as an essential means by which research evidence is translated into practice. Important to realizing the LHS vision is the engagement of clinicians into the generation and translation of research into practice. Research 101 is an important way to bolster clinician engagement in translational research.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The Workforce Development Core of the New Jersey Alliance for Clinical and Translational Science (NJ ACTS) has developed an internship program for students to engage in virtual research projects across the CTSA Hub. We sought to evaluate how intern projects within NJ ACTS align with the competencies needed for translational science. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Core leads and researchers within NJ ACTS developed 34 projects that were completed by individual interns or pairs of interns. Forty-two professional, undergraduate, and graduate students across the 3 Hub institutions have completed semester-long intern projects. Intern mentors mapped their projects to the C-COMEND competency profile for translational scientists which were further aligned with the seven fundamental character traits defined by Translation Together. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: More than 75% of intern projects addressed the C-COMEND competencies in Personal Development, Communication and Dissemination, Project Management and Time Management. Few projects (< 10%) focused on skills related to preclinical or clinical research. The competencies needed for development as a Rigorous Researcher were most consistently addressed in the intern projects. Additionally, intern projects fostered a number of skills needed for becoming a Domain Expert and Skilled Communicator. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Taken together, a virtual internship program can be designed to introduce and/or refine the competency skills needed for translational science.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The objective of this evaluation is to show how the STEP.UP program promoted the professional development at Michigan Medicine by providing clinical and translational research staff an experienced research staff mentor in a structured 9-month program. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Participant and mentor data was collected from application forms, online surveys, and interviews with both participating mentors and mentees. Validated assessments of mentoring competencies were administered. Participants were tracked over a period of four years with regular reviews of institutional records. Mentor and mentor data was also collected at the point of application each year and the application forms were aligned with NIH definitions for underrepresented populations in science in 2020. As part of a process of continuous programmatic improvement, a STEP.UP Advisory Board consisting of senior research staff and past mentors was involved in the identification, operationalization and evaluation of programmatic outcomes and is involve din the ongoing governance of this mentoring program. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Four cohorts of mentees and mentors have participated in this program since its inception. Mentees gained the greatest abilities in, Active listening, Establishing a relationship based on trust, Considering how personal and professional differences may impact expectations, and Working effectively with mentors/mentees whose personal background is different. Mentees reported the program contributed to their Career planning, Professional advancement, networking, personal growth, professional networks, and communication skills. Mentors reported learning about new professional techniques and areas of expertise. As of 2021, 75% the first cohort changed their job-classification since participating as did 25% of the second cohort and 100% of mentees have maintained research careers. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The creation of this program in 2019 marked the beginning of a novel professional development opportunity at Michigan Medicine. The evaluation results show how STEP.UP contributes to advancing clinical and translational study teams and how it can inform and the identification of best practices in clinical and translational workforce development.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Many ophthalmologic procedures involve operating on or manipulating the globe and bony orbit. Creating an anatomically accurate globe and orbit is of interest to improve surgical education for trainees. The purpose of this study was to create a high-fidelity globe and orbit model using synthetic materials and utilizing 3D-printing techniques. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A deidentified computed tomography scan of the head and neck was digitally rendered and segmented using Mimics and 3-Matic (Materialise NV, Belgium) to create a digital model of the bony orbit. The model was 3D printed using a stereolithographic 3D-printer (Formlabs, Somerville, MA). The globe was created by soaking a large water bead made from a water absorbing polymer (YIQUDUO, China) for 24 hours. The water bead was then coated consecutively with three layers of silicone (Smooth-On, Macungie, PA). A standard sausage casing was hydrated and encased around the water bead, representing the conjunctiva. The globe was placed into the 3D-printed orbit. An incision was made in the sausage casing and the defect was sutured by one ophthalmologist. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The bony orbital anatomy was accurately represented by stereolithographic printing. The size and feel of the artificial globe was similar to that of an in vivo human globe. The incised sausage casing covering the globe was able to be manipulated and sutured using a 8-0 suture in a microsurgical environment. The sausage casing had high-fidelity characteristics of an in vivo human eye conjunctiva. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This model can be used for teaching of conjunctival suturing for ophthalmologic trainees. By use of easily obtained materials for the globe, this model has the potential to standardize teaching methods of challenging techniques, and can reduce the need for animal and human tissue procurement, which is the current standard for ophthalmologic teaching.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The objective of this evaluation is to evaluate the long-term impact of the PORT program on the clinical and translational research careers of the participating research staff. The impact of the program is best demonstrated through measures of the scientific contributions of the participants as well as their professional advancement over time. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The PORT program participants were tracked through the collection of instructional and public records, including the collection of their subsequent grant and publications. The clinical and translational research careers of the participants was also assessed, using a measure adapted from the operational guidelines for NCATS’ Research Careers Common Metric. A survey was administered to part participants and interviews conducted with participants from the past cohorts. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The evaluation results demonstrate the PORT program participants made substantial contributions to the advancement of clinical and translational research, particularly through their publication of hundreds of scientific works. In addition, the evaluation results reveal that the program had short-, intermediate- and long-term impact on their research careers, thereby contributing to the advancement of the health research workforce at the University of Michigan for well over a decade. Specific participant cases highlight how individuals utilized their experience and training to advance research agendas and their long-term careers at the institution. These findings can inform the development, implementation and evaluation of similar programs throughout the CTSA consortium and beyond. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Most evaluations of research training and award programs for clinical and translational research staff do not evaluate the long-term impact of CTSA support on the research careers of the participants. The findings of this evaluation can help inform the development of new and more effective workforce development initiatives with long-term impact.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Recent scientific discoveries show that human sex determination and differentiation is a spectrum of developmental processes and that sex/gender traits and identities not always fit binarity. This study aims to determine whether the visual arts can effectively transmit these complex scientific ideas on sex and gender variance. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A one-hour lecture for undergraduate students enrolled in a behavioral neuroendocrinology course included 17th century Spanish paintings and representative work from contemporary LGBTQIA+ artists in photography. Pre and post self-evaluation was conducted through five multiple choice questions. Chi Square test was employed for statistical analysis, which required elimination of no responses from item analysis. Statistical significance was defined as p value < 0.05. Three artistic images and two scientific images were included in the questions. Acquisition of content-specific knowledge on diverse body configurations, differences of sex development (DSD), transsexuality, histopathology of the gonad and neuroanatomy of the hypothalamus was evaluated. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Twenty students completed the online pre- and post-test. We found that a 17th century Spanish painting was effective at making the distinction between transsexuality and intersexuality (p < 0.0005). Similarly, an artistic image that reinterprets the Vitruvius Man was effective for presenting the argument that diverse body configurations does not imply clinical pathology (p < 0.0001). Last, a scientific image showing the histopathology of an ovotestis was effective for introducing undergraduate students to diagnostic criteria for DSD (p < 0.02). No significant differences were found in the use of an artistic photograph depicting a young female to male transsexual individual nor in the use of a scientific image showing the neuroanatomical localization of the hypothalamus. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The learning of complex scientific concepts on human sex determination and differentiation can be affected by preconceived ideas, values, and attitudes towards sex and gender variance. The visual arts can provide a familiar ground of understanding between teachers and learners to transform such preconceptions.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The Title V Coop developed CRESCO, a physical and virtual space in the libraries of the two cooperating institutions. Adopting a flexible and transformational approach, it offers services to support the development of research and information skills of undergraduate students and faculty who receive clinical-translational research (CTR) training. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Since 2016, CRESCO has been staffed by a multidisciplinary team composed of three librarians, a statistician, an instructional designer, and an IT specialist. The physical facilities of the two libraries were remodeled and equipped, and a central portal was created to provide services and access to resources on a 7/24 basis. Online tutorials, workshops, and mentoring services have been offered that address topics in statistics, literature search, plagiarism, and the use of several research software. Services statistics are collected, and a questionnaire is administered to evaluate the workshops. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The main results include 12 online tutorials created in CTR areas and available in the CRESCO hub portal; 14,660 mentoring/consultations offered in statistics, the use of research-related software, and the search for scientific literature search; and 6 online workshops created in CTR areas, with 463 attendees. When evaluating online workshops, participants considered that their acquired learning was high or extremely high on the following topics: use of Intellectus Statistics (88%, n = 96); selection of statistical tests (81%, n = 92); use of Turnitin (85%, n = 76); literature search (91%, n = 58); and citations and references in Mendeley (90%, n = 67). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: These results suggest that the flexible, multidisciplinary, and transformational approach of CRESCO has been successful in helping undergraduate students and faculty develop the skills necessary to conduct CTR projects.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The purpose of this group is to foster professional and personal growth as leaders, provide peer mentoring, integrate the roles of scientist, woman, and mother, and build a self-sustaining network of peers for ongoing support throughout their careers in an academic setting. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: - Study population: 12 Health sciences research faculty (50% protected research time); identify as female; mother of school-age and/or younger children Methods: Year-long program; including a 2-day retreat based on Brene Brown's Dare to Lead RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: - Despite the pandemic, 100% of participants continued in the program over the one-year duration and met the attendance requirement of 75% - Screening for burnout was effective - facilitator was able to intervene when severe burnout was noted.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Diversity and interdisciplinarity are required for successful and transformational CTR. The Title V Coop developed a training curriculum for underrepresented in CTR health professions faculty and students, successfully integrating them in CTR teams. The curriculum exposed students to theory and then a practicum. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The curriculum and practicum included basic aspects of training in research including responsible conduct of research and the design of a proposal. The practicum focused on the organizing of a research team identified as a Clinical and Translational Mentoring Team (CTMT) and the implementation of the proposed project. Emphasis was placed on the importance of the mentor-mentee relationship, including peer mentoring. Participants were recruited from across all post-secondary institutions in Puerto Rico emphasizing the participation of faculty(UgF) and students (UgS) from undergraduate programs in health professions and the participation of graduate students GS) as peer mentors. Research mentors for each of the CTMTs were selected from faculty members that are established researchers. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Twenty-seven (27) proposals from the CTMTs were approved. A total of one hundred and eight (108) participants were or are still engaged in the proposed research. Thirty-four faculty (34) members participated as mentors and three (3) peer reviewed publications have been done. Health professions and science fields represented by the participants include: Nursing, radiology technician, audiologist, medical students, basic science in biology or chemistry, public health and industrial microbiology among others. We will showcase the diversity in research topics and teams composition and their accomplishments. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The Title V Coop has been successful in integrating individuals from academic programs underrepresented in research into interdisciplinary and interprofessional research teams, launching a model for diversity and interdisciplinarity and representation of health professionals at all levels of research.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Ask the Experts: A Biomedical Innovation Forum, presented by Fast Forward Medical Innovation (FFMI) at the University of Michigan, provided an opportunity to educate biomedical innovators on life science investment trends and technology assessment criteria. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: FFMI, in partnership with the U.S. Economic Development Administration, recruited an expert group of panelists to be featured at this virtual event. These life science investment experts provided insight on the strategy, timing, and best method for innovators to engaged investors, the specifics of what investors look for in technologies and project teams, and expectations of investors and project teams after the investment is secured. The panel presentation was followed by a poster presentation highlighting projects from the FFMI Hub at the University of Michigan, allowing innovators to have an open and constructive conversation with experts and attendees. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: There was a total of 73 registrants including academic faculty, biomedical innovators, and life science investment professionals from 21 different academic institutions, private companies, and other organizations. 50 attended the panel presentation and poster session. Results (N=5) of an evaluation of the event revealed that 100% of the respondents strongly agreed or agreed that the event met their expectations, while 80% strongly agreed or agreed that they would recommend the event to a colleague. Feedback from poster presenters was also strong with presenters exclaiming they “enjoyed the panel discussion and getting one-on-one time with the panelists,” as well as “a lot of great advice was given by the experts” and “I really liked the poster presentation part in which I got feedback from the investors.” DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The data demonstrates how accelerating technology mining activities, proactively seeking and strengthening external partnerships with investors, and scaling commercialization education programs can have a positive impact on the development and launch of biomedical innovations.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The Virtual CTSA Visiting Scholars Program allows KL2 scholars to serve as visiting professors at host CTSA consortium institutions. This program facilitates connections with faculty outside scholars home institutions, as well as fostering collaboration among different CTSA hubs. Stanford aimed to incorporate participants into its KL2 program. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Stanford is one of 57 host institutions for the Virtual CTSA Visiting Scholars Program. The program includes a virtual meeting between each participant and a chosen faculty at the host institution. Program participants also give a virtual Grand Rounds lecture, open to the entire CTSA consortium. As well as encouraging Spectrum KL2 Scholars to participate in the virtual exchange, the Spectrum KL2 program incorporated the visiting scholars into weekly activities over the course of 3 months. Visiting scholars were invited to participate virtually in KL2 educational sessions, which provide career development training and mentoring. As meetings transitioned to in-person, KL2 scholars were allowed to attend virtually when needed. Hybrid in-person sessions were also conducive to participation by visiting scholars. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Stanfords Spectrum KL2 program was virtual (Zoom) for academic year 2020-2021 and included 1:1 mentoring sessions, weekly career development seminars, and 1:1 peer virtual lunches to integrate the 9 junior faculty scholars. Visiting scholars joined the weekly Zoom meetings when their schedules allowed. KL2 faculty mentored visiting scholars for 3 months, exchanging ideas and forming collaborations. Each visiting participant was paired with a KL2 Scholar, who provided 1:1 peer mentorship. In addition, visiting scholars presented a work-in-progress seminar, to obtain feedback before the more formal Grand Rounds lecture. For academic year 2021-2022, Spectrum KL2 meetings include virtual and hybrid in-person sessions, allowing visiting scholars to join by Zoom during the 3-month virtual exchange program. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: What set Stanfords Virtual CTSA Visiting Scholars Program apart was faculty engagement and mentorship provided to visiting participants. By incorporating visiting scholars virtually into the ongoing KL2 education program, participants could engage fully with mentors and scholars, even surpassing opportunities of pre-pandemic on-site visits.