During military operations, soldiers are required to successfully complete numerous physical and cognitive tasks concurrently. Understanding the typical variance in research tools that may be used to provide insight into the interrelationship between physical and cognitive performance is therefore highly important. This study assessed the inter-day variability of two military-specific cognitive assessments: a Military-Specific Auditory N-Back Task (MSANT) and a Shoot-/Don’t-Shoot Task (SDST) in 28 participants. Limits of agreement ±95% confidence intervals, standard error of the mean, and smallest detectable change were calculated to quantify the typical variance in task performance. All parameters within the MSANT and SDST demonstrated no mean difference for trial visit in either the seated or walking condition, with equivalency demonstrated for the majority of comparisons. Collectively, these data provided an indication of the typical variance in MSANT and SDST performance, while demonstrating that both assessments can be used during seated and walking conditions.

Background: Healthcare facilities have experienced many challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, including limited personal protective equipment (PPE) supplies. Healthcare personnel (HCP) rely on PPE, vaccines, and other infection control measures to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infections. We describe PPE concerns reported by HCP who had close contact with COVID-19 patients in the workplace and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Method: The CDC collaborated with Emerging Infections Program (EIP) sites in 10 states to conduct surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 infections in HCP. EIP staff interviewed HCP with positive SARS-CoV-2 viral tests (ie, cases) to collect data on demographics, healthcare roles, exposures, PPE use, and concerns about their PPE use during COVID-19 patient care in the 14 days before the HCP’s SARS-CoV-2 positive test. PPE concerns were qualitatively coded as being related to supply (eg, low quality, shortages); use (eg, extended use, reuse, lack of fit test); or facility policy (eg, lack of guidance). We calculated and compared the percentages of cases reporting each concern type during the initial phase of the pandemic (April–May 2020), during the first US peak of daily COVID-19 cases (June–August 2020), and during the second US peak (September 2020–January 2021). We compared percentages using mid-P or Fisher exact tests (α = 0.05). Results: Among 1,998 HCP cases occurring during April 2020–January 2021 who had close contact with COVID-19 patients, 613 (30.7%) reported ≥1 PPE concern (Table 1). The percentage of cases reporting supply or use concerns was higher during the first peak period than the second peak period (supply concerns: 12.5% vs 7.5%; use concerns: 25.5% vs 18.2%; p Conclusions: Although lower percentages of HCP cases overall reported PPE concerns after the first US peak, our results highlight the importance of developing capacity to produce and distribute PPE during times of increased demand. The difference we observed among selected groups of cases may indicate that PPE access and use were more challenging for some, such as nonphysicians and nursing home HCP. These findings underscore the need to ensure that PPE is accessible and used correctly by HCP for whom use is recommended.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Healthcare personnel with severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection were interviewed to describe activities and practices in and outside the workplace. Among 2,625 healthcare personnel, workplace-related factors that may increase infection risk were more common among nursing-home personnel than hospital personnel, whereas selected factors outside the workplace were more common among hospital personnel.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The Monte Carlo dose calculation method is often considered the “gold standard” for patient dose calculations and can be as radiation dose measurements. Our study aims to develop a true Monte Carlo model that can be implemented in our clinic as part of our routine patient-specific quality assurance. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We have configured and validated a model of one of our linear accelerators used for radiation therapy treatments using the EGSnrc Monte Carlo simulation software. Measured dosimetric data was obtained from the linear accelerator and was used as the standard to compare the doses calculated with our model in EGSnrc. We will compare dose calculations between commercial treatment planning systems, the EGSnrc Monte Carlo model, and patient-specific measurements. We will implement the Monte Carlo model in our clinic for routine second-checks of patient plans, and to recalculate plans delivered to patients using machine log files. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Our Monte Carlo model is within 1% agreement with our measured dosimetric data, and is an accurate representation of our linear accelerators used for patient treatments. With this high level of accuracy, we have begun simulating more complex patient treatment geometries, and expect the level of accuracy to be within 1% of measured data. We believe the Monte Carlo calculation based on machine log files will correlate with patient-specific QA analysis and results. The Monte Carlo model will be a useful tool in improving our patient-specific quality assurance protocol and can be utilized in further research. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This work can be implemented directly in clinical practice to ensure patient doses are calculated as accurately as possible. These methods can be used by clinics who do not have access to more advanced dose calculation software, ensuring accuracy for all patients undergoing radiotherapy treatments.

We sought to define the prevalence of echocardiographic abnormalities in long-term survivors of paediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and determine the utility of screening in asymptomatic patients. We analysed echocardiograms performed on survivors who underwent hematopoietic stem cell transplantation from 1982 to 2006. A total of 389 patients were alive in 2017, with 114 having an echocardiogram obtained ⩾5 years post-infusion. A total of 95 patients had echocardiogram performed for routine surveillance. The mean time post-hematopoietic stem cell transplantation was 13 years. Of 95 patients, 77 (82.1%) had ejection fraction measured, and 10/77 (13.0%) had ejection fraction z-scores ⩽−2.0, which is abnormally low. Those patients with abnormal ejection fraction were significantly more likely to have been exposed to anthracyclines or total body irradiation. Among individuals who received neither anthracyclines nor total body irradiation, only 1/31 (3.2%) was found to have an abnormal ejection fraction of 51.4%, z-score −2.73. In the cohort of 77 patients, the negative predictive value of having a normal ejection fraction given no exposure to total body irradiation or anthracyclines was 96.7% at 95% confidence interval (83.3–99.8%). Systolic dysfunction is relatively common in long-term survivors of paediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplantation who have received anthracyclines or total body irradiation. Survivors who are asymptomatic and did not receive radiation or anthracyclines likely do not require surveillance echocardiograms, unless otherwise indicated.

We examine the morphological variation of a Paleozoic pterineid during a time of relative ecological and taxonomic stability in the Middle Devonian Appalachian Basin in central and eastern New York. We discuss the taxonomic status of the Middle Devonian bivalve Actinopteria boydi (Conrad, 1842) and quantify the variability of its shell disk as well as the width and angle of the auricles and sulci of this otherwise character-poor bivalve species using geometric morphometric techniques employing Cartesian landmarks. We compare variants from three stratigraphic levels (Skaneateles, Ludlowville, and Moscow formations) and from different habitats characterized by lithofacies.

The phenotypic variation observed in our data does not amount to an overall directional shift in morphology, i.e., they constitute reversible changes of morphology in a single variable taxon. Our study finds small-scale variation in morphology that represents evidence for ecophenotypic variation through ~3–4 Myr. Differences in substrate coupled with water energy seem to impact this taxon’s morphology. Although no clearly separated groups can be observed, material from muddy facies develops variants with, on average, rounder and broader shell disks than are found in material from silty facies. This morphology could have increased the flow rate of water channeled over the posterior shell portion thereby improving filtration rate, which is especially beneficial in environments with low water energy.

Wildlife populations provide harvestable meat to people and contribute to local food security. Throughout the year, and particularly at times of agricultural food shortages, wildlife and other wild foods play a critical role in supporting food security and enhancing local human nutrition. We explored the distribution of food security benefits of agricultural food production and a particular ecosystem provisioning service – wildlife harvest in the Makira Natural Park (MNP) of Madagascar – at community, household and individual levels. We found strong variation in wildlife consumption both among communities and among households and less variation among individuals within households. Mean household wildlife consumption in the target community was 10 kg per year ranging by approximately two orders of magnitude, with poorer and more food insecure households more reliant on wildlife for food. Meats (including wildlife) appeared to be evenly distributed within households, unaffected by age, sex, birth order and body weight, while other foods (including stew, rice and other staples) appeared to be allocated based on body mass. Reductions in wildlife consumption cause increased risk of food insecurity and specific nutritional deficiencies. The findings from our multilevel study suggest that disaggregated analysis that merges ecosystem services theory and the microeconomics of resource allocation allows for a more accurate valuation approach.

Few would dispute that the nature of work, and the workers who perform it, has evolved considerably in the 70 years since the founding of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) as the American Psychological Association's (APA's) Division 14, focused on industrial, business, and organizational psychology. Yet, in many ways the populations sampled in industrial–organizational (I-O) psychology research have failed to keep pace with this evolution. Bergman and Jean (2016) highlight how I-O research samples underrepresent (relative to the labor market) low- or medium-skill workers, wage earners, and temporary workers, resulting in a body of science that is overly focused on salaried, professional managers and executives. Though these discrepancies in the nature of individuals’ work and employment are certainly present and problematic in organizational research, one issue that should not be overlooked is that of adequately representing nationality and culture in I-O research samples.

As organizations become more complex and dynamic, individuals' ability to learn from experience becomes more important. Recently, the concept of learning agility has attracted considerable attention from human resource professionals and consultants interested in selecting on and developing employees' ability to learn from experience. However, the academic community has been largely absent from this discussion of learning agility, and the concept remains ill defined and poorly measured. This article presents a constructive critique of the existing literature on learning agility, seeks to clarify the definition and conceptualization of the construct, and situates learning agility within a broader nomological network of related constructs. We conclude by discussing several important directions for future research on learning agility.

This article responds to and extends the commentaries offered in response to our focal article on learning agility. After summarizing the basic themes in the commentaries, we use this response to clarify points that were unclear in our original article and push back on certain points raised in a few of the responses. In particular, we reframe the rigor–relevance debate from an “either–or” to a “both–and” discussion, clarify the relationship between learning agility and ability to learn, explain how learning agility in organizations moves beyond cognition, and describe how exchanges such as the one we have collectively engaged in here are central to progressing the scientific study on learning agility and its effective use in practice.