Luminescence dating and profiling are important analytical methods for providing chronological constraints and reconstructing depositional histories from sediment cores. However, sediment cores have often been exposed to ionising radiation sources during geophysical analyses, which potentially contaminates natural luminescence signals and may compromise the accuracy and reliability of luminescence analyses. Variable water content down-core is another potential issue for the rapid analysis of sediments, as water attenuates luminescence and may limit the comparability of samples. Here, we use a portable optically stimulated luminescence reader to test the influence of two common geophysical analyses—X-radiography and gamma-ray logging—on the luminescence properties of sediments in marine cores. We demonstrate that both techniques cause negligible changes to luminescence signals with doses <100 mGy. We test the effect of variable water content on luminescence and show that net signals are reduced by up to 70% at 30% moisture, relative to dry sediments. Accurate and reliable luminescence signals can be obtained from sediment cores despite prior exposure to ionising radiation from geophysical loggers or variable water content. However, the accuracy of luminescence measurements does require taking appropriate steps before analysis, like assessing the doses given by geophysical instruments at specific laboratories or drying samples.

Assessing the long-term impact of community-engaged research (CEnR) programs remains a significant challenge in translational science, such as those conducted by Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs). The Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM) is a framework designed to evaluate impact across four health and social domains (clinical/medical, community, economic, and political/legislative). TSBM offers a comprehensive framework for evaluating CEnR projects, as it extends beyond short-term outcomes to highlight distal impacts and sustainable benefits. Progress reports from three Cincinnati CTSA CEnR programs (Community Leaders Institute [CLI; n = 170], Community Health Grant [CHG; n = 82], and Partnership Development Grant [PDG; n = 21]) completed between 2010 and 2023 were coded by three reviewers using the TSBM. As expected, CEnR programs primarily demonstrated community & public health benefits. Economic, policy, and clinical benefits were also identified, further amplifying the impact of this work. The adoption of frameworks like the TSBM could lead to a more standardized approach for evaluating the impact of CEnR programs and facilitate comparisons across CTSAs. Future studies that track the impact of CEnR programs on health and social systems could provide valuable insights into the long-term benefits of these initiatives.

Objectives/Goals: The goal of this poster is to 1) describe the development of a graduate certificate program for community-engaged research for health (CEnRH) in a Clinical and Translational Science Awards-funded institution; 2) describe the initial impact of the program; and 3) discuss strengths, implications, and potential improvements for the future. Methods/Study Population: The CEnRH graduate certificate is a 12-credit, postbaccalaureate program offered at the University of Cincinnati co-created by faculty from the Community Engagement and Translational Workforce Cores of the CCTST with community partners. The goal is to support learning about community-engaged research (CEnR) and enhances capacity for academic-community partnered research. Student demographics are collected as part of university registration. Quantitative course evaluations are collected each semester. Program evaluations including qualitative data are collected from students enrolled in the program during and upon completion of the certificate. Results/Anticipated Results: The CEnRH curriculum includes 3 existing courses/electives in the College of Medicine and Psychology and three new courses in social justice and action research methodologies. Notably, the committee advocated for a scholarship to cover tuition for the certificate program to promote access for community partners. Since the fall of 2022, 17 students have enrolled in the CEnRH program, including 9 Faculty/Staff within CCTST institutions, 2 University of Cincinnati PhD Students, 5 Fellows, and 1 Community Member (who receives the scholarship). Notably, 24% of these students are from underrepresented minority backgrounds. Impact and evaluation data, as well as lessons learned, will be presented. Future directions for the CEnRH program will also be discussed. Discussion/Significance of Impact: The CEnRH is an impactful program for trainees, faculty, and staff who are planning to conduct CEnR, while also strengthening research capacity among community partners and advocates. This certificate program may be especially valuable to academic researchers as more funding agencies require community and stakeholder engagement in their proposals.

Objectives/Goals: Team science (TS) competency is important for translational science team collaboration. However, there are few educators available to assist teams. Asynchronous learning is an effective strategy for delivering TS content. The goal of this project is to expand TS education by providing online access to our learners using online modules. Methods/Study Population: The Collaboration and Team Science (CaTS) team at the University of Cincinnati provides a robust TS education and training program. As the need for team science gains recognition, CaTS has received increased requests for services, leading to a need to broaden TS offerings. To address this demand, the CaTS team created “Team Science 101,” an online, asynchronous, series of 15 modules covering basic team science concepts. Each module consists of an educational recording lasting an average of 20 minutes, optional topic resources, pre- and post-module surveys assessing learners’ confidence and satisfaction, post-module knowledge checks, and evaluation questions. Upon completing all modules, participants receive a completion certificate. Results/Anticipated Results: TS 101 will be piloted with a group of participants who expressed interest in asynchronous TS content and will be adjusted based on the feedback received. The associated pre- and post-module survey, post-module knowledge check, and evaluation questions will be monitored to determine learning levels and improve TS 101 overall. Canvas is the educational platform that houses these modules, allowing for participant follow-up and scalable dissemination. The CaTS team plans to disseminate TS 101 nationally and internationally for anyone interested in this resource. Discussion/Significance of Impact: There is a national effort to collect and curate TS education, training, and toolkits. TS 101 will be a useful educational tool that will expand the reach of team science educators, provide the foundation for educators to explore topics more deeply by building on the module topics, and provide education to broader audiences who lack access to TS experts.

To facilitate and sustain community-engaged research (CEnR) conducted by academic-community partnerships (ACPs), a Clinical Translational Science Award (CTSA)-funded Community Engagement Core (CEC) and Community Partner Council (CPC) co-created two innovative microgrant programs. The Community Health Grant (CHG) and the Partnership Development Grant (PDG) programs are designed to specifically fund ACPs conducting pilot programs aimed at improving health outcomes. Collectively, these programs have engaged 94 community partner organizations while impacting over 55,000 individuals and leveraging $1.2 million to fund over $10 million through other grants and awards. A cross-sectional survey of 57 CHG awardees demonstrated high overall satisfaction with the programs and indicated that participation addressed barriers to CEnR, such as building trust in research and improving partnership and program sustainability. The goal of this paper is to (1) describe the rationale and development of the CHG and PDG programs; (2) their feasibility, impact, and sustainability; and (3) lessons learned and best practices. Institutions seeking to implement similar programs should focus on integrating community partners throughout the design and review processes and prioritizing projects that align with specific, measurable goals.

Control of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa spread in healthcare settings begins with timely and accurate laboratory testing practices. Survey results show most Veterans Affairs facilities are performing recommended tests to identify these organisms. Most facilities report sufficient resources to perform testing, though medium-complexity facilities report some perceived barriers.

Accelerating COVID-19 Treatment Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV) was initiated by the US government to rapidly develop and test vaccines and therapeutics against COVID-19 in 2020. The ACTIV Therapeutics-Clinical Working Group selected ACTIV trial teams and clinical networks to expeditiously develop and launch master protocols based on therapeutic targets and patient populations. The suite of clinical trials was designed to collectively inform therapeutic care for COVID-19 outpatient, inpatient, and intensive care populations globally. In this report, we highlight challenges, strategies, and solutions around clinical protocol development and regulatory approval to document our experience and propose plans for future similar healthcare emergencies.

The United States Government (USG) public-private partnership “Accelerating COVID-19 Treatment Interventions and Vaccines” (ACTIV) was launched to identify safe, effective therapeutics to treat patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and prevent hospitalization, progression of disease, and death. Eleven original master protocols were developed by ACTIV, and thirty-seven therapeutic agents entered evaluation for treatment benefit. Challenges encountered during trial implementation led to innovations enabling initiation and enrollment of over 26,000 participants in the trials. While only two ACTIV trials continue to enroll, the recommendations here reflect information from all the trials as of May 2023. We review clinical trial implementation challenges and corresponding lessons learned to inform future therapeutic clinical trials implemented in response to a public health emergency and the conduct of complex clinical trials during “peacetime,” as well.

This manuscript addresses a critical topic: navigating complexities of conducting clinical trials during a pandemic. Central to this discussion is engaging communities to ensure diverse participation. The manuscript elucidates deliberate strategies employed to recruit minority communities with poor social drivers of health for participation in COVID-19 trials. The paper adopts a descriptive approach, eschewing analysis of data-driven efficacy of these efforts, and instead provides a comprehensive account of strategies utilized. The Accelerate COVID-19 Treatment Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV) public–private partnership launched early in the COVID-19 pandemic to develop clinical trials to advance SARS-CoV-2 treatments. In this paper, ACTIV investigators share challenges in conducting research during an evolving pandemic and approaches selected to engage communities when traditional strategies were infeasible. Lessons from this experience include importance of community representatives’ involvement early in study design and implementation and integration of well-developed public outreach and communication strategies with trial launch. Centralization and coordination of outreach will allow for efficient use of resources and the sharing of best practices. Insights gleaned from the ACTIV program, as outlined in this paper, shed light on effective strategies for involving communities in treatment trials amidst rapidly evolving public health emergencies. This underscores critical importance of community engagement initiatives well in advance of the pandemic.

The Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines Therapeutic-Clinical Working Group members gathered critical recommendations in follow-up to lessons learned manuscripts released earlier in the COVID-19 pandemic. Lessons around agent prioritization, preclinical therapeutics testing, master protocol design and implementation, drug manufacturing and supply, data sharing, and public–private partnership value are shared to inform responses to future pandemics.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The goal of theIntegrating Special Populations (ISP) Studiosis tointegrate communityvoice into research design and en hance diversity, equity, and inclusion in research, and disseminate findings in ways that improve health literacy and equity. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Based on the Vanderbilt Community Engagement Studio model, the ISP Studiowas designed through multiple phases, including Designand PilotStudioSessions. Stakeholders were diverse representatives of community and academic organizations serving special populations, as well asself-identified persons within special populations as defined by the NIH.Each phase of development and implementation of the Studio included an evaluation consisting of Likert scale and open-ended survey questions for process improvement and to integrate voices of the ISP community continuously. Demographic information and program outcomes were also collected via the evaluation survey. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: All Design Session (N=9) and Pilot Studio (N=10) participants indicated that the Design and Pilot were positive, relevant, bidirectionally useful, and fostered respect, trust, and inclusion. 100% of the panel strongly agreed the Studio met its goals and that the ISP Studios have potentialtobenefitspecial and under represented populations. Qualitative data and discussion on design will also be shared. Additi onaland relevant pointsincludepanelisttraining,compensation for community panelists, and ensuring accessibility. Evaluation outcomes from initial implementation of the ISP Studio will be discussed. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The ISP Studio is an innovative model that may increase engagement of special populations in the research process through co-creation and integration of lived experiences.It has the potential to improve research design, implementation, and impact.