Objectives/Goals: Cancer cachexia is a wasting condition common in pancreatic cancer, marked by loss of muscle, fat, and bone and driven by inflammation. Immune signals contribute to this damage. This study examines how muscle-resident macrophages may regulate muscle loss in pancreatic cancer cachexia. Methods/Study Population: To identify resident macrophages in cachectic muscle, Lyve1Cre-Rosa26;TdTomato mice were orthotopically transplanted with KPCML1 pancreatic cancer cells. Resident macrophages were analyzed via flow cytometry and immunohistochemistry. For muscle-specific macrophage ablation, lyve1-DTR mice (C57BL/6 background) received tumor cell injections followed by intramuscular diphtheria toxin (DTA) in the TA muscle. Quantitative RT-PCR assessed gene expression from whole muscle lysates and flow-sorted TdTomato+ cells. Results/Anticipated Results: We show that the population of muscle-resident macrophages increased as tumor burden increased. Further findings reveal that the ablation of the resident population of macrophages exacerbates muscle loss, suggesting that muscle-resident macrophages exude a protective phenotype on skeletal myofibers. This was confirmed with increased expression of atrophy biomarkers, MuRF1 and Atrogin-1, in muscles from DTA-injected mice. Additionally, preliminary data revealed an expansion of Toll-like receptor 7 (TLR7) expression in muscle-resident macrophages, suggesting that TLR7 signaling may contribute to their phenotypic regulation in cachexia. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Results suggest muscle-resident macrophages protect against cachexia-induced atrophy via anti-inflammatory activity. Future work will define their signals and targets. Given TLR7 upregulation, we will test if TLR7 signaling regulates their phenotype and contributes to muscle atrophy.

Objectives/Goals: Clinical trial recruitment needs innovative strategies to increase efficiency. Participant-driven recruitment (PDR) strategies are an advancement of snowball sampling that have been tested in observational studies (e.g., as respondent-driven sampling) but are infrequently used in clinical trials. Methods/Study Population: In preparation for testing participant-driven recruitment as a clinical trial innovation, we conducted interviews with experts (principal investigators, project managers, and methodologists (e.g., biostatisticians)) involved in ongoing trials. The expert’s trials included behavioral, screening, and pharmaceutical therapies. We described the PDR concept to our experts and asked what sorts of trials might be amenable to the approach. We asked experts to discuss when in the course of trial workflow would be ideal for engaging current participants to identify and refer others who might be interested and eligible; and what methods concerns might result from using PDR. Results/Anticipated Results: Experts (n = 10) noted studying disease prevention or screening, or focused on a common condition (e.g., diabetes, hypertension) was most amenable to PDR, whereas rare disease trials would be challenging. Opinions differed regarding when in the enrollment process might be best to engage participants to refer others (time of consent versus after completion of active intervention). From a methods standpoint, common concerns were contamination (if socially connected individuals were randomized to different arms) and that participant-referred individuals would not be independent, thus requiring special statistical considerations. Most experts (8 of 10) expressed interest in learning best practices for PDR (e.g., incentivizing referrals, setting referral quotas and timelines) and implementing the process. Discussion/Significance of Impact: PDR has the potential reduce the time to complete enrollment, and early reports suggest, as referral chains spread through social networks, the heterogeneity and representativeness of the sample increases. Integrating PDR into trials requires a tailored approach.

Objectives/Goals: This evaluation seeks to demonstrate the feasibility and impact of a new funding program for clinical and translational research launched by U-M Michigan Medicine. ’Research Scouts’ with established research agendas at U-M were identified and trained to invite and fund research proposals from U-M colleagues they had not collaborated with. Methods/Study Population: In 2023, Research Scouts identified and orientated to the program and goals. Each Scouts was given a year to invest $150,000 in innovative research projects. A web-based submission portal was used to anonymize the proposals to remove the potential for bias. All projects were granted a two-year funding period. The sequential mixed methods used for this evaluation includes surveys of ’Research Scouts’ and awardees, followed by the collection on administrative data regarding the awardees scientific production, including both research publications and grants. The survey results and administrative data were analyzed and informed the iterative refinement of an interview protocol designed to investigate the impact of the funding on awardees’ development of novel and collaborative research agendas. Results/Anticipated Results: Surveys of the 2023 Scouts (N=24) and Awardees (N=51) had a 59% response rate. Awardees agreed they were able to pursue new lines of investigation (Mean 4.62, on a 5-point Likert scale); test a new idea that otherwise would go unexplored (Mean 4.62); had more latitude for intellectual creativity and exploration than traditional funding mechanisms permit (Mean 4.46); had new scientific conversations and new connections (Mean 4.54). The results also indicate that Research Scouts agreed with these benefits. Analysis of Awardee’s administrative data yielded evidence that they were actively producing new research; for example, of 146 papers, at least 30 were relevant to their award. Ongoing interviews will yield evidence indicating how the award accelerated their clinical and translational research agendas. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Given the long gestation time for new research ideas to yield new publications or extramural funding, the full impact of the program won’t be known for years. However, preliminary evidence indicates that the Research Scouts program successfully provides a mechanism for pursuing novel ideas with minimal administrative costs and burden.

Objectives/Goals: Medical mistrust is a persistent challenge to effective healthcare delivery and disproportionately affects Black, Indigenous, and other people of color (BIPOC). The relationship between religiosity and patient trust is not well understood but can provide key insight into improving primary care. Methods/Study Population: This study examines the association between religiosity and trust among BIPOC and White patients receiving primary care at Tufts Medical Center. Eligible participants will be adults aged ≥18 years without cognitive impairment. Recruitment will occur via telephone and during office visits. We will create surveys measuring religiosity and trust in primary care physicians (PCPs), and mean scores will be compared across subgroups, including race, sex, age, and religious affiliation. We will also conduct interviews to explore patient perspectives on PCP characteristics that encourage or discourage trust, as well as the role of religion in shaping trust within primary care settings. Results/Anticipated Results: Based on prior literature, we hypothesize that BIPOC patients will have higher mean scores of mistrust than White patients. We also hypothesize a statistically significant interaction between religiosity and trust for both BIPOC and White patients, such that higher religiosity scores will be associated with greater levels of mistrust. In subgroup analyses, we hypothesize that Black/African American and Hispanic patients will have the strongest moderating effect between religiosity and mistrust. We further expect patients who report high levels of trust in their PCPs to identify physician qualities including perceived expertise, empathy, cultural humility, and shared decision-making. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Our results will inform the development and implementation of a medical mistrust screening tool that measures individual rather than broader group-based perceptions of trust – a tool that is not yet widely integrated into primary care – and can enhance physicians’ approach to patient-centered care.

Objectives/Goals: This study aims to quantitatively examine successful US researchers who may engage in pragmatic ’negotiation’ over time with external funders, their university administration, and other scientific and scholarly parties about their research lines and content. Methods/Study Population: The purpose of this quantitative correlational research is to pilot a new quantitative survey tool to measure researcher autonomy in selecting and pursuing their research agendas. The current study is modeled after a landmark peer-reviewed publication on negotiated space in evaluating researchers’ agendas in Finland and the United Kingdom by Luukkonen and Thomas in 2016. Using a mixed methods design, the study surveys NIH Director’s Pioneer and Keck Foundation Awardees (2018–2021) to assess perceptions of autonomy, competition, and institutional support. This study examines how NIH-funded researchers adapt grant strategies to shifting NIH priorities while preserving autonomy. Results/Anticipated Results: Of 24 respondents, most were White and male, with varied project portfolios and funding levels. Many described their fields as resource-intensive, with typical projects lasting 3–5 years. Primary funding sources were generally flexible, though stability and administrative burdens were concerns. Most researchers reported shifts in research aims driven by field developments rather than institutional pressures, with limited involvement in commercialization. Collaborations with global and industry leaders were common and largely stable. Overall, findings suggest US researchers adapt strategically to funding realities while balancing autonomy, collaboration, and institutional support. Discussion/Significance of Impact: This study demonstrates how US researchers balance autonomy with demands from funders and institutions within a “negotiated space.” Funding is flexible but administratively burdensome. Findings highlight the tension between innovation and external directives shaping research agendas.

Objectives/Goals: Multivariable statistical models are commonly used as clinical decision aids. However, more research examining real-world implementation of models is needed. The goal of this mixed methods study is to explore to what degree clinician uptake of risk models is influenced by perceptions of the potential risks and benefits of taking action on model output. Methods/Study Population: Mixed qualitative and quantitative data for the ’low-risk/low-reward’ scenario arise from an implementation trial of a electronic medical records-based (EMR) model to alert primary care providers of potential cognitive problems in patients ages 65 and older. We evaluated adoption of the EMR model based on provider actions (cognitive screening/referrals/medications/diagnoses) following Epic best practice alert (BPA), and acceptability of the models through semi-structured qualitative interviews. Data for the ’high-risk/high-reward’ scenario will be gathered from clinical notes documenting the use of statistical models to support elective surgical decision-making in scenarios where such models have been regularly used at our institution. Mixed methods analyses will be holistic. Results/Anticipated Results: Early quantitative analyses following implementation indicated that primary care providers largely did not adopt the BPA, but did take action (referrals, diagnoses, medications) when automated cognitive screening was performed in preparation for the appointment. Qualitative analyses of interview data to understand provider perspectives are ongoing. In the high-risk/high-reward scenario, we expect that providers will more frequently utilize statistical models for decision-making and report positive attitudes regarding their use, when compared to the low-risk/low-reward scenario. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Though used in practice with increasing frequency, the implementation of personalized statistical prediction models has not been widely studied. Understanding in what scenarios providers feel risk models are useful and actionable can guide decision-making for the development and implementation of future models.

Objectives/Goals: Implementation strategies to improve clinical trial recruitment exist yet training opportunities for successful recruitment are limited. Using the translational science promotion and research capacity (T-SPARC) framework, we developed and evaluated an educational intervention to increase use of recruitment science in translational research Methods/Study Population: We conducted focus groups with investigators and trainees (n=10) involved in CTSA programming at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. Focus groups explored participants’ experiences with study recruitment and their perceptions of recruitment strategies associated with implementation science. Data analysis was organized around identifying themes to inform a capacity-building recruitment science short course. The short course development was aligned with T-SPARC and featured interactive sessions on applying implementation science to successful recruitment, with real-world examples and community expert input. Following the course, we collected and analyzed post-survey data from attendees (n=168) regarding their changes in recruitment science knowledge due to participation in the short course. Results/Anticipated Results: Most focus group participants were unfamiliar with recruitment science, though some described applying related concepts such as partnering with community members in research. All participants expressed a need for ongoing support and training in recruitment science, including workshops, mentoring, and consultation. This indicated a need for training in translational science, specifically recruitment science, as the mechanism of change. Following the short course that was developed based on these focus group findings, attendees showed a significant increase in how to use recruitment science strategies (Z = −4.87, p < .001) and understanding of how implementation science can promote effective recruitment of research participants (Z = −4.45, p < .001). Discussion/Significance of Impact: There is need and interest in capacity-building for effective recruitment and implementation science strategies among investigators, and these needs can be met through activities like the implementation science short course. Building capacity in this area enhances research rigor, collaboration, and the translational impact of clinical trials.

Objectives/Goals: To evaluate the incremental value of post-approval adverse event reporting and population exposure in characterizing a drug’s safety profile, using PD-1 inhibitors as a model class to assess how continued clinical experience enhances safety knowledge. Methods/Study Population: Using PD-1 inhibitors as a model, we are exploring FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database to capture real-world post-marketing safety information on drugs in this class approved by FDA since 2014. Findings from FAERS will be compared with the safety profile in the initial package insert used for FDA approval for each of the drugs. The nature of novel adverse events will be characterized and compared with the extent of exposure as determined through the use of marketing databases (e.g., IQVIA, Cortellis). We seek to identify relationships between the observation of novel adverse events and levels of population exposure. We will explore whether the safety experience with older products in this drug class could be predictive of safety outcomes in newer class candidates. Results/Anticipated Results: The findings would aim to inform the development of a “Goldilocks” approach (the value of incremental exposures), to explore how post-marketing exposure impacts changes in the safety profile of drugs in this class. Results will be used to explore whether a particular level of post-approval exposure is predictive of the occurrence of novel adverse events, excluding idiosyncratic events, among PD-1 inhibitors. Discussion/Significance of Impact: The study will guide the understanding of the incremental value of additional population exposure to refining the safety profile within a class of well-defined drugs and may inform a systematic approach towards consistent class labeling.

Objectives/Goals: To evaluate an undergraduate nursing externship revised to integrate the updated International Association for Clinical Research Nursing (IACRN) curriculum, designed to strengthen knowledge, skills, and career readiness for the specialty of clinical research nursing (CRN). Methods/Study Population: A 192-hour, 8-week summer externship was conducted at the Rockefeller University (2022–2025), accepting two rising junior nursing students annually. The curriculum included lectures on clinical research principles and processes, IRB observation, informed consent simulation, a mock IRB, and rotations in bionutrition, pharmacy, bioinformatics, and laboratory processing. Externs also completed the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative on Good Laboratory Practice and lab safety modules. Program evaluations included a pre- and post-test, a 30-item knowledge exam to assess understanding of clinical research concepts, as well as ratings by the mentors across professional competencies, and open-ended questions to obtain feedback from the externs. Results/Anticipated Results: Externs’ knowledge scores rose from pretest averages of 58–70% to post-test scores of 73–86%, a gain of ~20 points. Surveys revealed an improved understanding of research processes, particularly in areas such as informed consent and protocol design. Hands-on activities, lab processing, dietary simulation, and pharmacy were most valued. Mentors consistently rated externs as “Good” to “Excellent” in terms of professionalism, adaptability, and teamwork. Externs reported a greater interest in CRN careers and a deeper appreciation for the specialty’s breadth. Discussion/Significance of Impact: This externship, which embedded updated IACRN competencies at the undergraduate level, successfully enhanced knowledge and understanding of the field. Its innovative, replicable model demonstrates how early exposure can expand the clinical research nursing pipeline and prepare future CRN leaders.

Objectives/Goals: To develop and implement a new course to fill an identified gap in the present IU School of Medicine Clinical Research Staff Education program, enhance data accuracy, and minimize audit findings. The goal was to provide a robust and thorough training on study orientation, source documentation, and adhering to ALCOA+ principles to clinical research staff. Methods/Study Population: A 90-minute presentation titled Best Practices for Study Documentation, or Level 1.5 because it fills the gap between the currently offered Level 1 and 2 courses, was developed by monitoring team members with input from the Director of Research Staff Education. A pilot session was presented to senior research staff for feedback prior to launch. The 90-minute presentation was designed with interactive polls to assess attendees’ research and documentation experience at the start and to maintain engagement throughout the session. Attendees receive a post-course evaluation survey along with a certificate of attendance. The course is offered every two months. Completion of Level 1 training is a prerequisite and aimed at those who are three to six months of starting in research at Indiana University School of Medicine. Results/Anticipated Results: Results from the post-course evaluation survey described Best Practices in Study Documentation as engaging, informative, and valuable for new and experienced research staff. Many learners reported increased confidence, improved understanding of documentation and regulatory requirements, greater awareness of the tools and resources available and appreciation for real-world examples from the instructors. While attendees valued the presentation’s clarity and interactive polls, they suggested leaving more time for questions, supporting reference materials, and an ability to watch a recording of the session. Overall, feedback has been highly positive, with learners emphasizing the relevance, practicality, and effectiveness of the presentation. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Best Practices for Study Documentation has been delivered nine times to 235 attendees since its inception in Jun 2024, 63% of learners report they have < 2 years’ research experience. Evaluation feedback is positive; however, no quantitative method has been identified to measure improvement in documentation quality or reduction in audit findings.

Objectives/Goals: Speech-language pathology (SLP) is essential to restore communication, swallowing, and cognition. Research on access to SLP services in rural communities is sparse. In this cross-sectional descriptive study, we analyze access to SLP services among traditional Medicare beneficiaries offered via urban and rural Home Health Agencies (HHA). Methods/Study Population: To describe access to SLP services at home among traditional Medicare beneficiaries in 2022, we analyzed three provider-level datasets from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services: The Post-Acute Care and Hospice Provider Utilization and Payment Public Use File, the Care Compare dataset, and the Provider of Services dataset. We grouped HHAs into five rural and urban categories: urban serving <10% rural beneficiaries (n=6001), urban serving 10%+ rural beneficiaries (n=458), large rural (n=755), small rural (n=431), and isolated small rural (n=148). We used descriptive statistics to assess SLP service provision and SLP staffing patterns. A logistic regression model was conducted to analyze how service provision varies by agency characteristics. Results/Anticipated Results: According to agency self-report, the likelihood of offering services was highest among urban HHAs and decreased as rurality increased. However, the number of HHAs that actually provided SLP therapy minutes in 2022 was lower. Urban HHAs serving less than 10% rural beneficiaries and isolated small rural agencies were least likely to have provided SLP services (71% and 59% of agencies provided services). In adjusted analyses, larger agencies were more likely to have documented service provision, while accredited agencies were less likely to have provided services. HHAs that actually provided services were more likely to have SLP staff employed by the agency rather than contract SLPs. Among agencies with documented service provision, the majority of agencies employed less than 0.5 full-time equivalent SLPs. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Small independent agencies in isolated rural areas may struggle to fill open positions or consistently offer SLP positions due to fluctuating SLP needs. Efforts to improve access to home health SLP services should focus on supporting these agencies to improve SLP recruitment and retention.

Objectives/Goals: To develop a tool to assess mentoring relationships (mentor-mentee dyad) that can be used to monitor relationships over time to identify those at-risk along with knowledge and skills gaps for targeted coaching and career development initiatives and to evaluate mentoring programs. Methods/Study Population: Informed by literature review and faculty input, the CCTSI mentoring relationship assessment tool consists of parallel mentor and mentee questionnaires [applewebdata%3A//6E5CC409-7F40-4414-AF57-C97DF94108CD#_msocom_1]; requesting both a self- and partner-assessment. Assessments are completed upon K or T award initiation, and then every 9-12 months to characterize changes throughout the course of these CCTSI programs that include structured mentored training. Reports are generated for each mentor-mentee dyad as well as aggregate reports of mentors/mentees over time. After pilot testing with CCTSI K and T awardees, the tool was revised and then integrated into the K and T programs. Results/Anticipated Results: Principal component analysis of pilot data from 30 K and T awardees revealed that 5 questions be removed. The revised tool consists of 3 sections: assess the mentor (14 items), rate the relationship (9 items), and self-assessment (20 items for mentees, 16 items for mentors). The revised tool was completed by 12 T and 6 K mentee-mentor dyads. T dyad reports revealed 3 dyads at-risk. Aggregated data for T mentors and mentees identified areas for targeted intervention for expectation alignment, review/revise IDP, and sponsorship activities. Aggregated K data revealed that mentees rated their mentors more favorably than mentors’ self-assessments; discrepancies were noted related to career development. K mentees’ ratings corresponded to their mentors’ rating except for mentees’ ability to review/revise IDP. Discussion/Significance of Impact: The CCTSI mentoring relationship assessment tool demonstrates promise in identifying at-risk mentor-mentee relationships and for identifying knowledge/skills gaps for targeted career development initiatives. Future work will determine its usefulness for evaluating mentoring programs and capturing changes in relationships over time.

Objectives/Goals: Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (hEDS) and endometriosis are under-diagnosed conditions that are not well understood by many clinicians. This study aims to increase provider readiness to diagnose and treat women with these conditions by identifying clinicians’ perceived gaps in knowledge and preferred educational resources and modalities. Methods/Study Population: A national survey of clinicians (N = 121) was created in the Qualtrics survey-building platform, with recruitment taking place via the Prolific online research platform from 09/04/25 to 10/02/25. Clinicians responded to a series of established, closed-ended measures assessing their educational experiences regarding hEDS and endometriosis, comfort with diagnosing and managing the care of women with these two conditions, perceived barriers to diagnosis and care management, and preferred educational/training modalities for enhancing their understanding of these conditions. To be eligible for participation, respondents had to self-report that they were a) clinicians, b) at least 18 years of age, and c) working in the US healthcare sector. Descriptive statistics were performed on all variables of interest. Results/Anticipated Results: Clinicians first heard about hEDS from medical texts (60%) and patients (15%), and endometriosis from medical texts (50%) and personal relationships (including own diagnosis; 33%). A substantial proportion of clinicians reported being not at all comfortable understanding diagnostic criteria (hEDS 36%, endo 17%), diagnosing patients (hEDS 46%, endo 30%), or making plans of care (hEDS 42%, endo 17%). Top barriers included lack of knowledge, confidence, and mentoring. Respondents identified Online activities and Internet Point-of-Care as the most desirable CME resources, and Evidence-Based Medicine and Case-Based Learning as the most desirable learning modalities. Online learning offered flexible timing and self-paced modules, whereas in-person learning offered interaction with experts and peers. Discussion/Significance of Impact: This project recognizes the dearth of resources on hEDS and endometriosis available to clinicians and fills that gap by soliciting feedback directly from clinicians on their educational needs. Results will be translated into two prototypes of specialized educational interventions tailored to clinicians’ desired resources and methods of learning.

Objectives/Goals: To enhance collaboration, communication, and research professional development in a newly aligned academic learning health system by implementing two innovative training programs – Leadership in Focus and Research Mentor Academy – that build leadership and mentoring capacity across the research workforce. Methods/Study Population: To elevate and support research leadership and mentoring development across a large, multi-state academic health system, we launched two complementary programs. Leadership in Focus is a monthly virtual series featuring interviews with enterprise leaders, offering insights into leadership, strategy, and team science. Mentor Academy is a 10-week virtual course that provides formal training through skill-building, discussions, and guest speakers. Aligned with national best practices, it emphasizes communication and mentee-focused career development across the translational spectrum. Results/Anticipated Results: Both programs have shown early success in increasing engagement, awareness, and leadership competency. Leadership in Focus has drawn growing attendance from researchers, staff, and clinicians, fueling internal networking opportunities. The Research Mentor Academy participants bring strong representation from across departments and campuses. Participant feedback indicates improved confidence in mentoring, greater clarity in career advancement strategies, and expanded professional networks. These initiatives are creating new entry points for leadership development across the research enterprise, contributing to a stronger, more connected learning health system. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Through strong leadership and mentoring training, these programs strengthen collaboration and skill development of the translational research workforce. The success of these programs fosters a culture of learning and emphasizes the value of professional growth in an academic learning health system.

Objectives/Goals: We developed and implemented a leadership training course tailored for clinical research teams, focusing on emotional intelligence, strategic thinking, communication, and project management to enhance knowledge and maximize team performance. Methods/Study Population: An informal, multi-institution survey and literature review revealed a lack of leadership training tailored to clinical research staff professionals (CRPs). In response, we developed RISE (Relate | Inspire | Strategize | Elevate), a 9-week immersive program led by subject matter experts. Sessions focused on four key themes: 1) Leadership Fundamentals, 2) Interpersonal Effectiveness, 3) Trust Building, and 4) Building a Community of Practice. Designed for experienced CRPs, cohorts were limited to 30 participants to foster engagement, peer learning, and long-term professional growth. Results/Anticipated Results: The inaugural RISE cohort included 28 experienced CRPs with expertise in areas such as regulatory knowledge, data management, study coordination, and award administration. Pre-/post-assessments showed a 16% (mean; range 8-20%) knowledge gain in leadership domains including team management, communication, vision setting, motivation, resilience, and decision-making. The strongest areas of understanding (≥95%) were empathy, near-peer mentoring, and translational scientist traits. Participants rated the course ~90% for helpfulness, relevance, and actionability, with a net promoter score of 93%. Valued elements included DISC assessments, networking, and elective readings. Discussion/Significance of Impact: CRPs are vital to clinical research leadership. RISE delivers tailored training in leadership best practices for this group. In response to strong demand, the curriculum is being refined and efforts are underway to expand access across the region.

Objectives/Goals: This poster provides an overview of a new curriculum, “Entering Mentoring for Research Professionals,” that is designed for research professional mentors who provide research support. The presentation will highlight the curriculum adaptation process and evaluation results from beta testing. Methods/Study Population: The new curriculum was adapted from the Entering Mentoring base curriculum with support from the National Organization of Research Development Professionals in collaboration with the Center for the Improvement of Mentored Experiences in Research. Modules and activities were revised for use with research professionals (RP) across career stages and research areas. The adapted curriculum was beta tested with RP mentors at several sites, including CTSA and CTR hubs, and ISCORE-RC. Evaluation surveys were administered to mentors immediately following the training. Surveys were also administered to facilitators to collect information on their experience implementing the new curriculum. Results/Anticipated Results: The anticipated results of this project include beta test data from 40 participants and their facilitators across four implementation sites. Key outcomes include data on how well the newly adapted curriculum aligns with the intended audience and participant workshop satisfaction. Data on workshop impact, including intended behavioral changes, will also be reported, along with recommendations for curricular modifications. Data from facilitators of the training will also be shared. Discussion/Significance of Impact: RPs, who primarily operationalize research studies aimed at improving human health, play a critical role in the translational science workforce. This curriculum is designed specifically for this group and helps promote mentorship excellence across the academic enterprise. The curriculum will be disseminated widely after beta testing.

Objectives/Goals: The team science professional digital badge initiative aims to build a high-quality, expert-reviewed collection of team science education and training resources that are aligned with key clinical and translational science competencies and integrated with a microcredential from the Association for Clinical and Translational Sciences (CTS). Methods/Study Population: We are initiating a structured process to solicit TS education and training resources from diverse stakeholders in the fields of Team Science (TS), Interdisciplinary Collaboration, and CTS. Using the Team Science Toolkitting Model, resources will be reviewed for alignment with the five domains of CTS competencies (facilitating team affect, communication, research management, collaborative problem-solving, and leadership). The ITD Alliance toolkit inventory will serve as a model for comprehensive coverage and interoperability. Approaches to remove roadblocks to knowledge integration will be prioritized, including epistemic inclusivity, boundary spanning, and shared mental models, for resource selection and peer review. Results/Anticipated Results: We anticipate assembling a curated collection of resources spanning all CTS competency domains, with explicit mapping to individual and team competencies. Peer review of resources will ensure quality, relevance, and adaptability for digital badge requirements. By linking these resources to a digital badge credential, learners will be able to demonstrate applied skills in interdisciplinary collaboration. The process aims to reinforce best practices for curation of team science education and training, maintenance, and scholarship and develop strategies for overcoming conceptual and methodological barriers to knowledge integration in translational teams. Results will be reported at the conference. Discussion/Significance of Impact: This ongoing project will advance team science education through competency-based training, cross-disciplinary collaboration, and integrated knowledge. It will develop a training resource collection and showcase a reproducible model for strengthening the field and profession of team science.

Objectives/Goals: The Bench Program offers academically talented high school students a unique opportunity to engage in cutting-edge research. Students are paired with a UTMB graduate student or postdoc and mentored by faculty, gaining hands-on experience in a rigorous, research-focused setting. Methods/Study Population: The Bench Tutorials course is open to all Ball High students and pairs each student with a UTMB graduate or postdoctoral mentor based on scientific interests. Students commit at least four hours weekly to supervised research and instruction, totaling about 40 hours per semester. This 5.0-credit course mirrors college-level rigor, with regular lab meetings and mentorship. Students present their research at two symposiums annually, including a Year-End event. Successful completion is considered an advanced academic achievement. Results/Anticipated Results: The Bench Program continues to serve as a model biomedical training program for qualified GISD high school students. Since its start, it has enrolled over 490 students, many of whom have pursued science-related college paths. For the upcoming year, we aim to maintain a high-quality, intensive experience by enrolling around 16 students, each paired with one of 8 dedicated mentors. This structure ensures personalized guidance and hands-on research training, helping to shape the next generation of scientific leaders. Discussion/Significance of Impact: The Bench Program gives high school students hands-on research experience with UTMB scientists. It mirrors graduate-level rigor, requiring time management and independent learning. The program is expanding to reach more students through GGCTSA partnerships.

Objectives/Goals: To evaluate the effectiveness of multiple grant writing support services – including workshops, one-on-one mentoring, and grant pre-review – in improving faculty success in securing research funding. Methods/Study Population: The study included junior faculty participating in the R Club Grant Program – a grant development program to assist junior faculty in the preparation of their first research grant proposal – within the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine (UC COM) and the Center for Clinical & Translational Science & Training (CCTST), as well as UC COM faculty who engaged in one-on-one mentoring, workshops, or the Grant Pre-Review Program. Data on participation, satisfaction, and grant submission outcomes were collected and analyzed to assess the impact of each grant writing support service. Results/Anticipated Results: More than 100 investigators participated in R Club Grant Program workshops and received supplemental grant development materials. Comprehensive support – including workshops, mentoring, and pre-review – has contributed to successful funding across multiple NIH mechanisms (K23, R01, R03, R21, R35, and R56). Based on positive participant feedback, future expansion will include online and on-demand resources to enhance accessibility to grant writing webinars and training materials. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Comprehensive grant writing support improves faculty preparedness and funding success. Expanding to online and on-demand formats will broaden access, promote equity in research training, and strengthen institutional grant competitiveness.

Objectives/Goals: 1. To develop UgS and UgF in CTR with IA in PR. 2. To equip UgS and UgF with the necessary knowledge, skills, and mentoring and provide hands-on experiences for their academic and professional development. 3. To provide UgS and UgF with dissemination opportunities. Methods/Study Population: Main approaches: Restructure the Center for Research Education and Science Communication Opportunities (CRESCO), hub to provide support in CTR skills, statistics, scientific writing, and access to library resources; and organize/launch a training program in CTR to support student development in CTR. Main strategies: peer-mentoring with graduate students (GS), faculty (F), and health professionals (HP); a pilot project (PiP) program to offer UgS, GS, F, and HP hands-on experiences with participation in up-to-date research in CTR under the mentorship of a principal investigator-mentor; organization/offering the Title V Annual Symposium in CTR as a dissemination platform; and acquisition of supplies/equipment to support the research and infrastructure to the library and academic programs. Results/Anticipated Results: CRESCO: Acquired 2-96’ interactive monitors and refurbished 7 study rooms with technology, boosting distance learning. Developed a Web portal, offered 27,249 consultations, and 692 attended CTR workshops. Training program: INTD 5998 course had 74 students (64 UPR-MSC and 10 from other campuses/institutions). 190 Orientations offered to Academic Program in Health Sciences (APHS), reaching 36 departmental chairs (dc) and 129 UgS from 10 UPR campuses, and 23 dc and 2 UgS from other universities. Healthcare associations approved one Continuing Education Module, and two were submitted for approval. PiP: 32 PiP teams (32 primary researchers, 32 UgF, 42 UgS, and 21 GS) from 9 institutions. Presented 38 oral/poster presentations (27 PiPs, 11 Collaborators) and published 4 peer-reviewed publications. Discussion/Significance of Impact: The project strengthened CTR research/education through CRESCO facilities, consultations, and training. The INTD 5998 course, APHS orientations, and PiP teams (from diverse campuses/institutions), expanded participation and hands-on experience, yielding presentations, publications, UgS seeking graduate studies, and real-world impact.