Search

Abstract Background: The knowledge, skills, and abilities needed for clinical research professionals (CRPs) are described in the Joint Task Force (JTF) for Clinical Trial Competencies Framework as a basis for leveled educational programs, training curricula, and certification. There is a paucity of literature addressing team science competencies tailored to CRPs. Gaps in training, research, and education can restrict their capability to effectively contribute to team science. Materials/Methods: The CRP Team Science team consisted of 18 members from 7 clinical and translational science awarded institutions. We employed a multi-stage, modified Delphi approach to define “Smart Skills” and leveled team science skills examples using individual and team science competencies identified by Lotrecchiano et al. Results: Overall, 59 team science Smart Skills were identified resulting in 177 skills examples across three levels: fundamental, skilled, and advanced. Two examples of the leveled skillsets for individual and team competencies are illustrated. Two vignettes were created to illustrate application for training. Discussion: This work provides a first-ever application of team science for CRPs by defining specific individual and team science competencies for each level of the CRP career life course. This work will enhance the JTF Domains 7 (Leadership and Professionalism) and 8 (Communication and Teamwork) which are often lacking in CRP training programs. The supplement provides a full set of skills and examples from this work. Conclusion: Developing team science skills for CRPs may contribute to more effective collaborations across interdisciplinary clinical research teams. These skills may also improve research outcomes and stabilize the CRP workforce.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To describe team science training that can be tailored to specific audiences, in this case, Clinical Research Professionals (CRP) using discipline-specific vignettes, and to highlight the benefits of audience-specific training in team science. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Translational science teams are comprised of members from various disciplines. All members can benefit from team science training. Our education team has incorporated discipline-specific training into educational offerings. This project focuses on education tailored to CRPs and their role in clinical research. Historically, team science training has been focused on faculty and trainees. The exclusion of CRPs can limit the impact of this training. We’ve created workshops specifically geared toward CRPs. This presentation demonstrates how we tailor team science training to CRPs by using relevant examples and real-world vignettes to highlight concepts. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The team science workshops conducted specifically for CRPs have been well received. CRPs have been eager to engage with team science-related material. The number of team science workshops requested by CRP groups is continuing to increase. We will share both quantitative and qualitative evaluation results from several team science workshops conducted to-date. The inclusion of scenarios that relate to common situations encountered by CRPs has been especially helpful in demonstrating team science concepts they have personally experienced. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Helping CRPs directly apply team science concepts to their work is very valuable for improving high-functioning team behavior. CRPs can use new knowledge and skills to enhance efficiency and reduce stress and burnout. The impact of team science is maximized when all members of the team are trained.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Our goal is to explore and collaboratively identify the team science competencies essential for Clinical Research Professionals at all experience levels and how these competencies relate to the Joint Task Force for Clinical Translational Research Professionals Competencies. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Team science competencies for clinical research professionals are poorly defined. The JTF Clinical Trial Competencies lack sufficient emphasis on team science, though it is briefly included in two JTF competency domains: Leadership & Professionalism, and Communication & Teamwork. The competencies primarily focus on tasks related to clinical research and basic knowledge of product development; however, a conceptual model for applying the competencies using a team science lens is needed. Currently, the JTF competency figure is often thought of as sequential, given the competencies are numbered, creating the misconception that the last competencies are less important. We support a new figure showing the permeability of team science across competencies and the connectedness and equality of the competencies. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Our anticipated results are to show the integral nature of team science in clinical research professional communities of practice. Once complete, we will have identified measurable team science competency-based skills essential for clinical research professionals at various levels of expertise. Understanding the multi-dimensional team science competencies will inform targeted team science education and training for clinical research professionals. Our revised competency framework provides an improved team science conceptual model for clinical translational science. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Our work will define team science competencies as related to clinical research professionals at all experience levels. The interdependence of teams across clinical trial activities necessitates a consideration of an improved conceptual framework for clinical translational team science competencies.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The impact of baseline BMI on glycemic response to group medical visits (GMV) and weight management (WM)-based interventions is unclear. Our objective is to determine how baseline BMI class impacts patient responses to GMV and interventions that combine WM/GMV. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We will perform a secondary analysis of Jump Start, a randomized, controlled trial that compared the effectiveness of a GMV-based low carbohydrate diet-focused WM program (WM/GMV) to traditional GMV-based medication management (GMV) on diabetes control. The primary and secondary outcomes will be change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and weight at 48 months, respectively. Study participants will be stratified into BMI categories defined by BMI 27-29.9kg/m2, 30.0-34.9kg/m2, 35.0-39.9kg/m2, and ≥40.0kg/m2. Hierarchical mixed models will be used to examine the differential impact of the WM/GMV intervention compared to GMV on changes in outcomes by BMI class category. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Jump Start enrolled 263 overweight Veterans (BMI ≥ 27kg/m2) with type 2 diabetes. At baseline, mean BMI was 35.3 and mean HbA1c was 9.1. 14.5% were overweight (BMI 27–29.9) and 84.5% were obese (BMI ≥ 30). The proposed analyses are ongoing. We anticipate that patients in the higher BMI obesity classes will demonstrate greater reductions in HbA1c and weight with the WM/GMV intervention relative to traditional GMV. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This work will advance the understanding of the relationship between BMI and glycemic response to targeted interventions, and may ultimately provide guidance for interventions for type 2 diabetes.