Search

This study is the first to apply the theoretical principles of Malcolm Knowles’ theory of andragogy to evaluate data collected from learners who participated in team science training workshops in a biomedical research setting. Briefly, andragogy includes six principles: the learner’s self-concept, the role of experience, readiness to learn, orientation to learning, the learner’s need to know, and intrinsic motivation. Using an embedded study design, the primary focus was on qualitative data, with quantitative data complementing the qualitative findings. The deductive analysis demonstrated that approximately 85% of the qualitative data could be connected to at least one andragogical principle. Participant responses to positive evaluation questions were largely related to two principles: readiness to learn and problem-based learning orientation. Participant responses to negative questions were largely connected to two different principles: the role of experience and self-direction. Inductive analysis found an additional theme: meeting biological needs. Quantitative survey results supported the qualitative findings. The study findings demonstrate that andragogy can serve as a valuable construct to integrate into the development of effective team science training for biomedical researchers.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Scholarly activity is a key component of most residency programs. To establish fundamental research skills and fill gaps within training curricula, we developed an online, asynchronous set of modules to introduce trainees to various topics that are germane to the conduct of research and evaluated its effectiveness in resident research education. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Research 101 was utilized by residents at the Brookdale Hospital Medical Center in Brooklyn, NY. Resident knowledge, confidence, and satisfaction were assessed using pre- and post-module surveys with 5-point Likert scaled questions, open-ended text responses, and a final quiz. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Pre-module survey results indicated that residents were most confident with the Aligning expectations, Introduction to research, and Study design and data analysis basics modules and least confident with the Submitting an Institutional Review Board (IRB) protocol at UC and Presenting your summer research modules. Post-module survey responses increased significantly compared to pre-module results for all modules and learning objectives (p

Scholarly activity is a key component of most residency programmes. To establish fundamental research skills and fill gaps within training curricula, we developed an online, asynchronous set of modules called Research 101 to introduce trainees to various topics that are germane to the conduct of research and evaluated its effectiveness in resident research education. Research 101 was utilised by residents at One Brooklyn Health in Brooklyn, NY. Resident knowledge, confidence, and satisfaction were assessed using pre- and post-module surveys with 5-point Likert scaled questions, open-ended text responses, and a multiple-choice quiz. Pre-module survey results indicated that residents were most confident with the Aligning expectations, Introduction to research, and Study design and data analysis basics modules and least confident with the Submitting an Institutional Review Board protocol and Presenting your summer research modules. Post-module survey responses demonstrated increased learning compared to pre-module results for all modules and learning objectives (p < 0.0001). “This module met my needs” was endorsed 91.4% of the time. The median score for the final quiz that consisted of 25 multiple-choice questions was 23. Thematic analysis of open-ended post-module survey responses identified multiple strengths and opportunities for improvement in course content and instructional methods. These data demonstrate that residents benefit from completion of Research 101, as post-module survey scores were significantly higher than pre-module survey scores for all modules and questions, final quiz scores were high, and open-ended responses highlighted opportunities for additional resident learning.

Abstract Introduction: Research is an important aspect of many students’ training. However, formal research training is rarely included in curricula. Thus, we developed an online, asynchronous series of modules to introduce trainees to multiple topics that are relevant to the conduct of research. Methods: Research 101 was utilized by first-year medical students and undergraduate students conducting mentored research projects. Students’ knowledge, confidence, and satisfaction were assessed using pre- and post-module surveys with five-point Likert scaled questions, open-ended text responses, and a final quiz. Results: Pre-module survey results showed that learners felt most confident with the Conducting a literature search and Race and racism in medicine modules and least confident with the Submitting an Institutional Review Board protocol at UC module. Post-module survey responses were significantly increased compared to pre-module results for all modules and questions (p < 0.0001). The response to “The content of this module met my needs” was endorsed across all modules (84.9% “yes” responses). A final quiz of 25 multiple-choice questions was completed by 92 participants who received a median score of 21. Content analysis of open-ended post-module survey responses identified several strengths and opportunities for improvement in course content and instructional methods. Conclusions: These data demonstrate that significant learning resulted from completion of Research 101, as post-module survey scores were significantly higher than pre-module survey scores for all modules and questions. Final quiz scores were positive but also highlighted opportunity for additional trainee learning and will guide evolution of future modules.

Abstract Introduction: Acute care research (ACR) is uniquely challenged by the constraints of recruiting participants and conducting research procedures within minutes to hours of an unscheduled critical illness or injury. Existing competencies for clinical research professionals (CRPs) are gaining traction but may have gaps for the acute environment. We sought to expand existing CRP competencies to include the specialized skills needed for ACR settings. Methods: Qualitative data collected from job shadowing, clinical observations, and interviews were analyzed to assess the educational needs of the acute care clinical research workforce. We identified competencies necessary to succeed as an ACR-CRP, and then applied Bloom’s Taxonomy to develop characteristics into learning outcomes that frame both knowledge to be acquired and job performance metrics. Results: There were 28 special interest competencies for ACR-CRPs identified within the eight domains set by the Joint Task Force (JTF) of Clinical Trial Competency. While the eight domains were not prioritized by the JTF, in ACR an emphasis on Communication and Teamwork, Clinical Trials Operations, and Data Management and Informatics was observed. Within each domain, distinct proficiencies and unique personal characteristics essential for success were identified. The competencies suggest that a combination of competency-based training, behavioral-based hiring practices, and continuing professional development will be essential to ACR success. Conclusion: The competencies developed for ACR can serve as a training guide for CRPs to be prepared for the challenges of conducting research within this vulnerable population. Hiring, training, and supporting the development of this workforce are foundational to clinical research in this challenging setting.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The grant writing process provides investigators with critical thinking, problem solving, and communication skills, crucial for personal and professional development. However, opportunities for junior faculty to learn these skills are highly variable. Thus, we developed a grant writing program to assist in the preparation of an NIH R proposal. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The R Club Grant Program was implemented in 2021 for junior faculty of the University of Cincinnati’s College of Medicine and Center for Clinical & Translational Science & Training (CCTST). The program consists of a series of workshops (e.g., How to Craft a Specific Aims Page, How to Construct a Competitive R01 Proposal) utilizing examples of successful proposals and grant review criteria to demonstrate how to translate a conceptual framework into a research proposal (level 1). All participants can receive constructive feedback on a Specific Aims page from an experienced grant writer (level 2), and for a select cohort, the program provides comprehensive scientific content edits and iterative feedback on a full research proposal, with a focus on grantsmanship, presentation, and overall competitiveness (level 3). RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Over three NIH grant cycles, the program to date has provided 38 early-career investigators with multi-level grant writing support. All participants attended the workshops and received supporting documents, 21 received feedback on a Specific Aims page, and 6 received one-on-one writing assistance on their full research proposal. Of the 6 investigators who received the greatest level of support, 3 have received NIH scientific review, with a 66.6% funding success rate for either an original (R01, n=1) or subsequent overlapping (R35, n=1) proposal. In a survey sent to workshop attendees, 100% of respondents (n=23) reported ( Strongly Agreed or Agreed ) that the training was a worthwhile investment in their professional development and 96% stated that they will be able to apply the knowledge and skills learned. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Initial evaluation measures suggest that grant writing support programs have great potential to enhance funding success rates. As the program evolves it will be crucial to evaluate both qualitative and quantitative feedback measures to ensure efforts are directed to the appropriate level(s) of service to maximize the funding success of our faculty.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Research is an important aspect of many students’ training. However, most trainees do not complete a scholarly project, and formal research training is rarely included in a degree program’s curriculum. Thus, we developed an online, asynchronous series of modules to introduce trainees to multiple topics that are relevant to the conduct of research. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Research 101 was utilized by first year medical students and undergraduate students conducting mentored research projects at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine. Students’ knowledge, confidence, and satisfaction were assessed using pre- and post-module surveys with 5-point Likert scaled questions, open-ended text responses, and a final quiz. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Pre-module survey results showed that learners were most confident with the Conducting a literature search and Race and racism in medicine modules and least confident with the Submitting an Institutional Review Board (IRB) protocol at UC module. Post-module survey responses were significantly increased compared to pre-module results for all modules and questions (p < 0.0001). The response to The content of this module met my needs was endorsed across all modules (84.9% yes responses). A final quiz of 25 multiple choice questions covering content from all required modules was completed by 92 students who had a median score of 21 (range: 15 to 25). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: These data demonstrate significant learning resulting from completion of Research 101, as post-module survey scores were significantly higher than pre-module survey scores for all modules and questions. Final quiz scores were positive but also highlighted opportunity for additional student learning and will guide evolution of future modules.

Abstract Background: Defining key barriers to the development of a well-trained clinical research professional (CRP) workforce is an essential first step in identifying solutions for successful CRP onboarding, training, and competency development, which will enhance quality across the clinical and translational research enterprise. This study aimed to summarize barriers and best practices at academic medical centers related to effective CRP onboarding, training, professional development, identify challenges with the assessment of and mentoring for CRP competency growth, and describe opportunities to improve training and professionalization for the CRP career pathway. Materials/Methods: Qualitative data from a series of Un-Meeting breakout sessions and open-text survey questions were analyzed to explore the complex issues involved when developing high-quality onboarding and continuing education opportunities for CRPs at academic medical centers. Results: Results suggest there are several barriers to training the CRP workforce, including balancing foundational onboarding with role-based training, managing logistical challenges and institutional contexts, identifying/enlisting institutional champions, assessing competency, and providing high-quality mentorship. Several of these themes are interrelated. Two universal threads present throughout all themes are the need for effective communication and the need to improve professionalization of the CRP career pathway. Conclusion: Few institutions have solved all the issues related to training a competent and adaptable CRP workforce, although some have addressed one or more. We applied a socio-technical lens to illustrate our findings and the need for NCATS-funded academic medical centers to work collaboratively within and across institutions to overcome training barriers and support a vital, well-qualified workforce and present several exemplars from the field to help attain this goal.

Abstract Introduction: Research is an important aspect of many medical students’ training. However, many medical students are not required to complete a scholarly project, and formal research training is often fragmented across the medical school curriculum. Thus, we developed an online, structured, asynchronous set of modules to introduce trainees to multiple topics relevant to the conduct of research. Methods: Research 101 was piloted by 27 first-year medical students at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine. Students’ knowledge, confidence, and satisfaction were assessed using a final quiz and pre- and post-module surveys with five-point Likert-scaled questions and open-ended text responses. Results: Pre-module survey results showed that learners felt most confident in Conducting a literature search and least confident in Submitting an Institutional Review Board (IRB) protocol at UC. Post-module mean scores were significantly increased compared to pre-module results for all modules and questions (P < 0.05). The response to “The content of this module met my needs” was high across all modules with 236 (84.0%) “yes” responses. Thematic analysis of open-ended text responses from post-module surveys identified several improvements to individual modules and to the overall structure of Research 101. A final quiz of 25 multiple choice questions covering content from all required modules was required. The median score was 21. Conclusions: Comparison of post-module to pre-module survey scores provided clear evidence of improved learning across all topics. The modules developed were responsive to the students’ needs, and students provided additional improvements for subsequent iterations of Research 101.

Abstract Background: Identification of evidence-based factors related to status of the clinical research professional (CRP) workforce at academic medical centers (AMCs) will provide context for National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS) policy considerations and guidance. The objective of this study is to explore barriers and opportunities related to the recruitment and retention of the CRP workforce. Materials and Methods: Qualitative data from a series of Un-Meeting breakout sessions and open-text survey questions were analyzed to explore barriers and recommendations for improving AMC CRP recruitment, retention and diversity. Results: While certain institutions have established competency-based frameworks for job descriptions, standardization remains generally lacking across CTSAs. AMCs report substantial increases in unfilled CRP positions leading to operational instability. Data confirmed an urgent need for closing gaps in CRP workforce at AMCs, especially for attracting, training, retaining, and diversifying qualified personnel. Improved collaboration with human resource departments, engagement with principal investigators, and overcoming both organizational and resource challenges were suggested strategies, as well as development of outreach to universities, community colleges, and high schools raising awareness of CRP career pathways. Discussion: Based on input from 130 CRP leaders at 35 CTSAs, four National Institute of General Medical Sciences’ Institutional Development Award (IDeA) program sites, along with industry and government representatives, we identified several barriers to successful recruitment and retention of a highly trained and diverse CRP workforce. Results, including securing institutional support, champions, standardizing and adopting proven national models, improving local institutional policies to facilitate CRP hiring and job progression point to potential solutions.