Subsequent Grant Research Articles

Building a community-academic partnership to expand services for childhood cancer survivors in a rural, low-income region in California.

360 Background: Community-engaged research is an effective approach to address health disparities that is well-established in the public health domain and has not been widely applied in childhood cancer survivorship. We present our multi-year experience building a community-academic partnership and community-engaged childhood cancer survivorship research portfolio. Methods: We have developed a partnership between Jacob’s Heart Children’s Cancer Support Services, a nonprofit community-based organization (CBO) and an academic pediatric cancer survivorship team, with the goal of improving health outcomes for childhood cancer survivors and their families in the Salinas Valley, a rural, low-income region in California with majority Hispanic/Latino/a/e residents. Our partnership process is guided by principles of community-based participatory research, prioritizing trust and involving community members as equal partners in all phases of research. Results: In year 1 (2021-2022), we held successive meetings which identified common goals and shared values, established the collaboration, and sought funding to advance our goals. In year 2 (2022-2023), with internal grant funding, we conducted a qualitative needs assessment interviewing childhood cancer survivors, parents, and CBO staff. Teamwork enriched the data analysis and allowed us to identify problems in communication as an area of need, which directly informed subsequent grant proposals. In year 3 (2023-2024), with external funding we began a multi-year study to understand and improve survivorship-related communication among Hispanic/Latino/a/e young adult childhood cancer survivors, their parents, and clinicians. Current and future projects include collaborative design and pilot testing of a novel communication intervention, formation of a dedicated community advisory board, and a CBO-driven program evaluation. Findings from our community-engaged studies have prompted new sets of research questions and illustrate opportunities for institutional change in the clinic setting. In parallel, the CBO has leveraged research findings in real-time to identify barriers to seeking support among childhood cancer survivors and families, and adapted and improved programming for families in response. Through our joint research portfolio, we have incorporated training and mentorship for staff at the CBO and medical trainees at the academic center. Conclusions: A community-academic partnership in a rural, low-income region has the potential to reduce health disparities and improve childhood cancer survivors’ health outcomes through collaborative program development and community-engaged research. Fueled by mutual investment and strong momentum, our partnership facilitates an interconnected cycle of research and practice change that is grounded in community needs.

115 Strategies for Training and Advancing under-represented Researchers (STARs)

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Minority faculty have inequitable access to information, professional development, and research resources. A structured research-mentoring program could help strengthen the research acumen of underrepresented (UR) faculty, provide a community, and support to ensure their success in becoming independent investigators. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The Translational Research Institute (TRI) STARs program aims to build a peer support community of UR in biomedical, clinical, behavioral and social sciences to support career development and research success. The program provides a structured peer support group with a 3-month grant training and development program and addresses issues of isolation often felt by UR faculty in academic settings. It encourages the development of innovative research ideas in a safe environment. This peer support group can also help improve confidence and self-efficacy in clinical and translational research development and execution by UR faculty. At the didactic program’s conclusion and seed grant application submission, STARs provides $10,000 as a TRI DEI Equity, Diversity, and Grantsmanship Expertise project. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Since its launch in 2021, 11 scholars have enrolled in the program;three have fully completed the program, and all three have received subsequent grant funding. Four scholars have completed the didactic program and are in the process of using seed funding to collect initial data and working on initial publications. The remaining scholars are currently in the didactic program. Initial scholar satisfaction with the program is high: 100% reported satisfaction with their participation (Very Satisfied/Satisfied), and 100% agree the program provides adequate support to their research project (Strongly Agree/Agree). Overall, scholars reported an average increase in confidence of 7.9% in grantsmanship skills (Scale 0-10). The return on investment is 3106%, with over $1.9 million in subsequent funding. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Research shows diverse teams working together, capitalizing on innovative ideas, and distinct perspectives outperform homogenous teams. Our preliminary experience demonstrates success for the model. Additional, long-term support will be furthered developed to address additional challenges experienced by UR faculty across their careers.

243 Community-Campus Research Incubator (CCRI) Grant Program: 13 years of partnerships improving community health

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: With the knowledge that population health will not improve without including community voices in research, analysis of the UCI Institute for Clinical and Translational Science (ICTS) Community-Campus Research Incubator (CCRI) grants awarded since 2010 provides the foundation for understanding research partnerships impact on community health. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Over the past 13 years, the UCI ICTS CCRI program has funded 63 partnered research pilot or capacity-building projects, providing up to $30K annually to academic-community partnerships. Each year since 2010, between 3 and 7 projects were funded up to $5,000 annually for capacity-building activities and up to $10,000 annually for pilot research activities. Additionally, during the COVID-19 pandemic, a collaboration between the UCI ICTS and the local Healthcare Agency provided up to $20,000 to research partnership teams to study impact and interventions related to the pandemic, where 10 CCRI awards were given out. Evaluations of these research teams was completed at the end of the project, and at years 2 and 3 after the project ended. Analysis of the projects and partnerships aim to reveal the impact of these projects. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: In 2023, we compiled all evaluation data collected from 2010 – 2023 from the CCRI partnership grants, including traditional metrics of publications, subsequent grant applications submitted & awarded, presentations given, and return on investment for ICTS granted funds. Less traditional metrics include number of students trained, new tools or databases created, knowledge disseminated, and advances in clinical care. Since 2020, Translational Science Benefit Model metrics have been collected on community, policy, economic, and clinical domains. Since 2015, data on each CCRI partnership has been collected at the start and end of each project, with questions about attributes of each partner, trust, community engagement principles, and anticipated/actual impact of each project. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Organizing outcomes from the data collected will provide deep understanding of important components, functioning, and types and reach of partnered health research. This understanding will inform future action of the CCRI program in terms of what can be accomplished with a given amount of funding, and the constitution of successful partnerships.

Impact of Neurosurgery Research and Education Foundation awards on subsequent grant funding and career outcomes of neurosurgeon-scientists.

The Neurosurgery Research and Education Foundation (NREF) provides diverse funding opportunities for in-training and early-career neurosurgeon-scientists. The authors analyzed the impact of NREF funding on the subsequent career success of neurosurgeons in obtaining research funding and academic achievements. The NREF database was queried to identify NREF winners from 2000 to 2015. The award recipients were surveyed to obtain information about their demographic characteristics, academic career, and research funding. Only subsequent research support with an annual funding amount of $50,000 or greater was included. The primary outcome was the NREF impact ratio, defined as the ratio between NREF award research dollars and subsequent grant funding dollars. The secondary outcomes were time to subsequent grant funding as principal investigator (PI), clinical practice settings, and final academic position achieved. From 2000 to 2015, 158 neurosurgeons received 164 NREF awards totaling $8.3 million (M), with $1.7 M awarded to 46 Young Clinician Investigators (YCIs), $1.5 M to 18 Van Wagenen Fellows (VWFs), and $5.1 M to 100 resident Research Fellowship Grant (RFG) awardees. Of all awardees, 73% have current academic appointments, and the mean ± SD number of publications and H-index were 71 ± 82 and 20 ± 15, respectively. The overall response rate to our survey was 70%, and these respondents became the cohort for our analysis. In total, respondents cumulatively obtained $776 M in post-NREF award grant funding, with the most common sources of funding including the National Institutes of Health ($327 M) and foundational awards ($306 M). The NREF impact ratios for awardees were $1:$381 for YCI, $1:$113 for VWF, and $1:$41 for resident RFG. Awardees with NREF projects in functional neurosurgery, pediatric neurosurgery, and neuro-oncology had the highest NREF impact ratios of $1:$194, $1:$185, and $1:$162, respectively. Of respondents, 9% became department chairs, 26% became full professors, 82% received at least 1 subsequent research grant, and 66% served as PI on a subsequent research grant after receiving their NREF awards. In-training and early-career neurosurgeons who were awarded NREF funding had significant success in acquiring subsequent grant support, research productivity, and achievements of academic rank. NREF grants provide a tremendous return on investment across various career stages and subspecialities. They also appeared to have a broader impact on trajectory of research and innovation within the field of neurosurgery.

Consortium for violence prevention research, leadership training, and implementation for excellence (CONVERGE): a protocol to train science leaders in gender-based-violence and violence-against-children research for impact.

Gender-based violence (GBV) and violence against children (VAC) are two prevalent and highly interconnected global health challenges, yet data and research capacities to study these forms of violence and to generate evidence-based policies and programs remain limited. To address critical shortages in research capacity in Vietnam and to establish a model for other Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs), we are establishing CONVERGE-the Consortium for Violence Prevention Research, Implementation, and Leadership Training for Excellence. Based on a needs assessment with partners in Vietnam, CONVERGE will provide a comprehensive research training program supporting 15 long-term, postdoctoral trainees with multi-disciplinary research training in GBV and VAC. We also will offer in-country trainings and short-courses to 40 short-term mid-career academic trainees and 60 short-term practitioner/stakeholder trainees over 5 years to build productive GBV and VAC academic, scientific, and practitioner networks. The CONVERGE training program has four components: (1) 14 h of virtual/in-person annual mentorship training to prepare research mentors and to create a pipeline of future mentors in Vietnam; (2) a one-month intensive research training for long-term postdoctoral fellows at Emory University; (3) a structured 17-month, in-country mentored research project for long-term trainees that results in a peer-reviewed manuscript and a subsequent grant submission; and, (4) week-long in-country intensive translational trainings on implementation science, advanced topics in leadership, and advanced topics in science dissemination. Opportunities for on-going virtual training and professional networking will be provided for CONVERGE trainees and mentors in Vietnam with other trainees and mentors of D43s focused on injury/violence prevention, D43s housed at Emory, and D43s with other institutions in Southeast Asia. To assess the reach, implementation, fidelity, and effectiveness of these four components, we will implement a rigorous, mixed-methods, multi-level evaluation strategy using process and outcome measures. Findings from the evaluation will be used to refine program components for future trainee and mentor cohorts and to assess long-term program impact. Led by Emory University in the US and Hanoi Medical University in Vietnam, CONVERGE represents leading institutions and experts from around the world, with a goal of providing mentorship opportunities for early-career scientists with an interest in violence prevention.

A mentored hands-on training model for scaling up implementation and intervention research in India: “connecting the dots”

Despite the high burden of mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), less than 25% of those in need have access to appropriate services, in part due to a scarcity of locally relevant, evidence-based interventions and models of care. To address this gap, researchers from India and the United States and the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) collaboratively developed a “Grantathon” model to provide mentored research training to 24 new principal investigators (PIs). This included a week-long didactic training, a customized web-based data entry/analysis system and a National Coordination Unit (NCU) to support PIs and track process objectives. Outcome objectives were assessed via scholarly output including publications, awards received and subsequent grants that were leveraged. Multiple mentorship strategies including collaborative problem-solving approaches were used to foster single-centre and multicentre research. Flexible, approachable and engaged support from mentors helped PIs overcome research barriers, and the NCU addressed local policy and day-to-day challenges through informal monthly review meetings. Bi-annual formal review presentations by all PIs continued through the COVID-19 pandemic, enabling interim results reporting and scientific review, also serving to reinforce accountability. To date, more than 33 publications, 47 scientific presentations, 12 awards, two measurement tools, five intervention manuals and eight research grants have been generated in an open-access environment. The Grantathon is a successful model for building research capacity and improving mental health research in India that could be adopted for use in other LMICs.

Assessing the Impact of the American Heart Association's Research Portfolio: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

A task force composed of American Heart Association (AHA) Research Committee members established processes to measure the performance of the AHA's research portfolio and evaluated key outcomes that are fundamental to the overall success of the program. This report reviews progress that the AHA research program has had in achieving its goals relevant to the research programs in the AHA's research portfolio from 2008 to 2017. Comprehensive performance metrics were identified to assess the impact of AHA funding on researchers' career progress and research outcomes. Metrics included bibliometric analysis (ie, tracking of publications and their impact) and career development measures (ie, subsequent grant funding, intellectual property, faculty appointment/promotion, or industry position). Publication rates ranged from ≈0.5 to 4 publications per year, with a strong correlation between number of publications per year and later career stage. The Field-Weighted Citation Index, a metric of bibliometric impact, was between 1.5 and 3.0 for all programs, indicating that AHA awardee publications had a higher citation impact compared with similar publications. To gain insight into the career progression of AHA awardees, a 2-year postaward survey was distributed. Of the Postdoctoral Fellowship recipient respondents, 72% obtained academic research positions, with the remaining working in industry or government research settings; 72% of those in academic positions obtained additional funding. Among respondents who were Beginning Grant-in-Aid and Scientist Development Grant awardees, 45% received academic promotions and 83% obtained additional funding. Measuring performance of the AHA's research portfolio is critical to ensure that its strategic goals are met and to show the AHA's commitment to high-quality, impactful research.

491 Evaluating the long-term impact of a practice-oriented research training program for clinical and translational research staff

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The objective of this evaluation is to evaluate the long-term impact of the PORT program on the clinical and translational research careers of the participating research staff. The impact of the program is best demonstrated through measures of the scientific contributions of the participants as well as their professional advancement over time. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The PORT program participants were tracked through the collection of instructional and public records, including the collection of their subsequent grant and publications. The clinical and translational research careers of the participants was also assessed, using a measure adapted from the operational guidelines for NCATS’ Research Careers Common Metric. A survey was administered to part participants and interviews conducted with participants from the past cohorts. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The evaluation results demonstrate the PORT program participants made substantial contributions to the advancement of clinical and translational research, particularly through their publication of hundreds of scientific works. In addition, the evaluation results reveal that the program had short-, intermediate- and long-term impact on their research careers, thereby contributing to the advancement of the health research workforce at the University of Michigan for well over a decade. Specific participant cases highlight how individuals utilized their experience and training to advance research agendas and their long-term careers at the institution. These findings can inform the development, implementation and evaluation of similar programs throughout the CTSA consortium and beyond. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Most evaluations of research training and award programs for clinical and translational research staff do not evaluate the long-term impact of CTSA support on the research careers of the participants. The findings of this evaluation can help inform the development of new and more effective workforce development initiatives with long-term impact.

Impact of the KL2/Catalyst Medical Research Investigator Training (CMeRIT) Program on the careers of early-stage clinical and translational investigators.

The Harvard Catalyst KL2/CMeRIT program is a 2-year mentored institutional career award that includes KL2 grants funded by National Institutes of Health (NIH) and CMeRIT grants funded by Harvard Catalyst nonfederal funds. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes for early-stage investigators funded by the KL2/CMeRIT program to a group of applicants who were not chosen for support to assess the potential impact of the program on early career outcomes. Career data, including academic promotions, subsequent grant funding, and publication rates, from both successful and unsuccessful 2008-2018 KL2/CMeRIT applicants were compiled throughout the year 2020. Data were obtained directly through outreach to both groups and through assessment of online resources. The cohort comprised 487 individuals, 109 awardees, and 378 nonawardees. Awardees were more likely to be subsequently involved in clinical and translational research than nonawardees (92% vs 75%, p < 0.001). A higher proportion of awardees also had achieved academic promotion (81% vs 69%, p = 0.016) and subsequent NIH funding (72% vs 58%, p = 0.047), while there was no difference in publication rates (p = 0.555). Participants in the Harvard Catalyst KL2/CMeRIT program demonstrate greater early career success than nonparticipants though the nonparticipants also fared relatively well.

Impact of a Clinical and Translational Science Awards hub on faculty research grant productivity

Abstract Introduction: Applications for and receipt of external research grants are important indicators of scientific productivity, and ones that the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Program is intended to support. Methods: We investigate the association between the receipt of support services from one CTSA-supported hub and investigator productivity as measured by individual investigator grant submissions and grant awards at a Research I public university over an 8-year period. Negative binomial regression models are used to evaluate associations between individual grant productivity (in 2017, 2018, and 2019) and receipt of support services during the preceding 2 years. Results: Controlling for prior levels of productivity, service receipt is found to be predictive of both grants submitted and grants awarded to investigators in each model examined. Analyses also found some evidence of faculty rank and race/ethnic differences in the effects of Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCTS) service use on subsequent grant productivity. Conclusions: Further work is needed to understand the relationship between clinical and translational services and other measures of productivity.

Thoracic Surgery Foundation Research Awards: Leading the Way to Excellence

BackgroundCombining clinical and research excellence has become an increasingly difficult endeavor for thoracic surgeons, with typical success rates for the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute and the National Cancer Institute being 25.1% and 11.3%, respectively. The Thoracic Surgery Foundation (TSF), which is an arm of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, provides research awards and grants aimed at early career faculty to assist in securing federal peer-reviewed funding. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of these awards. MethodsFaculty awardees of the TSF research awards from 1995 to 2019 were included in the study. The scholarly work of awardees was assessed by using Scopus , MEDLINE, and Google Scholar for publications, citations, and h-index. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) RePorter and the Federal RePorter were used to search for any grants awarded to these individuals. For publications and citations associated with a TSF grant, a 4-year window from the time of the research award was used. ResultsFifty-two research awards were given to early career faculty during this study period, and 8 (15%) were awarded to MD PhDs. Six (12%) of awardees were female. Cardiac faculty members were awarded 27 (52%) awards, and general thoracic faculty members were awarded 25 (48%); of the cardiac faculty, 4 (17.4%) were congenital cardiac faculty. In the 4-year period after the TSF grant award, the mean number of published articles per awardee was 23 (interquartile range [IQR], 12 to 36), with a median citation count of 147 (IQR, 32 to 327). The current median h-index was 26 (IQR, 15 to 36), with 2323 (IQR, 1173 to 4568) median citations. Forty-eight percent of all awardees received at least 1 subsequent grant; 40.4% of these awardees received grants from the NIH, and 25% had 2 or more NIH grants. Comparing academic position at the time of the award with current position, 54% of awardees had an advancement in their professional rank. On analyzing leadership positions, 42% of awardees were division chiefs, 21% were associate clinical directors, and 28% were clinical directors. ConclusionsBeing a recipient of the TSF award may position an individual to excel in academic medicine, with a large portion of awardees improving their academic standing with time. The rate of successful NIH grant funding after being a TSF awardee is higher than typical institutional success rates.

The future of health professions education: Emerging trends in the United States.

The future of health professions education: Emerging trends in the United States.

Program Evaluation of the Research in Academic Pediatrics Initiative on Diversity (RAPID): Impact on Career Development and Professional Society Diversity.

Despite a demographic surge in U.S. minority children, pediatric workforce diversity has failed to keep pace. The study aim was to evaluate the Research in Academic Pediatrics Initiative on Diversity (RAPID), a research-education program aimed at recruiting, retaining, and professionally advancing diverse early-career faculty in general pediatrics who are pursuing research careers. RAPID includes the following components: small research grants, mentoring by nationally renowned senior investigators, mentoring and networking at an annual breakfast, an annual career-development conference, and monthly mentoring conference calls. Outcomes data from the first 5 years (2012-2017) of RAPID were analyzed. Data sources were Academic Pediatric Association (APA) membership data and postconference, baseline, and end-of-program/follow-up surveys. Outcome measures included mentoring quality, presentations, publications, subsequent grants, impact on career success, conference ratings, and APA membership diversity. For the 10 Scholars from the first 4 cohorts, mean scores were 4.5 (5 = strongly agree) for RAPID fostering mentoring, developing research skills, and helping Scholars feel more comfortable as underrepresented minority (URM) faculty; 78% delivered platform or poster presentations on their project. They published 56 total articles and received a mean of 2.5 subsequent grants. Their mean score for RAPID "advancing my career by facilitating promotion or getting a job" was 4.6. The first 4 RAPID Conferences were highly rated (mean scores = 4.2-4.8) and brought in 33 additional URM young investigators. Pre-RAPID, URM APA membership stagnated at 6%-7% for 5 years. In RAPID's first year, URM APA membership rose to 8%, then to 10% by 2017 (43% increase; P < .001). RAPID Scholars generated multiple presentations and publications. RAPID mentoring and Conferences were highly rated. RAPID was associated with career advancement and increased professional society diversity. RAPID could serve as a national model for enhancing URM career development and professional society diversity.

4449 Building Capacity in the Flint Community in the Midst of the Ongoing Water Crisis

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Examining the impact of the Building Capacity for Research and Action (BCRA) Award created by the Community Engagement (CE) Program at the Michigan Institute for Clinical &amp; Health Research (MICHR)--a Clinical &amp; Translational Science Award (CTSA) site at the University of Michigan--in partnership with Community Based Organization Partners (CBOP). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The BCRA is a funding mechanism that supports new community-engaged research (CEnR) partnerships and projects that address community-identified health needs in Flint, Michigan. BCRA projects are required to be Flint-based and inclusive of both community and academic partners. A study section consisting of 10 MICHR-affiliated faculty and community partners reviewed proposals and made funding decisions. Funded teams were trained on Institutional Review Board (IRB) and reporting requirements by CE staff. MICHR provides support to BCRA-funded teams through monthly email correspondence with the CE Flint connector, budget review, mediation, regulatory assurance of IRB and the National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS) requirements, coordinating six-month and final reporting, and hosting an annual stakeholder meet and greet. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: In 2017, the BCRA Award submitted its first request for proposals. It received 20 applications in 2018, and selected eight awardees, providing them with a total of $60,000 in funding. Four received $5,000 for partnership development and another four received $10,000 for their research projects. The BCRA Award received 16 applications in 2019, expanding its academic pool to include the University of Chicago, U-M Flint, Michigan State University, and Michigan State University-Flint in addition to the University of Michigan. Five recipients were selected and received a total of $45,000 in funding. One was awarded $5,000 for partnership development and another four were awarded $10,000 for their research projects. MICHR has invested over $100,000 in Flint through this mechanism, which was renewed in 2019. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Each awardee presented at the annual stakeholder meet and greet. They showcased their projects with a brief overview and spoke about their expectations, lessons learned, partnership strengths and challenges, translational issues, and proposed next steps for subsequent grants, publications.

Supporting dissertation work through a nursing PhD program federal grant writing workshop.

Nurse researchers need skills to secure external funding; therefore, we created a grant writing workshop for PhD students focused on the F31 Individual Fellowship and R36 Dissertation Grant. Describe a nursing PhD program federal grant writing workshop and present participant impressions and outcomes. We designed a three half-day workshop covering essential aspects of grant writing combined with mentor participation and follow-up. We assessed participant satisfaction in evaluations, subsequent grant submissions, project implementation, and time from PhD program entry to completion. Evaluations were overwhelmingly positive. Seventeen of 29 (58.6%) participants submitted 21 applications; five (23.8%) were funded. The majority (75.0%) conducted the proposed dissertation project regardless of funding. Writing and submitting a grant did not increase time to program completion. The workshop efficiently supports PhD students' dissertation research. Timing and mentor participation are key for success. We recommend schools of nursing implement PhD program grant writing workshops.

3351 Research training and career development in junior investigators at a multi-institutional CTSA

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS:. The study aims to understand the characteristics of junior investigators who are supported by the CTSI, their knowledge of CTSI services and resources, as well as the perceived effectiveness of CTSI research training and career development. The primary outcome is scientific productivity that enhances career development and promotion. The secondary outcome is to inform and improve CTSA research training and career development, not only for the UCLA CTSI hub but also for the CTSA Program nationally. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION:. The study sample includes post-doctoral and junior investigators who have received UCLA CTSI support between 2011 and 2017 (n=319). These junior investigators conduct research at our four partner sites (UCLA-Westwood, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, The Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science). The CTSI administered the LSAS and the Career Development module in 2018 using Qualtrics, a subscription software for collecting and analyzing survey data. In order to reduce the burden on the survey respondents, the survey team pre-populated their previously reported publication in the Qualtrics survey system. Qualtrics sends customized email invitations containing a link to start the LSAS survey and subsequently automated sequences of reminder messages for non-responders and partial completers. The survey team initiated telephone call-backs and engaged partner site leaders to achieve a high response rate. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS:. Preliminary results show a response rate of 83% (n=264). Respondents include K-to-R workshop participants (n=192), core voucher co-investigators (n=38), Training Program in Translational Science (TPTS) trainees (n=82), and junior investigators who participated in two or more of these activities (n=48). Trainee characteristics include degree, gender, and partner site location. The distribution of advanced degrees among the junior investigators include: PhD (29%), MD (55%), MD/PhD (13%), or other degree (3%). Forty-four percent (44%) respondents are male and 56% are female. Seventy-two percent (72%) have a primary appointment at UCLA-Westwood, while 28% have academic appointments at the partner institutions. Twenty-five percent (25%) received CTSI research training and 49% received CTSI career development support. Regarding scientific productivity, 58% reported having at least one peer-reviewed publication and 29% reported subsequent grant funding. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT:. We are in the process of identifying the predictors of scientific productivity and the characteristics of the junior investigators most significantly correlated with productivity using multiple logistic regression analysis. We will analyze qualitative responses to examine the facilitators and barriers to conducting research at the CTSI and explore ways to improve administrative and clinical research processes. The significance of this research is to inform research training and career development programs within our CTSA hub and the CTSA Program nationally.

Firms’ markup, cost, and price changes when policymakers permit collusion: Does antitrust immunity matter?

Airlines wanting to cooperatively set prices for their international air travel service must apply to the relevant authorities for antitrust immunity (ATI). Whether consumers, on net, benefit from a grant of ATI to partner airlines has caused much public debate. This paper investigates the impact of granting ATI to oneworld alliance members on their price, markup, and various measures of cost. The evidence suggests that implementation of the oneworld alliance without ATI did not have a statistically significant impact on the markup of products offered by the members, and there is no evidence that the subsequent grant of ATI to various members resulted in higher markups on their products. We find evidence suggesting that the grant of ATI facilitated a decrease in partner carriers’ marginal and fixed costs. Furthermore, member carriers’ price did not increase (decreased) in markets where their services do (do not) overlap, implying that consumers, on net, benefit from the grant of ATI in terms of price changes.

Preserving older adults' routine outdoor activities in contrasting neighborhood environments through a physical activity intervention.

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier=NCT01072500.

Replicating and extending a model of effects of universal preventive intervention during early adolescence on young adult substance misuse.

This brief report summarizes a replication and extension of a developmental outcome modeling study, by examining whether delayed substance initiation during adolescence, resulting from universal middle school preventive interventions, reduces problematic use in young adults Ages 25 and 27, up to 14.5 years after baseline. Participants were middle school students from 36 Iowa schools randomly assigned to the Strengthening Families Program plus Life Skills Training (SFP 10-14 + LST), LST-only, or a control condition. Self-report questionnaires originally were collected at 11 time points, through Age 22. A subsequent grant allowed for assessments at Ages 25 and 27, including measures of drunkenness, alcohol-related problems, cigarette use, illicit drug use (lifetime and frequency), marijuana use and prescription drug misuse. These outcomes were modeled as variables influenced by growth factors describing substance initiation during adolescence. Models included the effects of baseline risk, intervention condition assignment, and their interaction; risk-related moderation effects were examined and relative reduction rates were calculated for dichotomous variables. Model fits were good. Analyses showed significant or marginally significant indirect intervention effects on all outcomes, through effects on adolescent substance initiation growth factors. Intervention × Risk interaction effects favored the higher risk subsample, replicating earlier findings. Additional direct effects on young adult use were observed only for cigarette frequency. Relative reduction rates were larger for the higher risk subsamples, ranging from 3.9% to 36.2%. Universal preventive interventions implemented during early adolescence have the potential to decrease the rates of substance misuse and associated problems into young adulthood. (PsycINFO Database Record

Initial Outcomes for the NHLBI K99/R00 Pathway to Independence Program in Relation to Long-Standing Career Development Programs: Implications for Trainees, Mentors, and Institutions.

Sufficient history now exists to assess the National Institutes of Health Pathway to Independence Award (K99/R00), first offered in 2007 to support the career development of biomedical researchers. The success of K99 (Mentored Phase of the K99/R00) principal investigators in obtaining subsequent grant support was compared with that of principal investigators supported by the long-standing K08 (Mentored Clinical Scientist Research Career Development Award) and K23 (Mentored Patient-Oriented Research Career Development Award) programs. For cardiovascular K awards initiated in fiscal years 2007 to 2009, K99 principal investigators were more successful in obtaining subsequent grant support than the other groups. Although a bibliometric analysis showed similar publication quality for all groups, the K99 group was most persistent in applying for the next grant. Possible implications of these findings for all K Award principal investigators, their mentors, and institutions are presented. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) supports a variety of career development or K awards to facilitate the careers of promising investigators through mentorship, salary support, resources, and protected research time with the broad objective of maintaining a skilled cadre of independent biomedical researchers.1 There are several K mechanisms, and each NIH Institute or Center offers those that best support its mission. Assessments of the entire K program both within2,3 and across NIH Institutes or Centers1 and external reviews by working groups of the Advisory Committee to the Director of NIH4 have shaped the overall structure and performance of K Award programs to achieve a diverse and highly productive research workforce. Recently, we have investigated outcomes for the most prevalent mentored K Awards within the portfolio of the Division of Cardiovascular Sciences (DCVS) of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). K08 (Mentored Clinical Scientist Research Career Development Award), K23 (Mentored Patient-Oriented Research Career Development …