232 Trauma-informed, culturally responsive clinical and translational research with African American communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To present a community engaged pilot study of minority participation in clinical research that translates principles of trauma informed care and culturally responsive education into research practices for Investigators that elevate African American patients’ trauma survivorship, and prioritize their values for meaningful research engagement. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Data will generated from Phase 1 pilot project research activities including: a) a scoping review of trauma-informed care and culturally responsive education principles, and published recommendations for translating these principles to clinical research practices, b) semi-structured Key Informant interviews (~10) capturing the perceived impact of trauma on Portland-area African Americans’ health, well-being, and clinical research participation, and c) a 2-day stakeholder council meeting with clinicians, patients, community health workers, Investigators, and IRB staff that will prioritize the clinical research principles and practices that matter most to African American patients, from pre-design to dissemination. Data will be collected Fall 2022/Winter 2023, and analyzed in Winter 2023. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The results will empirically validate published recommendations on how to apply trauma-informed, culturally responsive (TICR) principles to clinical research practices, specifically for African American patients. They will illuminate the sociocultural and historical contexts under which clinical research is conducted with minoritized patients--drawing on the experiences of personnel who intersect at various levels of the clinical research ecosystem, and African American patients with varying experiences with clinical research. Results will illuminate challenges, needs, assets, cultural funds of knowledge, and values for meaningful research engagement, and provide practical, tangible strategies for Investigators to align with equity- and justice-based clinical research practices. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The TICR research approach disrupts the cycle of trauma, health disparities, and low minority research participation through a paradigm shift that equips Investigators to exercise universal precautions to minimize harm, protect African American research participants from retraumatization, prioritize their cultural values, and promote safety.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".