No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 July 2020
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To assess the impact of FLTCs on CTR on S and F from health professions and basic science academic programs island wide in Puerto Rico. Cycles supported by the Title V Cooperative Project at University of Puerto Rico-Medical Sciences Campus (UPRMSC) and Universidad Central del Caribe (UCC)(Title V). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: After offering FLTCs in CTR to S and F from UPRMSC and UCC, Title V expanded it to S and F from other institutions island wide in PR. These FLTCs were offered the 2nd semester of 2018 and consisted of 20 hours of interdisciplinary sessions in: introduction to and definition of CTR; preparation of a CTR-presentation; how to interview/share a presentation of a CT researcher and to prepare a research question in CTR. To assess the knowledge of S and F in the above-mentioned skills and their continuation in the 2nd level of CTR training, surveys were administered: pre-test, at the beginning, post-test, sometime during the FLTCs, and satisfaction at the end of the FLTCs. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Fifty eight (58) S/F from UPRMSC, UCC and 7 other institutions participated. Forty two (42,72%) answered a pre-test and 31/42 (74%) completed the post-test. Results showed that S/F: who correctly defined CTR increased from 7% to 77 %; their ability to identify a CT researcher increased from 10% to 83%. Fifty five percent (55 %) (21/38) S/F that were certified in the FLTCs, answered the satisfaction survey. One hundred percent (100%) indicated that the materials offered contributed in the identification of a CT researcher and a topic in CTR; 100% answered that the FLTCs contributed higher knowledge in and provided new skills in CTR. Moreover, 31/38 (82%) S/F started the 2nd level of training. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The FLTCs were successful in increasing S/F knowledge of CTR and to further engage in 2nd level of trainings. Title V impact extended island wide, increasing the diversity of represented health professions and science fields among participants. The interventions were deemed to be of high quality.