IntroductionCommunicating to smokers that e-cigarettes deliver lower levels of harmful chemicals than combusted cigarettes is a challenging issue. This study qualitatively explored smokers’ interpretations of messages communicating the risk of e-cigarettes relative to cigarettes (comparative risk messages).MethodWe developed 12 print comparative risk messages and evaluated them in 12 focus groups with 72 adult smokers (18+ years old) in Atlanta, Georgia.ResultsParticipants interpreted uncertainty about health effects of e-cigarettes as an indicator of significant unknown risks, which some believed to be potentially more severe than the known effects of cigarettes (such as cancer and heart disease). Also, participants were sceptical about the lower risk claims. Some participants misinterpreted what ‘switching completely’ or ‘switching 100% of the time’ means, perceiving switching from e-cigarettes to combusted cigarettes as comparable with the use of both products. When chemicals in e-cigarettes were mentioned (eg, nicotine or formaldehyde), participants viewed e-cigarettes as very harmful and had difficulty reconciling this belief with the reduced risk claim. Comparative risk messages emphasising smoking risks were perceived as effective. Participants also appreciated being given an option to switch if they cannot quit. Participants suggested the inclusion of more facts and statistics and a credible message source (eg, public health agencies) to increase message effectiveness.ConclusionComparative risk messages may be more acceptable to smokers if they show direct comparisons of the number of toxic chemicals in cigarettes and e-cigarettes, are attributed to a credible source(s), and emphasise smoking risks.

Community health workers (CHWs) have been successful partners in addressing public health and health care challenges but have yet to be engaged in efforts to promote family health history (FHH) collection. FHH information is a key factor in determining disease risk and supporting screening and prevention across multiple diseases. The collection of FHH information could be facilitated by the existing cadre of CHWs already working alongside clients and families. In this qualitative study, we interviewed 30 CHWs from Georgia to better understand the current level of knowledge about FHH, perceptions of how FHH collection aligns with their role, and barriers and facilitators in order to support more active involvement of CHWs in FHH collection. Interviews were completed, transcribed, and double coded by three study team members. More than half of CHWs reported knowing their own FHH information. CHWs showed a strong interest and support for collecting FHH in their job, despite limited current engagement in this role. CHWs acknowledged the collection of FHH as being an opportunity to empower clients to have conversations with their providers. To better support this work, CHWs requested training in using and integrating FHH tools into their workflow and support in communicating about FHH with their clients. Our findings suggest that with support and training, CHWs are uniquely positioned to improve FHH collection among their client base. Ultimately, improving FHH collection skills among the population could allow for better integration of risk-stratified approaches that are informed by FHH information for the prevention, management, and treatment of disease.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Morehouse School of Medicine (MSM), TxTM is a scientific philosophy promoting interdisciplinary approaches towards exponential advances in community and population health. Objectives are to detail the model, pilot funding mechanism, early research findings and infrastructure investments. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The health research system has widely acknowledged challenges that can delay research translation to systems that advance health for chronically disadvantaged health disparity population groups. MSM’s vision is to lead the creation and advancement of health equity. The vision-aligned strategic plan prioritized formalization of a TX TM implementation priority. The study population was the institution’s research faculty and leaders, research administration, and communication arm. Through a cross-institutional working group, a plan was deployed to 1) assess the institutional landscape, 2) review the grey and peer reviewed literature on translational research and 3) invest in a pilot research funding mechanism. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Over $700K has been invested in TX TM implementation. Over half of research faculty completed an institutional landscape assessment to identify translational research expertise, interests and points of interest in new collaboration. The most frequently cited collaborative research interests were clinical research with human subjects, patient-centered outcomes and laboratory-based research with human subjects/specimens. Funded multidisciplinary and/or community-engaged pilot studies investigate the role for circadian rhythms and shift work, cultural variables influencing mental health among Haitians living in the US and integrating prescription reconciliation telehealth in primary care. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: TX TM requires interdisciplinary collaboration across translational research spheres and beyond the academy. Institutional investment, infrastructure support and senior-level champions are central to awareness and rewarding such scholarship towards scaling approaches that advance health equity. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DESCRIPTION: Coined at Morehouse School of Medicine (MSM), Tx TM symbolizes an approach and scientific philosophy designed to intentionally promote and support convergence of interdisciplinary approaches and scientists to stimulate exponential advances for the health of diverse communities.

Parents and children rated Rocket Blades as a good learning tool and indicated that they would download it for personal use.

The collection of family health history (FHH) is integral to the implementation of population screening that could identify those at high cancer risk who could benefit most from life-saving interventions. Although most individuals believe FHH is important to their health, few actually collect or know their FHH. Recent findings have identified a reduced likelihood of FHH collection among minority populations who may already be at an increased risk for familial cancers such as kidney, cervical, prostate, ovarian, and triple-negative breast cancer. The community health worker (CHW) workforce is especially well positioned to address these challenges in FHH collection, as they are trusted members of their community and well recognized for their work in creating community-clinical linkages. Engaging CHWs in promoting FHH collection could help improve cancer risk assessment utilization among minority populations. We conducted 30 semistructured interviews with CHWs in Georgia to understand their current roles and opportunities to expand their roles to include the gathering and sharing FHH information. Interview questions were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and also included current engagement in FHH collection, beliefs and understanding of FHH collection, and perceived training needs to complete an FHH record using an FHH collection tool. All interviews were double coded in MAXQDA using a codebook developed, adapted, and agreed upon by the research team. Findings demonstrate that most CHWs believe that there is value in collecting FHH and that they are well suited to gather basic FHH information, but the majority had no experience collecting FHH, either formally as part of their jobs or from their own family members. Some concerns raised about this role include the potential for community members to be resistant to providing the information, CHWs' lack of medical knowledge required to address questions from clients about genetics, and the potential complexity of information needed to complete FHH tools. CHWs also provided recommendations for reducing the burden of FHH collection such as tutorials about how to gather accurate and complete information. They also suggested providing resources to clients that focus on the importance of knowing FHH and how it can be used to improve health and become knowledgeable about cancer risk-reduction resources and prevention strategies. Understanding opportunities for CHWs to extend their role in this way could help improve health care delivery and access by enhancing patient-provider communication about FHH in order to tailor recommendations, prevention, and treatment of diseases. Results from this study may inform efforts to strengthen the utility of existing FHH collection tools and accompanying materials to promote the uptake of FHH assessment among patients and providers. Citation Format: Caitlin G. Allen, Lawrence McKinney, Brittaney Bethea, Cam Escoffery, Gail McCray, Colleen McBride, Tabia Akintobi. Exploring the roles of CHWs in improving uptake of family health history assessment among patients and providers: Implications for cancer risk reduction and prevention among minority populations [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2018 Nov 2-5; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2020;29(6 Suppl):Abstract nr B090.