Objectives/Goals: Established in 2006, Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) support programs at research institutions that accelerate the “bench to bedside” timeline. This project explores how funded hubs describe their programs’ contributions to scientific rigor and transparency. Methods/Study Population: Grant information associated with CTSA hub awards were extracted from NIH Reporter through their application programming interface (API). The primary author utilized text mining to analyze the corpus with a predetermined list of terms indicating support of research transparency and reproducibility. As a point of comparison, a second set of terms were drawn from key attributes of “gold standard science” described in Executive Order 14303. Frequency distributions were used to quantify the usage of specific vocabulary across cooperative (U), career development (K), and training (T) grant types, and over time (2006 to 2024). Results/Anticipated Results: As a less-structured metadata field, project abstracts have posed challenges for data cleaning and analysis. The abstracts retrieved through the API occasionally contain irregular formatting and unexpected insertions. Preliminary findings show that CTSA hub awards most frequently and consistently described “interdisciplinary,” “multidisciplinary,” “collaboration,” or “collaborative” approaches. Over time, abstracts increasingly emphasized “reproducible” science or “reproducibility.” Among abstracts for cooperative agreements (UL1 and UM1), mentions of “data sharing” and “data commons” infrastructure peaked in parallel with the COVID-19 pandemic. Discussion/Significance of Impact: The strategy employed in this project demonstrates how existing commitments made through CTSA may align with the framework proposed for “gold standard science”.
Yee et al. (2026) studied this question.