Search

The deployment of public electric vehicle charging stations (EVCS) is a critical component of transportation electrification. Recent studies have highlighted growing concerns about disparities in accessibility to public chargers between different demographic groups. This research expands ongoing equity concerns by contextualizing existing transportation equity discourse and analyzing public charger access disparities in Austin, Texas. Using threshold equity toolkits, we investigated public EVCS access disparity across different races and income groups. We conducted a generalized additive model regression to measure and visualize the effects of possible determinants on public EVCS access. The analysis results revealed that a public EVCS access disparity exists in Austin, with most chargers being installed in areas where the majority of the population is Non-Hispanic White. There was a more equal distribution of public EVCSs across income quartiles when compared with race. However, middle- and high-income groups had better access than lower-income communities in terms of distance to the nearest public EVCSs. Our regression analysis found that regional and socio-demographic factors, such as race and income, have a statistically significant impact on public charger access. The regression analysis also revealed that Austin's current public EVCS deployment seems to favor communities above the poverty level and with higher numbers of registered electric vehicles. Local policymakers should reflect on the findings of this study to develop an equitable transportation electrification plan. Federal environmental justice plans such as the Justice40 initiative can benefit from incorporating more local contexts to better invest in disadvantaged communities.

Summary: Transcriptome prediction models built with data from European-descent individuals are less accurate when applied to different populations because of differences in linkage disequilibrium patterns and allele frequencies. We hypothesized that methods that leverage shared regulatory effects across different conditions, in this case, across different populations, may improve cross-population transcriptome prediction. To test this hypothesis, we made transcriptome prediction models for use in transcriptome-wide association studies (TWASs) using different methods (elastic net, joint-tissue imputation [JTI], matrix expression quantitative trait loci [Matrix eQTL], multivariate adaptive shrinkage in R [MASHR], and transcriptome-integrated genetic association resource [TIGAR]) and tested their out-of-sample transcriptome prediction accuracy in population-matched and cross-population scenarios. Additionally, to evaluate model applicability in TWASs, we integrated publicly available multiethnic genome-wide association study (GWAS) summary statistics from the Population Architecture using Genomics and Epidemiology (PAGE) study and Pan-ancestry genetic analysis of the UK Biobank (PanUKBB) with our developed transcriptome prediction models. In regard to transcriptome prediction accuracy, MASHR models performed better or the same as other methods in both population-matched and cross-population transcriptome predictions. Furthermore, in multiethnic TWASs, MASHR models yielded more discoveries that replicate in both PAGE and PanUKBB across all methods analyzed, including loci previously mapped in GWASs and loci previously not found in GWASs. Overall, our study demonstrates the importance of using methods that benefit from different populations’ effect size estimates in order to improve TWASs for multiethnic or underrepresented populations.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The purpose of this small survey-based study was to characterize the current role of neurocritical care physicians in traumatic brain injury (TBI) systems of care and research. In doing so, we aim to highlight potential roles of neurology providers in the medical management and enhancement of translational science in the field of TBI. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Between April and June 2021, a web-based survey was disseminated by email to members of the Neurocritical Care Society. The survey was open to all physician providers. A total of 36 surveys were completed. The survey consisted of 18 questions with pre-defined answer choices. Survey questions aimed to determine areas of practice, primary clinical specialty, hospital practice setting, provider involvement in TBI care, provider involvement in TBI research, and current research roles. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: 92% of survey respondents were in the United States (n=33), representing all national regions. 75% of the physicians were neurocritical care trained (n=27). 69% of providers were practicing in academic institutions while 78% were at sites designated as Level I trauma centers. All respondents managed acute TBI, but 50% served as consultants rather than being the primary service provider. At their sites of practice, 31% of patients were on non-neuroscience services, especially those with non-neurologic traumatic injury. Only 36% reported that TBI protocols were written and adhered to at their site. Only 44% reported that TBI research was performed at their site, while 50% had interest in participating in TBI research. TBI was the primary area of research for 17% of physicians. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This small physician survey highlights heterogeneity in TBI systems-based practice and research roles. Areas of potential improvement include greater involvement of neurocritical care physicians in TBI management, protocol-building and implementation, and TBI research. Reasons for current barriers are multifactorial and will be discussed.

Background: The efficacy and safety of a single tablet regimen (STR) of elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (E/C/F/TAF) was analyzed in Phase 3 clinical trials in antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive and ART-experienced Asian participants infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 through 96 or 144 weeks. Objective: In Asian population requiring treatment, it is imperative to have data specific to this group, particularly as there is a general concern that Asians with lower body weight have increased risk of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-related renal dysfunction. Methods: Studies -104 and 111 were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 144-week studies conducted in ART-naive participants, comparing E/C/F/TAF versus E/C/F/TDF. Study 109 was a randomized, open-label, 96-week study conducted in virologically suppressed, ART-experienced participants, who switched to E/C/F/TAF from ritonavir/cobicistat-boosted atazanavir ATV+(RTV or COBI) + F/TDF regimens, from non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) + F/TDF regimens, or from E/C/F/TDF. Study 112 was a single arm, open-label, 144-week study conducted in HIV suppressed, ART-experienced participants with mild-moderate renal impairment, who switched to E/C/F/TAF. Results: Asian participants in these studies had sustained efficacy safety and tolerability. In Study 104/111, Asian participants achieved 93% virologic suppression on TAF vs 88% on TDF at week 144. At baseline, there were numerically more Asians with median CD4 counts < 200 cells/uL and VL > 100,000 c/mL. In Study 109, 95% of Asians on TAF vs 86% on TDF maintained virologic suppression at week 96. Lastly, in Study 112, 91% maintained virologic suppression at week 144. There were no discontinuations due to renal AE, no cases of PRT or Fanconi syndrome in any of the studies.