Suchergebnisse

"Engaging and Working with African American Fathers: Strategies and Lessons challenges traditional and historic practices and policies that have systematically excluded fathers and contributed to social and health disparities among this population. With chapters led by African American women - drawing on years of research, interviews and practical experience with this demographic - each section explores current evidence on engagement approaches; descriptions of agencies/programs addressing specific issues fathers face, and case studies documenting typical clients and approaches to addressing their diverse needs. Offering an expansive overview of issues affecting African American fathers, the book explores such important topics as public, child and mental health; education; parenting; employment and public initiatives amongst others. Engaging and Working with African American Fathers is a key resource for social work, public health, education students, researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and members of communities who are challenged by meeting the diverse needs of African American fathers"--

This article describes the participatory evalu­ation framework for the Transdisciplinary Collaborative Center for Health Disparities Research (TCC) funded by the National Institute of Minority Health and Health Disparities. In collaboration with TCC stake­holders, logic models, the McKinlay model, and process and outcome evaluation plans, including quantitative and qualitative methods, have been developed and used to document the impact of the TCC. The McKinlay model, a widely used compre­hensive health model for eliminating health disparities, was also tailored to document the outcomes of the TCC. The process and outcome evaluation plans for the TCC guide continuous improvement and the achieve­ment of its specific aims. The evaluation of the TCC occurred between 2012 and 2019 and involved key stakeholders in TCC re­search and programming. Several challenges exist for implementing an evaluation plan of a health equity-focused policy research center. However, we learned several lessons that will ensure progress toward specific aims and will help the TCC serve as a model for similar programs and centers.Ethn Dis. 2019;29(Suppl 2):385-392. doi:10.18865/ed.29.S2.385

Health 360x is a mobile health application and social platform that integrates self-monitoring and decision support for preventive health. We studied 240 diabetic patients in primary care practices and a church community in metropolitan Atlanta. Health coaches were trained on the Health 360x curriculum, which was adapted from the American Association of Diabetes Educators. Participants worked with the health coaches to set goals for diabetes self-management. The intervention included weekly coaching for 12 weeks and online peer networking. Outcome variables included blood pressure, physical activity, and blood glucose that showed significant improvement at 12 weeks and 12 months compared to baseline. Focus group testing revealed that references for empowerment and engagement were associated with positive clinical outcomes. Barriers to adoption and use of the technology were inability to use the internet and concern about privacy and security of health data. Future efforts will integrate a multidisciplinary training dashboard with considerable attention to education on security features including data encryption and sign-on verification.

Rulemaking is one of the most important ways the federal government makes public policy. It frequently has significant impact on individuals, communities, and organizations. Yet, few of those directly affected are familiar with the rulemaking process, and even fewer understand how it works. This article describes a case study of the Transdisciplinary Collaborative Center for Health Disparities Research Health Information Technology (TCC HIT) Policy Project's approach to health-policy engagement using: 1) social media; and 2) a webinar to educate stakeholders on the rulemaking process and increase their level of meaningful engagement with the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) proposed rule public comment submission. The webinar "Paying for Quality: What Is the Impact on Health Equity" was promoted through Twitter and held in June 2016. In total, we posted 19 tweets using two distinct hashtags (#MACRA4Equity, #MACRA2Equity) to raise awareness of the upcoming MACRA proposed rule and its possible effects on health equity. Overall, 252 individuals registered for the webinar, and more than half participated (n=133). Most (67%) registrants reported that health policy was not the primary focus of their current position. Based on information provided in the webinar, 95% agreed that their understanding of the topic improved. By the end of the webinar, 44% of participants indicated that they planned to submit public comments for MACRA, a 12% increase compared with those who planned to submit at the time of registration. The TCC health-policy engagement strategy demonstrates the feasibility of engaging a diverse audience around health policy issues, particularly those who are not typically engaged in policy work. Ethn Dis. 2019;29(Suppl 2): 377-384. doi:10.18865/ed.29.S2.377

Rulemaking is one of the most important ways the federal government makes public policy. It frequently has significant impact on individuals, communities, and organizations. Yet, few of those directly affected are familiar with the rulemaking process, and even fewer understand how it works. This article describes a case study of the Transdisciplinary Collaborative Center for Health Disparities Research Health Information Technology (TCC HIT) Policy Project's approach to health-policy engagement using: 1) social media; and 2) a webinar to educate stakeholders on the rulemaking process and increase their level of meaningful engagement with the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) proposed rule public comment submission. The webinar "Paying for Quality: What Is the Impact on Health Equity" was promoted through Twitter and held in June 2016. In total, we posted 19 tweets using two distinct hashtags (#MACRA4Equity, #MACRA2Equity) to raise awareness of the upcoming MACRA proposed rule and its possible effects on health equity. Overall, 252 individuals registered for the webinar, and more than half participated (n=133). Most (67%) registrants reported that health policy was not the primary focus of their current position. Based on information provided in the webinar, 95% agreed that their understanding of the topic improved. By the end of the webinar, 44% of participants indicated that they planned to submit public comments for MACRA, a 12% increase compared with those who planned to submit at the time of registration. The TCC health-policy engagement strategy demonstrates the feasibility of engaging a diverse audience around health policy issues, particularly those who are not typically engaged in policy work.

Health disparities have persisted despite decades of efforts to eliminate them at the national, regional, state and local levels. Policies have been a driving force in creat­ing and exacerbating health disparities, but they can also play a major role in eliminat­ing disparities. Research evidence and input from affected community-level stakeholders are critical components of evidence-based health policy that will advance health equi­ty. The Transdisciplinary Collaborative Cen­ter (TCC) for Health Disparities Research at Morehouse School of Medicine consists of five subprojects focused on studying and informing health equity policy related to maternal-child health, mental health, health information technology, diabetes, and leadership/workforce development. This article describes a "health equity lens" as defined, operationalized and applied by the TCC to inform health policy development, implementation, and analysis. Prioritizing health equity in laws and organizational policies provides an upstream foundation for ensuring that the laws are implemented at the midstream and downstream lev­els to advance health equity. Ethn Dis. 2019;29(Suppl 2):329-342; doi:10.18865/ed.29.S2.329.

Objective: We describe the implementa­tion, clinical outcomes and participant perspectives for e-Healthystrides©.Setting: Three independent ambulatory clinics and an historic African American (AA) church.Participants: Adults with diagnosed diabe­tes mellitus type 2.Interventions: e-Healthystrides© health coach facilitated interventionPrimary outcome: Acquisition of three new self-management behaviors.Secondary outcomes: Blood pressure, blood glucose, A1c, attrition rate and par­ticipant perspectives of e-Healthystrides©Methods: A convergent parallel mixed method design was used in both pilot stud­ies.Results: Two hundred and sixty-four par­ticipants, aged ~62±16 years, enrolled. At­trition at 52 weeks varied 50%-90% by site. Low engagement users were defined mainly by anxiety with putting health information online. The primary outcome was achieved in 36% of our participants, with the top 3 self-management behaviors acquired be­ing: reducing risk (24.5%); healthy eating (23.7%); and monitoring (16.4%). Problem solving had the lowest rate of achievement (.91%). Blood pressure improved signifi­cantly at all sites at 12 weeks and at clinics A,B,C at 52 weeks. Blood glucose im­proved at 12 weeks: clinic A (P=.0001), B (P=.003), C (P=.001) and D (P=.03); but, at 52 weeks, only clinics A (P=<.0001) and B (P=.0001). Participants felt empowered by features of e-Healthystrides©. Engage­ment with health coaches and peers was highly valued.Conclusions: e-Healthystrides© is effec­tive for self-management behavior change. Participants showed the best success with healthy coping, healthy eating, and moni­toring behaviors. They felt empowered by access to health information and valued interaction with coaches and peers. Our findings support strong relational/social network strategy with a role for coaches as guides (apomediaries) who facilitate skill acquisition using technology. Ethn Dis. 2019;29(Suppl 2):393-404; doi:10.18865/ed.29.S2.393.

The Research Centers in Minority Institu­tions (RCMI) program was established by the US Congress to support the develop­ment of biomedical research infrastructure at minority-serving institutions granting doctoral degrees in the health professions or in a health-related science. RCMI institu­tions also conduct research on diseases that disproportionately affect racial and ethnic minorities (ie, African Americans/Blacks, American Indians and Alaska Natives, His­panics, Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders), those of low socioeconomic sta­tus, and rural persons. Quantitative metrics, including the numbers of doctoral science degrees granted to underrepresented stu­dents, NIH peer-reviewed research funding, peer-reviewed publications, and numbers of racial and ethnic minorities participat­ing in sponsored research, demonstrate that RCMI grantee institutions have made substantial progress toward the intent of the Congressional legislation, as well as the NIH/NIMHD-linked goals of addressing workforce diversity and health disparities. Despite this progress, nationally, many challenges remain, including persistent disparities in research and career develop­ment awards to minority investigators. The continuing underrepresentation of minority investigators in NIH-sponsored research across multiple disease areas is of concern, in the face of unrelenting national health inequities. With the collaborative network support by the RCMI Translational Research Network (RTRN), the RCMI community is uniquely positioned to address these chal­lenges through its community engagement and strategic partnerships with non-RCMI institutions. Funding agencies can play an important role by incentivizing such col­laborations, and incorporating metrics for research funding that address underrep­resented populations, workforce diversity and health equity.Ethn Dis. 2019;29(Suppl 1):135-144; doi:10.18865/ed.29.S1.135.

The Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI) program was established by the US Congress to support the development of biomedical research infrastructure at minority-serving institutions granting doctoral degrees in the health professions or in a health-related science. RCMI institutions also conduct research on diseases that disproportionately affect racial and ethnic minorities (ie, African Americans/Blacks, American Indians and Alaska Natives, Hispanics, Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders), those of low socioeconomic status, and rural persons. Quantitative metrics, including the numbers of doctoral science degrees granted to underrepresented students, NIH peer-reviewed research funding, peer-reviewed publications, and numbers of racial and ethnic minorities participating in sponsored research, demonstrate that RCMI grantee institutions have made substantial progress toward the intent of the Congressional legislation, as well as the NIH/NIMHD-linked goals of addressing workforce diversity and health disparities. Despite this progress, nationally, many challenges remain, including persistent disparities in research and career development awards to minority investigators. The continuing underrepresentation of minority investigators in NIH-sponsored research across multiple disease areas is of concern, in the face of unrelenting national health inequities. With the collaborative network support by the RCMI Translational Research Network (RTRN), the RCMI community is uniquely positioned to address these challenges through its community engagement and strategic partnerships with non-RCMI institutions. Funding agencies can play an important role by incentivizing such collaborations, and incorporating metrics for research funding that address underrepresented populations, workforce diversity and health equity.