Two model inner city health-care delivery systems are examined in terms of their organizational structure, the role of the consumer within them, their strategies for change, and their ultimate impact and effectiveness. A group practice prepayment plan in Baltimore had consumers on its governing board and, in alliance with a powerful medical institution, successfully organized around political, economic, and social issues. An Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) grant-supported, neighborhood health center in Washington, D.C. was less effective due to its lack of community representation in the decision-making process. The Baltimore model influenced the federal, state, and local governments, while the Washington, D.C. model had stronger local, than national, effects.
We examined the extent to which beliefs in a loving God and punitive God correspond with self‐reported behavior in an online, longitudinal survey involving three waves of data collection, each separated by 6 months. Adolescents (N = 760) reported the extent to which they believed in a loving God and a punitive God (Times 1 and 3) and reported their engagement in benevolent (helping and forgiveness) and aggressive behavior (Times 2 and 3). Participants strongly endorsed a loving God but not a punitive God. In addition, belief in a loving God corresponded with reports of less aggressive and more benevolent behavior, whereas belief in a punitive God corresponded with more aggressive and less benevolent behavior.
AbstractPeople often use cognitive and affective heuristics when judging the likelihood of a health outcome and making health decisions. However, little research has examined how heuristics shape risk perceptions and behavior among people who make decisions on behalf of another person. We examined associations between heuristic cues and caregivers' perceptions of their child's asthma risk, the frequency of caregivers' asthma management behaviors, and child health outcomes. We used Ipsos KnowledgePanel to recruit 814 U.S. adult caregivers of children with asthma of the age <18 years. Participants completed a survey at baseline (T1) and 3 months later (T2). Caregivers who, at T1, reported greater negative affect about their child's asthma (affect heuristic cue), greater ease of imagining their child experiencing asthma symptoms (availability heuristic cue), and greater perceived similarity between their child and a child who has ever experienced asthma symptoms (representativeness heuristic cue) reported statistically significantly (p < 0.05) higher interpersonal perceived risk of their child having an exacerbation or uncontrolled asthma at T1. They also indicated at T2 that their child had poorer asthma control and more frequent exacerbations. Greater T1 negative affect was associated with more frequent T2 actions to reduce inflammation, manage triggers, and manage symptoms, and with poorer T2 child health outcomes. Heuristic cues are likely important for interpersonal—not just personal—risk perceptions. However, the interrelationship between caregivers' ratings of heuristic cues (in particular, negative affect) and risk judgments may signify a struggle with managing their child's asthma and need for extra support from health care providers or systems.
In: Journal of risk research: the official journal of the Society for Risk Analysis Europe and the Society for Risk Analysis Japan, Band 26, Heft 12, S. 1370-1382
Introduction: Encouraging family communication about possible genetic risk has become among the most important avenues for achieving the full potential of genomic discovery for primary and secondary prevention. Yet, effective family-wide risk communication (i.e., conveying genetic risk status and its meaning for other family members) remains a critical gap in the field. We aim to describe the iterative process of developing a scalable population-based communication outreach intervention, Your Family Connects, to reach ovarian cancer survivors and close relatives to communicate the potential for inherited risk and to consider genetic counseling. Methods: Relational-level theories (e.g., interdependence theory) suggest that interventions to promote family cancer risk communication will be most effective if they consider the qualities of specific relationships and activate motives to preserve the relationship. Informed by these theories, we collaborated with 14 citizen scientists (survivors of ovarian cancer or relatives) and collected 261 surveys and 39 structured interviews over 12 weeks of citizen science activities in 2020. Results: The citizen science findings and consideration of relational-level theories informed the content and implementation of Your Family Connects (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.yourfamilyconnects.org/" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">www.yourfamilyconnects.org</ext-link>). CS results showed survivors favor personal contact with close relatives, but relatives were open to alternative contact methods, such as through health professionals. Recognizing the need for varied approaches based on relationship dynamics, we implemented a relative contact menu to enable survivors identify at-risk relatives and provide multiple contact options (i.e., survivor contact, health professional contact, and delayed contact). In line with relational autonomy principles, we included pros and cons for each option, assisting survivors in choosing suitable contact methods for each relative. Discussion: Our developed intervention represents a novel application of relational-level theories and partnership with citizen scientists to expand genetic services reach to increase the likelihood for fair distribution of cancer genomic advances. The Your Family Connects intervention as part of a randomized trial in collaboration with the Georgia Cancer Registry compared with standard outreach.