Background: Implementation science (IS) could accelerate progress toward achieving health equity goals. However, the lack of attention to the outer setting where interventions are implemented limits applicability and generalizability of findings to different populations, settings, and time periods. We developed a data resource to assess outer setting across seven centers funded by the National Cancer Institute’s IS Centers in Cancer Control (ISC3) Network Program.
Methods: Our Data Resource captures seven key environments, including: (1) food; (2) physical; (3) economic; (4) social; (5) health care; (6) cancer behavioral and screening; and (7) cancer-related policy. Data were obtained from public sources including the US Census and American Community Survey. We present medians and interquartile ranges based on the distribution of all counties in the US, all ISC3 centers, and within each Center for twelve selected measures. Distributions of each factor are compared with the national estimate using single sample sign tests.
Conclusions: Our results indicate that the outer setting varies across Centers and often differs from the national level. These findings demonstrate the importance of assessing the contextual environment in which interventions are implemented and suggest potential implications for intervention generalizability and scalability.
Citation: Warner ET, Huguet N, Fredericks M, Gundersen D, Nederveld A, Brown MC, Houston TK, Davis KL, Mazzucca S, Rendle KA, Emmons KM. Advancing health equity through implementation science: Identifying and examining measures of the outer setting. Social Science & Medicine. 2023;331:116095. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116095
Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) systems are increasingly used in medicine to improve clinical decision-making and healthcare delivery. In gastroenterology and hepatology, studies have explored a myriad of opportunities for AI/ML applications which are already making the transition to bedside. Despite these advances, there is a risk that biases and health inequities can be introduced or exacerbated by these technologies. If unrecognised, these technologies could generate or worsen systematic racial, ethnic and sex disparities when deployed on a large scale. There are several mechanisms through which AI/ML could contribute to health inequities in gastroenterology and hepatology, including diagnosis of oesophageal cancer, management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), liver transplantation, colorectal cancer screening and many others. This review adapts a framework for ethical AI/ML development and application to gastroenterology and hepatology such that clinical practice is advanced while minimising bias and optimising health equity.
Citation: Uche-Anya E, Anyane-Yeboa A, Berzin T, Ghassemi M, May F. Artificial intelligence in gastroenterology and hepatology: how to advance clinical practice while ensuring health equity. Gut. 2022; 71:1909-1915. Published 2022 Sep. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2021-326271
Qualitative methods are critical for implementation science as they generate opportunities to examine complexity and include a diversity of perspectives. However, it can be a challenge to identify the approach that will provide the best fit for achieving a given set of practice-driven research needs. After all, implementation scientists must find a balance between speed and rigor, reliance on existing frameworks and new discoveries, and inclusion of insider and outsider perspectives. This paper offers guidance on taking a pragmatic approach to analysis, which entails strategically combining and borrowing from established qualitative approaches to meet a study’s needs, typically with guidance from an existing framework and with explicit research and practice change goals.
Section 1 offers a series of practical questions to guide the development of a pragmatic analytic approach. These include examining the balance of inductive and deductive procedures, the extent to which insider or outsider perspectives are privileged, study requirements related to data and products that support scientific advancement and practice change, and strategic resource allocation. This is followed by an introduction to three approaches commonly considered for implementation science projects: grounded theory, framework analysis, and interpretive phenomenological analysis, highlighting core analytic procedures that may be borrowed for a pragmatic approach. Section 2 addresses opportunities to ensure and communicate rigor of pragmatic analytic approaches. Section 3 provides an illustrative example from the team’s work, highlighting how a pragmatic analytic approach was designed and executed and the diversity of research and practice products generated.
As qualitative inquiry gains prominence in implementation science, it is critical to take advantage of qualitative methods’ diversity and flexibility. This paper furthers the conversation regarding how to strategically mix and match components of established qualitative approaches to meet the analytic needs of implementation science projects, thereby supporting high-impact research and improved opportunities to create practice change.
Citation: Ramanadhan S, Revette AC, Lee RM, Aveling EL. Pragmatic approaches to analyzing qualitative data for implementation science: an introduction. Implementation Science Communications. 2021; 2:70. Published 2021 Jun 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-021-00174-1
Objective: This study aimed to estimate the 10-year cost-effectiveness of school-based BMI report cards, a commonly implemented program for childhood obesity prevention in the US where student BMI is reported to parents/guardians by letter with nutrition and physical activity resources, for students in grades 3 to 7.
Methods: A microsimulation model, using data inputs from evidence reviews on health impacts and costs, estimated: how many students would be reached if the 15 states currently measuring student BMI (but not reporting to parents/guardians) implemented BMI report cards from 2023 to 2032; how many cases of childhood obesity would be prevented; expected changes in childhood obesity prevalence; and costs to society.
Conclusions: School-based BMI report cards are not cost-effective childhood obesity interventions. Deimplementation should be considered to free up resources for implementing effective programs..
Citation: Poole MK, Gortmaker SL, Barrett JL, McCulloch SM, Rimm EB, Emmons KM, Ward ZJ, Kenney EL. The societal costs and health impacts on obesity of BMI report cards in US schools. Obesity. 2023;31(8):2110-2118. doi:10.1002/oby.23788
Background: Numerous reports have demonstrated the disproportionate impact that COVID-19 has had on vulnerable populations. Our purpose is to describe our health care system’s response to this impact.
Methods: We convened a Workgroup with the goal to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on the most medically vulnerable people in Springfield, Massachusetts, USA, particularly those with significant social needs. We did this through (1) identifying vulnerable patients in high-need geographic areas, (2) developing and implementing a needs assessment/outreach tool tailored to meet cultural, linguistic and religious backgrounds, (3) surveying pharmacies for access to medication delivery, (4) gathering information about sources of food delivery, groceries and/or prepared food, (5) gathering information about means of travel, and (6) assessing need for testing. We then combined these six elements into a patient-oriented branch and a community outreach/engagement branch.
Conclusions: Our highly intentional and methodical approach to patient and community outreach with a strong geographic component has led to fruitful efforts in COVID-19 mitigation. Our patient-level outreach engages our health centers’ clinical teams, particularly community health workers, and is providing the direct benefit of material and service resources for our at-risk patients and their families. Our community efforts leveraged existing relationships and created new partnerships that continue to inform us—healthcare entities, healthcare employees, and clinical teams—so that we can grow and learn in order to authentically build trust and engagement.
Citation: Pirraglia PA, Huebner Torres C, Collins J, Garb J, Kent M, Perez McAdoo S, Oloruntola-Coates M, Smith JM, Thomas A. COVID-19 mitigation for high-risk populations in Springfield Massachusetts USA: a health systems approach. Int J Equity Health. 2021; 20:230. Published 2021 Oct 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-021-01567-3
COVID-19 vaccine development has advanced at lighting speed. Research that would normally require years has been completed in months. As a result of this unprecedented effort, two vaccine candidates, mRNA-1273 (Moderna, Cambridge, MA) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer, New York, NY), have been found to be safe and more than 90% effective in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 shortly after vaccination. These vaccines are extremely promising and will eventually be distributed widely. Unfortunately, as the science of vaccine development has swiftly progressed, the equally important science of community engagement, which should guide the establishment of mutually beneficial partnerships and promote eventual vaccine uptake, has lagged behind. Research methods focused on the development of effective public health interventions place communities—groups with shared culture, norms, beliefs, or language—at their core and emphasize the primacy of community ownership as essential for uptake and sustainability.1 Yet, communities of color (i.e., Black, Latinx, and Indigenous communities), who remain at highest risk for infection, have been peripheral, not central actors in the pursuit of COVID-19 vaccines. Instead, the tripartite relationship between industry, government, and academia has dominated the research enterprise related to COVID-19.
The peripheral position of community has been evident since early in vaccine development. Notably, initial trial recruitment consisted of short-term community outreach, and more detailed plans for longer-term community engagement to support enrollment and eventual vaccine uptake commenced late in phase III trials. Such a critical oversight may be the Achilles’ heel of this unprecedented effort. Deeply rooted mistrust bred by centuries of well-documented, abusive medical experimentation and ongoing structural racism impedes racially and ethnically diverse individuals’ participation in clinical trials and threatens the uptake of future COVID-19 vaccines, particularly among Black individuals.
This history may be overcome by reimagining how industry, government, and academic institutions partner with marginalized communities. COVID-19 vaccine development offers an opportunity to shift from transient outreach to true investment in communities of color, which may mitigate mistrust, improve vaccine uptake, and have far-reaching effects beyond COVID-19.
Citation: Ojikutu BO, Stephenson KE, Mayer KH, Emmons KM. Building trust in COVID-19 vaccines and beyond through authentic community investment. American Journal of Public Health. 2021; 111:3. Published 2021 Mar 1. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2020.306087
The National Cancer Institute’s Implementation Science Centers in Cancer Control (ISC3) Network represents a large-scale initiative to create an infrastructure to support and enable the efficient, effective, and equitable translation of approaches and evidence-based treatments to reduce cancer risk and improve outcomes. This Cancer MoonshotSM–funded ISC3 Network consists of 7 P50 Centers that support and advance the rapid development, testing, and refinement of innovative approaches to implement a range of evidence-based cancer control interventions. The Centers were designed to have research-practice partnerships at their core and to create the opportunity for a series of pilot studies that could explore new and sometimes risky ideas and embed in their infrastructure a 2-way engagement and collaboration essential to stimulating lasting change. ISC3 also seeks to enhance capacity of researchers, practitioners, and communities to apply implementation science approaches, methods, and measures. The Organizing Framework that guides the work of ISC3 highlights a collective set of 3 core areas of collaboration within and among Centers, including to 1) assess and incorporate dynamic, multilevel context; 2) develop and conduct rapid and responsive pilot and methods studies; and 3) build capacity for knowledge development and exchange. Core operating principles that undergird the Framework include open collaboration, consideration of the dynamic context, and engagement of multiple implementation partners to advance pragmatic methods and health equity and facilitate leadership and capacity building across implementation science and cancer control.
Citation: Oh A, Emmons KM, Brownson RC, Glasgow RE, Foley KL, Lewis CC, Schnoll R, Huguet N, Caplon A, Chambers DA. Speeding implementation in cancer: The National Cancer Institute’s Implementation Science Centers in Cancer Control. JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2022; 115:2. Published 2022 Oct 31. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djac198
The purpose of this study was to understand challenges that school administrators faced in their approaches to address adolescent vaping in Massachusetts middle and high schools. We analyzed open-ended comments from Massachusetts school administrators who completed a survey between November 2020 and January 2021. Further, we analyzed nine interviews with administrators (e.g., principals, vice principals, school nurses) from Massachusetts school systems (n = 6) and school-based anti-tobacco advocates (n = 3); interviews took place between May and December 2021. We found that challenges to addressing adolescent vaping included school personnel capacity, funding, and lack of mental health and counseling supports. The COVID-19 pandemic was a major barrier to conducting usual in-person vaping programs, but also reduced student vaping at school due to new social distancing practices and bathroom use policies. Successful approaches included peer-led initiatives and parental involvement, and participants discussed the importance of educating adolescents on the harms of vaping. Based on our findings, school-based anti-vaping program practitioners—such as school districts, state departments of education, or local health departments—should leverage peer-led initiatives, alternatives-to-suspension approaches, and parental involvement, to increase the potential impact of adolescent vaping prevention and treatment efforts.
Citation: Liu J, Roberts J, Reynolds MJ, Hanby E, Gundersen DA, Winickoff JP, Rees VW, Emmons KM, Tan ASL. Barriers and facilitators to address vaping in Massachusetts schools: a mixed-methods study of school-based stakeholders. Translational Behavioral Medicine. 2023;13(8):589-600. doi:10.1093/tbm/ibad012
Background: There is little guidance for conducting health equity-focused economic evaluations of evidence-based practices in resource-constrained settings, particularly with respect to staff time use. Investigators must balance the need for low-touch, non-disruptive cost data collection with the need for data on providing services to priority subpopulations.
Methods: This investigation took place within a pilot study examining the implementation of a bundled screening intervention combining screening for social determinants of health and colorectal cancer at four federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in the Boston metropolitan area. Methods for collecting data on personnel costs for implementation and intervention activities, including passive (automatic) and active (non-automatic, requiring staff time and effort) data collection, as well as three alternate wordings for self-reporting time-use, were evaluated qualitatively using data collected through interviews with FQHC staff (including clinicians, population health staff, and community health workers) and assessments of data completeness.
Conclusion: Passively collected time use data are the least burdensome and should be pursued in research efforts when possible, but should be accompanied by qualitative assessments to ensure the data are an accurate reflection of effort. When workflows are already tracked by active data collection, these are also strong data collection methods. Self-reported time use will be most accurate when questions inquire about “typical” tasks and specific types of patients.
Citation: Levy DE, Singh D, Aschbrenner KA, Davies ME, Pelton-Cairns L, Kruse GR. Challenges and recommendations for measuring time devoted to implementation and intervention activities in health equity-focused, resource-constrained settings: a qualitative analysis. Implementation Science Communications. 2023;4(1). doi:10.1186/s43058-023-00491-7
View the research summary here.
Racial/ethnic minorities have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. The effects of COVID-19 on the long-term mental health of minorities remains unclear. To evaluate differences in odds of screening positive for depression and anxiety among various racial and ethnic groups during the latter phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, we performed a cross-sectional analysis of 691,473 participants nested within the prospective smartphone-based COVID Symptom Study in the United States (U.S.) and United Kingdom (U.K). from February 23, 2021 to June 9, 2021. In the U.S. (n=57,187), compared to White participants, the multivariable odds ratios (ORs) for screening positive for depression were 1·16 (95% CI: 1·02 to 1·31) for Black, 1·23 (1·11 to 1·36) for Hispanic, and 1·15 (1·02 to 1·30) for Asian participants, and 1·34 (1·13 to 1·59) for participants reporting more than one race/other even after accounting for personal factors such as prior history of a mental health disorder, COVID-19 infection status, and surrounding lockdown stringency. Rates of screening positive for anxiety were comparable. In the U.K. (n=643,286), racial/ethnic minorities had similarly elevated rates of positive screening for depression and anxiety. These disparities were not fully explained by changes in leisure time activities. Racial/ethnic minorities bore a disproportionate mental health burden during the COVID-19 pandemic. These differences will need to be considered as health care systems transition from prioritizing infection control to mitigating long-term consequences.
Citation: Nguyen LH, Nguyen LH, Anyane-Yeboa A, Klaser K, Merino J, Drew DA, et al. The mental health burden of racial and ethnic minorities during the COVID-19 pandemic. PlosOne. 2022; 17:8. Published 2022 Aug 10. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0271661