No abstract

Background The introduction of HPV vaccines represents a breakthrough in the primary prevention of cervical cancer. However, little is known about vaccination uptake and correlates among U.S. low-income, ethnic minority and immigrant populations who may benefit most from the vaccine. Methods Telephone interviews (N=490) were conducted in six languages between January and November 2009 among mothers of vaccine-eligible girls (ages 9–18) using the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, Office of Women’s Health service referral hotline. HPV and vaccine awareness, knowledge, beliefs, barriers, and daughter’s vaccine receipt were assessed. Results The sample consisted of low-income, uninsured, ethnic minority and immigrant women. Only 29% of daughters initiated the vaccine and 11% received all three doses. No ethnic differences were observed in initiation or completion rates. Ethnic differences were observed in HPV awareness, perceived risk, and other immunization related beliefs. The strongest predictor of initiation was vaccine awareness (OR=12.00). Daughter’s age and reporting a younger acceptable age for vaccination were positively associated with initiation. Mothers of unvaccinated girls reported lacking information about the vaccine to make a decision (66%) and not knowing where they could obtain the vaccine (74%). Conclusion Vaccination rates in this sample were lower than state and national estimates, and were associated with low levels of vaccine awareness. Interventions, including culturally targeted messaging, may be helpful for enhancing HPV vaccine knowledge, modifying vaccine-related beliefs and increasing uptake. Impact Our findings provide valuable guidance for developing interventions to address sub-optimal HPV vaccination in high risk groups.

No abstract

The potential reduction in morbidity and mortality through cancer screening cannot be realized without receipt of appropriate follow-up care for abnormalities identified via screening. In this paper, the authors critically examine the existing literature on correlates of receipt of appropriate follow-up care for screen-detected abnormalities, as well as the literature on interventions designed to increase rates of receipt of follow-up care. Lessons learned describe what is known and not known about factors that are related to or predict receipt of follow-up care.Similarly, effective interventions to increase follow-up are described and gaps identified. A conceptual model is developed that categorizes the health care system in the United States as comprising four levels: policy, practice, provider, and patient. Some patient-level factors that influence follow-up receipt are identified, but the lack of data severely limit the understanding of provider, practice, and A long the continuum from cancer screening through diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation, little attention has focused on intervening to assure timely, effective diagnosis once an abnormality has been identified. To achieve the goal of reducing cancer morbidity and mortality, it is imperative that patients receive timely and appropriate follow-up for detected abnormalities, as a prerequisite to appropriate treatment. Failure to obtain appropriate diagnostic services can have a significant effect on psychosocial sequelae, morbidity, and mortality, as well as cost implications for the individual and the health care system. A recent review of studies on follow-up of abnormal screening examinations reported that, in the majority of studies, fewer than 75% of patients receive adequate follow-up care. 1 The negative implications of failure to follow-up are substantial, especially at the population level.

Mitigating the unequal burden of cancer often involves conducting community-based trials to develop effective intervention strategies to promote cancer-related health behaviors. However, this is challenging due to the simultaneous influence of numerous factors, at multiple levels in the socio-ecological context, on health behavior. A sound conceptual framework can bring order to this complex environment and provide a roadmap for systematically addressing the multiple determinants of the behavior in question. This paper describes the application of The Health Behavior Framework, an integrative conceptual model, in an ongoing Program Project, “Liver Cancer Control Interventions for Asian-Americans.” The Framework has been integral to shaping all aspects of the three component research trials from selection of the study designs to development of the interventions and data collection instruments. We advocate universal adoption of theory into community-based intervention research as a way to accelerate our ability to develop effective interventions and facilitate synthesis of study results across populations and behavioral outcomes: critical steps in advancing the field of health disparities research.

Background-The recent proliferation of studies describing factors associated with HPV vaccine acceptability could inform health care providers in improving vaccine coverage and support future research. This review examined measures of HPV and HPV-vaccine knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and acceptability, described psychometric characteristics, and provided recommendations about their use.

BackgroundThere is a pressing need for greater attention to patient-centered health behavior and psychosocial issues in primary care, and for practical tools, study designs and results of clinical and policy relevance. Our goal is to design a scientifically rigorous and valid pragmatic trial to test whether primary care practices can systematically implement the collection of patient-reported information and provide patients needed advice, goal setting, and counseling in response.MethodsThis manuscript reports on the iterative design of the My Own Health Report (MOHR) study, a cluster randomized delayed intervention trial. Nine pairs of diverse primary care practices will be randomized to early or delayed intervention four months later. The intervention consists of fielding the MOHR assessment – addresses 10 domains of health behaviors and psychosocial issues – and subsequent provision of needed counseling and support for patients presenting for wellness or chronic care. As a pragmatic participatory trial, stakeholder groups including practice partners and patients have been engaged throughout the study design to account for local resources and characteristics. Participatory tasks include identifying MOHR assessment content, refining the study design, providing input on outcomes measures, and designing the implementation workflow. Study outcomes include the intervention reach (percent of patients offered and completing the MOHR assessment), effectiveness (patients reporting being asked about topics, setting change goals, and receiving assistance in early versus delayed intervention practices), contextual factors influencing outcomes, and intervention costs.DiscussionThe MOHR study shows how a participatory design can be used to promote the consistent collection and use of patient-reported health behavior and psychosocial assessments in a broad range of primary care settings. While pragmatic in nature, the study design will allow valid comparisons to answer the posed research question, and findings will be broadly generalizable to a range of primary care settings. Per the pragmatic explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS) framework, the study design is substantially more pragmatic than other published trials. The methods and findings should be of interest to researchers, practitioners, and policy makers attempting to make healthcare more patient-centered and relevant.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov: NCT01825746

BackgroundSocial media offer an unprecedented opportunity to explore how people talk about health care at a very large scale. Numerous studies have shown the importance of websites with user forums for people seeking information related to health. Parents turn to some of these sites, colloquially referred to as “mommy blogs,” to share concerns about children’s health care, including vaccination. Although substantial work has considered the role of social media, particularly Twitter, in discussions of vaccination and other health care–related issues, there has been little work on describing the underlying structure of these discussions and the role of persuasive storytelling, particularly on sites with no limits on post length. Understanding the role of persuasive storytelling at Internet scale provides useful insight into how people discuss vaccinations, including exemption-seeking behavior, which has been tied to a recent diminution of herd immunity in some communities.ObjectiveTo develop an automated and scalable machine-learning method for story aggregation on social media sites dedicated to discussions of parenting. We wanted to discover the aggregate narrative frameworks to which individuals, through their exchange of experiences and commentary, contribute over time in a particular topic domain. We also wanted to characterize temporal trends in these narrative frameworks on the sites over the study period.MethodsTo ensure that our data capture long-term discussions and not short-term reactions to recent events, we developed a dataset of 1.99 million posts contributed by 40,056 users and viewed 20.12 million times indexed from 2 parenting sites over a period of 105 months. Using probabilistic methods, we determined the topics of discussion on these parenting sites. We developed a generative statistical-mechanical narrative model to automatically extract the underlying stories and story fragments from millions of posts. We aggregated the stories into an overarching narrative framework graph. In our model, stories were represented as network graphs with actants as nodes and their various relationships as edges. We estimated the latent stories circulating on these sites by modeling the posts as a sampling of the hidden narrative framework graph. Temporal trends were examined based on monthly user-poststatistics.ResultsWe discovered that discussions of exemption from vaccination requirements are highly represented. We found a strong narrative framework related to exemption seeking and a culture of distrust of government and medical institutions. Various posts reinforced part of the narrative framework graph in which parents, medical professionals, and religious institutions emerged as key nodes, and exemption seeking emerged as an important edge. In the aggregate story, parents used religion or belief to acquire exemptions to protect their children from vaccines that are required by schools or government institutions, but (allegedly) cause adverse reactions such as autism, pain, compromised immunity, and even dea...