No abstract

Purpose People living in rural areas experience greater health disparities than their nonrural counterparts, but little is known about the association between rural status and quality of life (QOL) in non‐Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) survivors. We compared self‐reported quality of life and impact of cancer in rural and nonrural NHL survivors. Methods This study is a secondary analysis of 566 NHL cancer survivors recruited from cancer registries at 2 large academic medical centers in 1 state. Standardized measures collected information on demographics and clinical characteristics, quality of life (QOL; SF‐36), and the Impact of Cancer (IOCv2). Rural residence was determined by Rural‐Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) codes designated as nonmetropolitan. Multiple linear regression analysis, adjusted for demographic and clinical covariates, was used to evaluate the relationship between rural residence and QOL and impact of cancer. Findings Among the 566 participants (83% response rate), rural residence was independently associated with lower SF‐36 physical component summary scores and the physical function subscale (all P < .05). Rural residence was also associated with higher IOCv2 positive impact scores and the subscales of altruism/empathy and meaning of cancer scores in the adjusted models (all P < .05). Conclusions Given documented rural cancer disparities and the lack of resources in rural communities, study findings support the continued need to provide supportive care to rural cancer survivors to improve their QOL. Consistent with previous research, rural residence status is associated with increased positive impact following cancer diagnosis.

No abstract

Background: Black cisgender women in the United States experience a disproportionate burden of human immunodeficiency virus acquisition. Pre-exposure prophylaxis is an effective oral daily medication that reduces the risk of human immunodeficiency virus through sex by 99% when taken as prescribed. However, less than 2% of eligible Black cisgender women take pre-exposure prophylaxis. The purpose of this scoping review was to describe the types of research studies done in this area, gaps in knowledge, and potential areas of research needed to increase pre-exposure prophylaxis use among Black cisgender women in the United States. Methods: We conducted our search in MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (Elsevier), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), and Scopus (Elsevier) using a combination of keywords and database-specific subject headings for the following concepts: pre-exposure prophylaxis, African American/Black or minority, and women. We used the Joanna Briggs Institute’s Reviewers’ Manual process for Scoping Reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews to ensure comprehensive and standardized reporting of each part of the review. Results: Fifty-nine studies were included in the final review. Results of the study were classified according to the three phases of the Human Immunodeficiency Virus Prevention Cascade—demand side, supply side, and adherence and retention. The majority of studies ( n = 24, 41%) were cross-sectional quantitative surveys and 43 (34%) focused on the demand-side phase of the Human Immunodeficiency Virus Prevention Cascade. Fifty-eight percent of studies either assessed women’s pre-exposure prophylaxis knowledge, attitudes, and intentions to use, or assessed perceived barriers and facilitators. Seven studies (12%) tested pre-exposure prophylaxis uptake and adherence among Black cisgender women. Conclusion: This review found multiple missed opportunities to increase women’s demand for pre-exposure prophylaxis and health care provider screening and referral for pre-exposure prophylaxis. Additional studies are needed to effectively assess pre-exposure prophylaxis uptake and adherence among Black cisgender women.

No abstract

No abstract

Optimizing resources within environments where people live, work, and pray can aid nurses in improving public health. Religion and social capital significantly influence the health of individuals and communities, particularly among racial and ethnic minorities in the United States. A concept analysis of religious social capital was conducted to clarify how this resource is used in the context of health.Design and Sample: Rodgers' evolutionary concept analysis method guided this analysis. A search of PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, using keywords "religious social capital" and "health" yielded 152 publications.Results: Antecedents were "defined religious social network," "voluntary membership," "shared values," and "trust." Attributes were "relationships (bonding bridging, and linking)," "information exchange and resource sharing," and "reciprocal participation." Consequences were "increased productivity," "increased resources," "better personal and community health," and "trust." A model case of African American women and HIV prevention was included to illustrate how religious social capital can be developed and optimized to promote health. Conclusion:Religious social capital is defined as increased individual and collective capabilities that result from voluntary and reciprocal participation in bonding, bridging, or linking social network relationships and activities. Religious social capital is an accessible resource that can be leveraged to improve minority health.

Morbidity and mortality from colorectal cancer can be decreased by addressing patient barriers to colorectal cancer screening; especially among adults who have never been screened. Assessing changes in barriers over time may help practitioners better tailor interventions to address patient barriers. We assessed among adults ages 50-75 who have never been screened for colorectal cancer (CRC) which barriers predict prospective screening. A sample of 560 adults who had never been screened, recruited from Growth for Knowledge's online panel, completed a baseline and a six-month follow-up survey. Both surveys assessed screening barriers after an online intervention that involved conveying tailored comparative risk estimates and message framing. Among those who did not get screened, we examined the consistency between reported barriers at baseline and at six-month follow-up. At baseline, participants identified 27 barriers; some reported no barriers. Among those never screened (n = 362), there was a significant increase from baseline to follow-up in five barriers: 'time/too busy', 'no symptoms', 'in good health', 'no motivation', and 'hadn't thought about it'. Reporting 'no barriers' at baseline was a significant predictor of being screened at follow-up (OR = 3.67, 95% CI = 1.44-9.30, p < .007). Among people who have never been screened, interventions should focus on addressing the most consistently reported barriers (i.e., 'time/too busy', and on improving knowledge and beliefs about who should be screened and when, as well as attitudes toward screening, to design more efficacious and tailored interventions.