No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

OBJECTIVES-To compare lifetime and 12-month prevalence of DSM-IV psychiatric disorders among a national representative sample of older Latinos, Asians, African-Americans, and AfroCaribbean to non-Latino Whites. DESIGN-Cross METHODS-The World Health Organization Composite International DiagnosticInterview assessed lifetime and 12-month psychiatric disorders. Interviewers matched the cultural background and language preference of participants. Bayesian estimates compared psychiatric disorder prevalence rates among ethnic/racial groups. RESULTS-After gender adjustments, older non-Latino Whites had higher lifetime rates of any depressive disorder than African-Americans but were no different than older Latinos. Older Asians and Afro-Caribbean had significantly lower lifetime rates of any depressive, anxiety, and substance use disorders than non-Latino Whites. Immigrant Asians had higher lifetime rates of GAD than the U.S.-born Asians and immigrant Latinos had higher lifetime rates of dysthymia and GAD than U. S.-born Latinos. U.S. born Latinos had higher lifetime rates of substance abuse, especially alcohol abuse, than immigrant Latinos. There were no significant differences in the rates of 12-month psychiatric disorders between non-Latino whites and ethnic/racial minorities, except that older African-Americans had higher 12-month rates of any substance use disorder compared to non-Latino Whites.CONCLUSION-Prevalence rates vary considerably by ethnicity and race as well as by nativity for older minorities, suggesting different patterns of illness and risk.

No abstract

A national community based participatory research (CBPR) team developed a conceptual/logic model of CBPR partnerships to understand the contribution of partnership processes to improved community capacity and health outcomes. With the model primarily developed through academic literature and expert consensus-building, we sought community input to assess face validity and acceptability. Our research team conducted semi-structured focus groups with six partnerships nation-wide. Participants validated and expanded upon existing model constructs and identified new constructs based on “real-world” praxis, resulting in a revised model. Four cross-cutting constructs were identified: trust development, capacity, mutual learning, and power dynamics. By empirically testing the model, we found community face validity and capacity to adapt the model to diverse contexts. We recommend partnerships use and adapt the CBPR model and its constructs, for collective reflection and evaluation, to enhance their partnering practices and achieve their health and research goals.

No abstract

Clinical RelevanceUsing the Vita 3D-Master shade guide, the accuracy of three experienced clinicians was compared to shade choices using an intraoral spectrophotometer. Compared to the clinicians, the shades chosen by the Easyshade guide were more frequently an exact match. This study indicates shade matching may be improved by using an electronic device. SUMMARYConsistently choosing an accurate shade match is far more difficult than it appears. Recently, several electronic shade-matching devices have been marketed. One device is an intraoral spectrophotometer, Easyshade. The current study compared the accuracy and consistency of the Easyshade (ES) device to three clinicians experienced in tooth whitening trials and trained in the use of the Vitapan 3D Master shade.The maxillary anteriors of 16 participants were matched on three separate occasions one month apart. At each appointment, the three clinicians (R1, R2 & R3) and ES independently chose a single 3D Master tab. A trained research assistant used the Easyshade device to record CIE L*, C* and H* and a shade tab. In addition, color differences between shade tabs were calculated using the Delta E 2000 (∆ e 00) formula. The CIE L*C*H* data were also used to establish standards for the five lightness groups of the 3D Master. An intrarater agreement was evaluated using an intraclass correlation statistic, and an inter-rater agreement was evaluated using a weighted Kappa statistic.The percentages of exact matches were: ES = 41%; R1 = 27%; R2 = 22% and R3 = 17%. Matches within a half-shade were also calculated. This represents a mismatch that is perceptible but acceptable. The percentages of matches within a half-tab were: ES = 91%; R1 = 69%; R2 = 85% and R3 = 79%. In terms of lightness, the intra-rater The mean color difference for the L*, C*, H* data recorded at each evaluation was 1.5, or only slightly greater than the color difference between the same tab on different guides (1.2). The ∆ e 00 data were the most accurate data collected, and they were used to establish a standard to which the tab choices of the four raters were compared. A weighted Kappa statistic was performed and, in terms of lightness, agreement was found to be good for all raters. For chroma, agreement was very good for ES and it was good for the clinicians.In terms of the number of exact matches and matches within a half-shade, the performance of ES was at least comparable to, if not better than, the dentists. Statistically, the same was true in terms of consistency and accuracy when making repeated matches of lightness and chroma using the 3D Master shade guide.