Cancer is the leading cause of death for Korean Americans (KAs). Breast cancer (BC) is the most commonly occurring cancer among KA women, and its rate has been rapidly increasing. Low BC screening rates for KAs puts them at greater risk for late-stage breast cancer. We conducted a systematic review of the published literature on cancer screening among KAs, and identified 38 eligible studies. Despite significant increases in mammogram utilization over the past two decades, KAs have consistently lower rates of mammogram screening than other American populations. KA women also report lower rates of clinical breast examination and breast self-examination. Screening rates are higher among adults with higher socioeconomic status, greater acculturation to the United States, more cancer knowledge, higher perceived susceptibility to BC, more social support, and better access to health services. However, fear of finding something wrong, fear of embarrassment or lack of modesty, not knowing where to go for screening, believing that mammography is only necessary when symptoms are present, and perceived time and cost difficulties in accessing mammography were reported as barriers to mammogram screening. Coordinated efforts from clinicians, public health workers, KA cultural and religious organizations, and the broader breast cancer advocacy and awareness community are necessary for improving BC screening among KAs.
Progress in modern biology is being driven, in part, by the large amounts of freely available data in public resources such as the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration (INSDC), the world's primary database of biological sequence (and related) information. INSDC and similar databases have dramatically increased the pace of fundamental biological discovery and enabled a host of innovative therapeutic, diagnostic, and forensic applications. However, as high-value, openly shared resources with a high degree of assumed trust, these repositories share compelling similarities to the early days of the Internet. Consequently, as public biological databases continue to increase in size and importance, we expect that they will face the same threats as undefended cyberspace. There is a unique opportunity, before a significant breach and loss of trust occurs, to ensure they evolve with quality and security as a design philosophy rather than costly “retrofitted” mitigations. This Perspective surveys some potential quality assurance and security weaknesses in existing open genomic and proteomic repositories, describes methods to mitigate the likelihood of both intentional and unintentional errors, and offers recommendations for risk mitigation based on lessons learned from cybersecurity.
In this paper we analyze results from 114 face-to-face qualitative interviews of people who had evacuated from the New Orleans area in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, interviews that were completed within weeks of the 2005 storm in most cases. Our goal was to understand the role information and knowledge played in people's decisions to leave the area. Contrary to the conventional wisdom underlying many disaster communication studies, we found that our interviewees almost always had extensive storm-related information from a variety of sources, including media reports and (in many cases) other background knowledge gleaned from experiences with previous storms, often from interpersonal sources. However, consistent with a theme in communication research that has been identifiable since at least the 1940s, interpersonal communication networks were most often what ultimately caused these individuals to act on this information, and therefore those with "weak ties" (a concept borrowed from sociology) to the broader "mainstream" community may have been disadvantaged, slower to leave, and thus more vulnerable to the storm's main effects. From our evidence, the end result was less a function of discrimination as it was one of differential activation of a relevant social network. These results argue for the rejection of a "deficit model" that assumes varied reactions to natural disaster result from some kind of an information deficiency, and remind us that behavior under such circumstances is the result of a process of collective behavior, not only individual cognition.
As of 2021, the biothreat policy and research communities organize their efforts around lists of priority agents, which elides consideration of novel pathogens and biotoxins. For example, the Select Agents and Toxins list is composed of agents that historic biological warfare programs had weaponized or that have previously caused great harm during natural outbreaks. Similarly, lists of priority agents promulgated by the World Health Organization and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases are composed of previously known pathogens and biotoxins. To fill this gap, we argue that the research/scientific and biodefense/biosecurity communities should categorize agents based on how they impact their hosts to augment current list-based paradigms. Specifically, we propose integrating the results of multi-omics studies to identify bioagent-agnostic signatures (BASs) of disease—namely, patterns of biomarkers that accurately and reproducibly predict the impacts of infection or intoxication without prior knowledge of the causative agent. Here, we highlight three pathways that investigators might exploit as sources of signals to construct BASs and their applicability to this framework. The research community will need to forge robust interdisciplinary teams to surmount substantial experimental, technical, and data analytic challenges that stand in the way of our long-term vision. However, if successful, our functionality-based BAS model could present a means to more effectively surveil for and treat known and novel agents alike.
A s organizational communication scholars, we routinely orient ourselves to organizations as places of work while often ignoring the diverse forms of communicative work and communication about our working lives that underpin such locales. In this essay, we consider how the study of meaningful work problematizes the boundaries of organizational communication. Specifically, we reflect on how definitions of meaningful work are very much caught up in our contemporary milieu. Organizational communication scholars, then, must be willing and able to work within and across traditional boundaries, perhaps redefining them in the process. We illustrate these claims in three parts. In the first part, we consider the rise of communication work and how it calls into question common notions of meaningful work. In our second section, we argue that what counts as meaningful work often stems from the raced, classed, and gendered assumptions guiding our practice. Finally, in part three, and with these elements of our milieu in mind, we describe ways in which scholars can begin to investigate meaningful work by examining tensions between description and prescription
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.