BackgroundRural residents are increasingly identified as being at greater risk for health disparities. These inequities may be related to health behaviors such as adequate fruits and vegetable consumption. There is little national-level population-based research about the prevalence of fruit and vegetable consumption by US rural population adults. The objective of this study was to examine the prevalence differences between US rural and non-rural adults in consuming at least five daily servings of combined fruits and vegetables.MethodsCross-sectional analysis of weighted 2009 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey (BRFSS) data using bivariate and multivariate techniques. 52,259,789 US adults were identified as consuming at least five daily servings of fruits and vegetables of which 8,983,840 were identified as living in rural locales.ResultsBivariate analysis revealed that in comparison to non-rural US adults, rural adults were less likely to consume five or more daily servings of fruits and vegetables (OR = 1.161, 95% CI 1.160-1.162). Logistic regression analysis revealed that US rural adults consuming at least five daily servings of fruits and vegetables were more likely to be female, non-Caucasian, married or living with a partner, living in a household without children, living in a household whose annual income was > $35,000, and getting at least moderate physical activity. They were also more likely to have a BMI of <30, have a personal physician, have had a routine medical exam in the past 12 months, self-defined their health as good to excellent and to have deferred medical care because of cost. When comparing the prevalence differences between rural and non-rural US adults within a state, 37 States had a lower prevalence of rural adults consuming at least five daily servings of fruits and vegetables and 11 States a higher prevalence of the same.ConclusionsThis enhanced understanding of fruit and vegetable consumption should prove useful to those seeking to lessen the disparity or inequity between rural and non-rural adults. Additionally, those responsible for health-related planning could benefit from the knowledge of how their state ranks in comparison to others vis-à-vis the consumption of fruits and vegetables by rural adults---a population increasingly being identified as one at risk for health disparities.

Introduction If interprofessional collaborative practice is to be an important component of healthcare reform, then an evidentiary base connecting interprofessional education to interprofessional practice with significantly improved health and healthcare outcomes is an unconditional necessity. This study is a scoping review of the current peer reviewed literature linking interprofessional collaborative care and interprofessional collaborative practice to clearly identified healthcare and/or patient health-related outcomes. The research question for this review was: What does the evidence from the past decade reveal about the impact of Interprofessional collaborative practice on patient-related outcomes in the US healthcare system? Materials and methods A modified preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) approach was followed. Results Of an initial 375 articles retrieved 20 met review criteria. The most common professions represented in the studies reviewed were physicians, pharmacists and nurses. Primary care was the most common care delivery setting and measures related to chronic disease the most commonly measured outcomes. No study identified negative impacts of interprofessional collaborative practice. Eight outcome categories emerged from a content analysis of the findings of the reviewed studies. Conclusions The results suggest a need for more research on the measurable impact of interprofessional collaborative practice and/or care on patient health-related outcomes to further document its benefits and to explore the models, systems and nature of collaborations that best improve population health, increase patient satisfaction, and reduce cost of care.

Aim: Are there differences in diabetes care between rural and non-rural US adults with diabetes? Background: Rural Healthy People 2010 includes diabetes as a major health priority, suggesting a possible disparity between diabetes care in rural settings as compared to non-rural locales. Methods: This cross-sectional study using population-based survey data sought to determine if there was a difference in the quality of diabetes care between rural and non-rural US adults (>18 years). A diabetes care index was computed from five separate dichotomous care-related variables (HbA1c checked, lipids checked, dilated eye exam, feet checked by health care provider, and diabetes education), with adequate care defined as receiving at least four of these interventions. Multivariate methods were used to detect differences in diabetes care received by individuals living in rural compared to non-rural settings. Results: Multivariate regression analysis revealed that US adults with diabetes living in rural communities were more likely to receive inadequate care than non-rural residents (OR 5 1.205; 95% CI 1.201, 1.209). Rural residents were more likely to receive inadequate diabetes care if they were: ,40 years of age, male, Caucasian, not a high school graduate, not partnered, without health insurance, inactive or without an identified health care provider. Those deferring medical care because of cost, or who did not have an annual routine physical or had fewer than two diabetes related office visits annually were also at greater risk for suboptimal care. Routine physical checkups and deferring medical care because of cost had a greater impact on diabetes care for rural adults compared to non-rural adults. Conclusion: The results of this study indicated that rural residents were less likely to receive adequate diabetes care compared to their nonrural counterparts. The findings suggest that efforts to identify and to address this disparity would likely improve the outcomes for diabetic individuals living in rural communities.

Objective. To create, implement, and evaluate a PharmD course on primary care nutrition. Design. A 2-credit hour elective course was offered to second-and third-year pharmacy students. It was informed by the Socratic method using a minimum number of formal lecture presentations and featured problem-based learning exercises, case-based scenarios, and scientific literature to fuel informed debate. A single group posttest design with a retrospective pretest was used to assess students' self-efficacy. Assessment. There was a significant overall improvement in students' self-efficacy in their ability to practice primary care nutrition. Conclusion. Completion of a nutrition course improved students' confidence in providing primary care nutrition and empowered them to speak more comfortably about the role of nutrition in the prevention of chronic diseases.

Background In a recent survey, medical students expressed eagerness to acquire competencies in the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine. It is time that undergraduate medical education takes the lead in helping students develop these competencies. We propose a solution that integrates competency-driven AI instruction in medical school curriculum. Methods We applied constructivist and backwards design principles to design online learning assignments simulating the real-world work done in the healthcare industry. Our innovative approach assumed no technical background for students, yet addressed the need for training clinicians to be ready to practice in the new digital patient care environment. This modular 4-week AI course was implemented in 2019, integrating AI with evidence-based medicine, pathology, pharmacology, tele-monitoring, quality improvement, value-based care, and patient safety. Results This educational innovation was tested in 2 cohorts of fourth year medical students who demonstrated an improvement in knowledge with an average quiz score of 97% and in skills with an average application assignment score of 89%. Weekly reflections revealed how students learned to transition from theory to practice of AI and how these concepts might apply to their upcoming residency training programs and future medical practice. Conclusions We present an innovative product that achieves the objective of competency-based education of students regarding the role of AI in medicine. This course can be integrated in the preclinical years with a focus on foundational knowledge, vocabulary, and concepts, and in clinical years with a focus on application of core knowledge to real-world scenarios.