Key Points Question Are social, economic, and geographic factors independently associated with diet quality? Findings In this cross-sectional analysis of 155 331 adults participating in a nationwide US cohort study, Black individuals, White individuals with limited income, participants with low educational attainment, and people living in rural areas or food deserts were more likely to have overall poor diet quality. All dietary components, but especially sugar-sweetened beverages and processed meats, contributed to the disparities observed. Meaning These findings suggest that multiple individual-level socioeconomic and neighborhood-level factors were independently associated with poor diet quality in this US cohort.
Background Numerous studies have documented mental health challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. Few studies included pre-pandemic levels of mental health or were comprehensive in assessing factors likely associated with longer-term mental health impacts. Methods Analyses used prospective data from a subset of participants in the nationwide Cancer Prevention Study-3 (CPS-3) United States cohort (N=2,359; 1,534 women; 825 men) who completed surveys in 2018 and during the COVID-19 pandemic (July-September 2020). Logistic regressions examined associations of pandemic-related stressors, sociodemographic and other predictors with (i) overall psychological distress (PD) and depression and anxiety separately during the COVID-19 pandemic and (ii) change in PD from 2018 to during the pandemic (low/low; high to low; low to high; high/high). Findings During the pandemic, 10% of participants reported moderate-to-severe PD and almost half (42%) reported at least mild PD. Pandemic PD levels were associated with pre-pandemic PD (female OR=5.65; male OR=9.70), financial stressors (female OR=2.48; male OR=3.68), and work/life balance stressors (female OR=3.03; male OR=3.33) experienced since the pandemic began. These stressors also predicted an escalation from low PD in 2018 to high PD during the pandemic. Factors associated with high PD at both time points included younger age, female sex, and financial stressors. Interpretation These results highlight the importance of regular mental health assessment and support among those with a history of mental health problems and those experiencing pandemic-related stressors, such as those with caregiving responsibilities or job changes. Funding The American Cancer Society funds the creation, maintenance, and updating of the CPS-3.
BACKGROUND: eHealth interventions can help cancer survivors self-manage their health outside the clinic. Little is known about how best to engage and assist survivors across the age and cancer treatment spectra. METHODS: The American Cancer Society conducted a randomized controlled trial that assessed efficacy of, and engagement with, Springboard Beyond Cancer, an eHealth self-management program for cancer survivors. Intent-to treat analyses assessed effects of intervention engagement for treatment (on-treatment vs completed) overall (n = 176; 88 control, 88 intervention arm) and separately by age (<60 years vs older). Multiple imputation was used to account for participants who were lost to follow-up (n = 41) or missing self-efficacy data (n = 1) at 3 months follow-up. RESULTS: Self-efficacy for managing cancer, the primary outcome of this trial, increased significantly within the intervention arm and for those who had completed treatment (Cohen's d = 0.26, 0.31, respectively). Additionally, participants with moderate-to-high engagement in the text and/or web intervention (n = 30) had a significantly greater self-efficacy for managing cancer-related issues compared to the control group (n = 68), with a medium effect size (Cohen's d = 0.44). Self-efficacy did not differ between the intervention and control arm at 3 months post-baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Study results suggest that cancer survivors benefit variably from eHealth tools. To maximize effects of such tools, it is imperative to tailor information to a priori identified survivor subgroups and increase engagement efforts.
BACKGROUND: To the authors' knowledge, few studies to date have examined associations between moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and sitting time with quality of life in cancer survivors compared with a cancer-free group. The current study examined differences in global mental health (GMH) and global physical health (GPH) across levels of MVPA and sitting among cancer survivors and cancer-free participants. METHODS: Cancer Prevention Study II participants (59.9% of whom were female with an age of 77.8 ± 5.8 years) were grouped as: 1) survivors who were 1 to 5 years after diagnosis (3718 participants); 2) survivors who were 6 to 10 years after diagnosis (4248 participants); and 3) cancer-free participants (ie, no history of cancer; 69,860 participants). In 2009, participants completed MVPA, sitting, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System GMH/GPH surveys. Mean differences in GMH and GPH T scores across MVPA (none, 0 to <7.5, 7.5 to <15, 15 to <22.5, and ≥22.5 metabolic equivalent [MET]-hours/week) and sitting (0 to <3, 3 to <6, and ≥6 hours/day) were assessed using multivariate generalized linear models. RESULTS: The mean GMH and GPH scores were statistically significantly higher in cancer-free participants compared with cancer survivor groups, although the differences were not clinically meaningful (mean difference of 0.52 for GMH and 0.88 for GPH). More MVPA was associated with higher GMH and GPH scores for all 3 groups (P for trend <.001), and differences between the least and most active participants were found to be clinically meaningful (mean differences of ≥4.34 for GMH and ≥6.39 for GPH). Similarly, a lower duration of sitting was associated with higher GMH and GPH scores for all groups (P for trend <.001), with clinically meaningful differences observed between the least and most sedentary participants (mean differences of ≥2.74 for GMH and ≥3.75 for GPH). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of the current study provide evidence of the importance of increased MVPA and decreased sitting for improved health in older adults with or without a prior cancer diagnosis.
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.