Sexual orientation and gender identity inequities in cervical cancer screening by race and ethnicity.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, inequities in preventive health behaviors such as cervical cancer screening have been documented. Sexual orientation, gender identity, and race/ethnicity all individually contribute to such disparities. However, little work has investigated their joint impact on screening behavior. METHODS: Using sampling weighted data from the 2016 and 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, we assessed differences in two metrics via chi-square statistics: 1) lifetime uptake, and 2) up-to-date cervical cancer screening by sexual orientation and gender identity, within and across racial/ethnic classifications. RESULTS: Within all races, individuals who identify as members of sexual and gender minority (SGM) communities reported higher rates of never being screened (except for Black transgender men) than straight or cisgender individuals (p < 0.0001). [*START* Across all races, the Asian/Pacific Islander transgender population (32.4%; weighted n (w.n.) = 1,313) had the lowest proportion of lifetime screening, followed by the Asian/Pacific Islander gay/lesbian (53.0%, w.n. = 21,771), Hispanic transgender (58.7%; w.n. = 24,780), Asian/Pacific Islander bisexual (61.8%, w.n. = 54,524), and Hispanic gay/lesbian (69.6%, w.n. = 125,781) populations. *END*] Straight or cisgender Non-Hispanic White (w.n. = 40,664,476) individuals had the highest proportion of lifetime screening (97.7% and 97.5%, respectively). However, among individuals who had been screened at least once in their lifetime, identifying as SGM was not associated with a decreased proportion of up-to-date screening within or between races. CONCLUSIONS: Due to small sample sizes, especially among Asian/Pacific Islander and Hispanic populations, confidence intervals were wide. Heterogeneity in screening participation by SGM status within and across racial/ethnic groups were observed. IMPACT: These screening disparities reveal the need to disaggregate data to account for intersecting identities and for studies with larger sample sizes to increase estimate reliability.

Inequities in colorectal and breast cancer screening: At the intersection of race/ethnicity, sexuality, and gender.

Objective: To investigate the joint impact of sexual orientation, gender identity, and race/ethnicity on colorectal and breast cancer screening disparities in the United States. Methods: Utilizing sampling weighted data from the 2016 and 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, we assessed differences in two metrics via chi-square statistics: 1) lifetime uptake, and 2) up-to-date colorectal and breast cancer screening by sexual orientation and gender identity, within and across racial/ethnic classifications. Results: Within specific races/ethnicities, lifetime CRC screening was higher among gay/lesbian (within NH-White, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander) and bisexual individuals (Hispanic) compared to straight individuals, and lowest overall among transgender women and transgender nonconforming populations (p < 0.05). Asian transgender women had the lowest lifetime CRC screening (13.0%; w.n. = 1,428). Lifetime breast cancer screening was lowest among the Hispanic bisexual population (86.6%; w.n. = 26,940) and Hispanic transgender nonconforming population (71.8%; w.n. = 739); within all races, SGM individuals (except NH-White, Hispanic, and Black bisexual populations, and NH-White transgender men) had greater breast cancer screening adherence compared to straight individuals. Conclusions: Due to small, unweighted sample sizes, results should be interpreted with caution. Heterogeneity in screening participation by SGM status within and across racial/ethnic groups were observed, revealing the need to disaggregate data to account for intersecting identities and for studies with larger sample sizes to increase estimate reliability.

Genetically modified (GM) late blight-resistant potato and consumer attitudes before and after a field visit.

Late blight, caused by Phytophthora infestans, is the most devastating disease in potato production. Here, we show full late blight resistance in a location with a genetically diverse pathogen population with the use of GM potato stacked with three resistance (R) genes over three seasons. In addition, using this field trials, we demonstrate that in-the-field intervention among consumers led to change for more favorable attitude generally toward GM crops.

Associations of Eating Identities With Self-Reported Dietary Behaviors and Body Mass Index.

Objective: To inform dietary interventions, it is important to understand antecedents of recommended (henceforth: healthy) dietary behaviors, beyond dietary beliefs and self-efficacy. We used the validated "Eating Identity Type Inventory" to assess the extent to which participants identified as healthy eaters, meat eaters, emotional eaters or picky eaters. We examined correlations between participants' race/ethnicity and other socio-demographic characteristics and affinity with these eating identities, how affinity with these eating identities correlated with self-reports of dietary beliefs, self-efficacy, dietary behaviors and Body Mass Index (BMI), and how well affinity with these eating identities predicted self-reported dietary behaviors and BMI, as compared to self-reported dietary beliefs and self-efficacy. Methods: In an online survey, a diverse sample of 340 Los Angeles County adults reported eating identities, dietary beliefs, and self-efficacy, dietary behaviors and BMI. Results: Pearson correlations revealed that identifying more as a healthy eater was positively associated with self-reports of being non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic mixed race, older, and college-educated, while identifying more as a meat eater was positively associated with self-reports of being non-Hispanic Black, younger, and male (α = 0.05). Pearson correlations also showed that healthy eaters had more accurate dietary beliefs and self-efficacy, and emotional eaters had lower self-efficacy (α = 0.05). In linear regressions, identifying more as a healthy eater was associated with self-reporting healthier dietary behaviors and lower BMI, and identifying more as a meat eater and emotional eater was associated with reporting less healthy dietary behaviors and higher BMI, even after accounting for correlations with socio-demographics, dietary beliefs, and self-efficacy (α = 0.05). Conclusions: Our findings highlight the importance of eating identities in understanding dietary behaviors and outcomes, with implications for dietary interventions.

The inverse relation between risks and benefits: The impact of individual differences in information processing style.

Existing research shows that evaluations of the risks and benefits of various hazards (i.e., technologies and activities) are inversely related. The affect heuristic explains the negative relation between risks and benefits, as based on the strength of positive or negative affect associated with a hazard. Research on the affect heuristic previously investigated under which conditions people judge risk and benefits independently, focusing on expertise as a factor that might exempt from inversely related judgements of risk and benefits. Measurements within Dual Process Theories have been found to be associated with rational, analytical decision making and accurate judgments. In this paper we investigated the extent to which rational information processing styles can predict the risk-benefit relation of technologies in a medical and food applications and whether the attitudes influence the strength or direction of the relationship. Using the Need for Cognition Scale (NFC), a psychometric-based risk scale and an explicit measure of attitude, in a representative sample of 3228 Swedes, we found that the high NFC group judged the risks and benefits of technologies to be inversely related. In contrast, the low NFC group judged the risks and benefits to be positively related. These results were confirmed across all studied technologies by applying moderation analysis. We discuss the results in light of recent research on cognitive processing and polarization over technologies' risks.

Measurements of Rationality: Individual Differences in Information Processing, the Transitivity of Preferences and Decision Strategies.

The first goal of this study was to validate the Rational-Experiential Inventory (REI) and the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) through checking their relation to the transitivity axiom. The second goal was to test the relation between decision strategies and cognitive style as well as the relation between decision strategies and the transitivity of preferences. The following characteristics of strategies were investigated: requirements for trade-offs, maximization vs. satisficing and option-wise vs. attribute-wise information processing. Respondents were given choices between two multi-attribute options. The options were designed so that the choice indicated which strategy was applied. Both the REI-R and the CRT were found to be good predictors of the transitivity of preferences. Respondents who applied compensatory strategies and the maximization criterion scored highly on the REI-R and in the CRT, whereas those who applied the satisficing rule scored highly on the REI-R but not in the CRT. Attribute-wise information processing was related to low scores in both measurements. Option-wise information processing led to a high transitivity of preferences.

The Inverse Relation Between Risks and Benefits: The Role of Affect and Expertise.

Although risk and benefits of risky activities are positively correlated in the real world, empirical results indicate that people perceive them as negatively correlated. The common explanation is that confounding benefits and losses stems from affect. In this article, we address the issue that has not been clearly established in studies on the affect heuristic: to what extent boundary conditions, such as judgments' generality and expertise, influence the presence of the inverse relation in judgments of hazards. These conditions were examined in four studies in which respondents evaluated general or specific benefits and risks of "affect-rich" and "affect-poor" hazards (ranging from investments to applications of stem cell research). In line with previous research, affect is defined as good or bad feelings integral to a stimulus. In contrast to previous research, affect is considered as related both to personal feelings and to social controversies associated with a hazard. Expertise is related to personal knowledge (laypersons vs. experts) as well as to objective knowledge (targets well vs. poorly known to science). The direct comparison of the input from personal and objective ignorance into the inverse relation has not been investigated previously. It was found that affect invoked by a hazard guides general but not specific judgments of its benefits and risks. Technical expertise helps to avoid simplified evaluations of consequences as long as they are well known to science. For new, poorly understood hazards (e.g., stem cell research), expertise does not protect from the perception of the inverse relation between benefits and risks.