Training Health Policy Researchers on Policy Engagement and Research Translation for Greater Impact: Evaluation of the Amplify@LDI Program.

BACKGROUND: Few researchers receive formal training in research translation and dissemination or policy engagement. We created Amplify@LDI, a training program for health services and health policy researchers, to equip them with skills to increase the visibility of their research through translation and dissemination activities. AIMS: To describe the program's participants and curriculum, and evaluate the first 2 years of the program. SETTING: The Leonard Davis Institute (LDI) at the University of Pennsylvania (Penn). PARTICIPANTS: An annual cohort of 12 LDI Senior Fellows (Penn faculty) from multiple schools, disciplines, and ranks at Penn. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The Amplify@LDI curriculum includes 6 sessions on different aspects of research translation and dissemination, including media and social engagement, writing Op-Eds, and policy engagement. PROGRAM EVALUATION: Participants reported measurable increases in time spent on translation and dissemination activities, as well as new enthusiasm for and confidence in policy engagement. Participants' reach (as measured by Altmetric) increased during the program, compared to smaller increases or reductions in reach for two comparator groups. DISCUSSION: In our preliminary evaluation of Amplify@LDI, we find strong evidence of positive impact from participant evaluations, and suggestive evidence that participation in the program is associated with significant increases in the reach of their research.

What Were the Information Voids? A Qualitative Analysis of Questions Asked by Dear Pandemic Readers between August 2020-August 2021.

In the current infodemic, how individuals receive information (channel), who it is coming from (source), and how it is framed can have an important effect on COVID-19 related mitigation behaviors. In light of these challenges presented by the infodemic, Dear Pandemic (DP) was created to directly address persistent questions related to COVID-19 and other health topics in the online environment. This is a qualitative analysis of 3806 questions that were submitted by DP readers to a question box on the Dear Pandemic website between August 30, 2020 and August 29, 2021. Analyses resulted in four themes: the need for clarification of other sources; lack of trust in information; recognition of possible misinformation; and questions on personal decision-making. Each theme reflects an unmet informational need of Dear Pandemic readers, which may be reflective of the broader informational gaps in our science communication efforts.This study highlights the role of an ad hoc risk communication platform in the current environment and uses questions submitted to the Dear Pandemic question box to identify informational needs of DP readers over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings may help clarify how organizations addressing health misinformation in the digital space can contribute to timely, responsive science communication and improve future communication efforts.

Do Incentives Crowd Out Motivation? A Feasibility Study of a Community Vector-Control Campaign in Peru.

Incentives are a useful tool in encouraging healthy behavior as part of public health initiatives. However, there remains concern about motivation crowd out-a decline in levels of motivation to undertake a behavior to below baseline levels after incentives have been removed-and few public health studies have assessed for motivation crowd out. Here, we assess the feasibility of identifying motivation crowd out following a lottery to promote participation in a Chagas disease vector control campaign. We look for evidence of crowd out in subsequent participation in the same behavior, a related behavior, and an unrelated behavior. We identified potential motivation crowd out for the same behavior, but not for related behavior or unrelated behaviors after lottery incentives are removed. Despite some limitations, we conclude that motivation crowd out is feasible to assess in large-scale trials of incentives.

Promoting COVID-19 vaccine acceptance: recommendations from the Lancet Commission on Vaccine Refusal, Acceptance, and Demand in the USA.

Since the first case of COVID-19 was identified in the USA in January, 2020, over 46 million people in the country have tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Several COVID-19 vaccines have received emergency use authorisations from the US Food and Drug Administration, with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine receiving full approval on Aug 23, 2021. When paired with masking, physical distancing, and ventilation, COVID-19 vaccines are the best intervention to sustainably control the pandemic. However, surveys have consistently found that a sizeable minority of US residents do not plan to get a COVID-19 vaccine. The most severe consequence of an inadequate uptake of COVID-19 vaccines has been sustained community transmission (including of the delta [B.1.617.2] variant, a surge of which began in July, 2021). Exacerbating the direct impact of the virus, a low uptake of COVID-19 vaccines will prolong the social and economic repercussions of the pandemic on families and communities, especially low-income and minority ethnic groups, into 2022, or even longer. The scale and challenges of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign are unprecedented. Therefore, through a series of recommendations, we present a coordinated, evidence-based education, communication, and behavioural intervention strategy that is likely to improve the success of COVID-19 vaccine programmes across the USA.

Equitable implementation of S.A.F.E. Firearm: A multi-method pilot study.

Attention to health equity is critical in the implementation of firearm safety efforts. We present our operationalization of equity-oriented recommendations in preparation for launch of a hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial focused on firearm safety promotion in pediatric primary care as a universal suicide prevention strategy. In Step 1 of our process, pre-trial engagement with clinican partners and literature review alerted us that delivery of a firearm safety program may vary by patients' medical complexity, race, and ethnicity. In Step 2, we selected the Health Equity Implementation Framework to inform our understanding of contextual determinants (i.e., barriers and facilitators). In Step 3, we leveraged an implementation pilot across 5 pediatric primary care clinics in 2 health system sites to study signals of inequities. Eligible well-child visits for 694 patients and 47 clinicians were included. Our results suggested that medical complexity was not associated with program delivery. We did see potential signals of inequities by race and ethnicity but must interpret with caution. Though we did not initially plan to examine differences by sex assigned at birth, we discovered that clinicians may be more likely to deliver the program to parents of male than female patients. Seven qualitative interviews with clinicians provided additional context. In Step 4, we interrogated equity considerations (e.g., why and how do these inequities exist). In Step 5, we will develop a plan to probe potential inequities related to race, ethnicity, and sex in the fully powered trial. Our process highlights that prospective, rigorous, exploratory work is vital for equity-informed implementation trials.

Longitudinal changes in COVID-19 vaccination intent among South African adults: evidence from the NIDS-CRAM panel survey, February to May 2021.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has threatened the ability of many countries worldwide to contain the pandemic. Given the severe impact of the pandemic in South Africa and disruptions to the roll-out of the vaccine in early 2021, slower-than-expected uptake is a pressing public health challenge in the country. We examined longitudinal changes in COVID-19 vaccination intent among South African adults, as well as determinants of intent to receive a vaccine. METHODS: We used longitudinal data from Wave 4 (February/March 2021) and Wave 5 (April/May 2021) of the National Income Dynamics Study: Coronavirus Rapid Mobile Survey (NIDS-CRAM), a national and broadly representative panel survey of adults in South Africa. We conducted cross-sectional analyses on aggregate and between-group variation in vaccination intent, examined individual-level changes between waves, and modeled demographic predictors of intent. RESULTS: We analysed data for 5629 (Wave 4; 48% male, mean age 41.5 years) and 5862 (Wave 5; 48% male, mean age 41.6 years) respondents. Willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine significantly increased from 70.8% (95% CI: 68.5-73.1) in Wave 4 to 76.1% (95% CI: 74.2-77.8) in Wave 5. Individual-level analyses indicated that only 6.6% of respondents remained strongly hesitant between survey waves. Although respondents aged 18-24 years were 8.5 percentage points more likely to report hesitancy, hesitant respondents in this group were 5.6 percentage points more likely to change their minds by Wave 5. Concerns about rushed testing and safety of the vaccines were frequent and strongly-held reasons for hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: Willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine has increased among adults in South Africa, and those who were entrenched in their reluctance make up a small proportion of the country's population. Younger adults, those in formal housing, and those who trusted COVID-19 information on social media were more likely to be hesitant. Given that stated vaccination intent may not translate into behaviour, our finding that three-quarters of the population were willing to accept the vaccine may reflect an upper bound. Vaccination promotion campaigns should continue to frame vaccine acceptance as the norm and tailor strategies to different demographic groups.

Community stakeholder preferences for evidence-based practice implementation strategies in behavioral health: a best-worst scaling choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: Community behavioral health clinicians, supervisors, and administrators play an essential role in implementing new psychosocial evidence-based practices (EBP) for patients receiving psychiatric care; however, little is known about these stakeholders' values and preferences for implementation strategies that support EBP use, nor how best to elicit, quantify, or segment their preferences. This study sought to quantify these stakeholders' preferences for implementation strategies and to identify segments of stakeholders with distinct preferences using a rigorous choice experiment method called best-worst scaling. METHODS: A total of 240 clinicians, 74 clinical supervisors, and 29 administrators employed within clinics delivering publicly-funded behavioral health services in a large metropolitan behavioral health system participated in a best-worst scaling choice experiment. Participants evaluated 14 implementation strategies developed through extensive elicitation and pilot work within the target system. Preference weights were generated for each strategy using hierarchical Bayesian estimation. Latent class analysis identified segments of stakeholders with unique preference profiles. RESULTS: On average, stakeholders preferred two strategies significantly more than all others-compensation for use of EBP per session and compensation for preparation time to use the EBP (P < .05); two strategies were preferred significantly less than all others-performance feedback via email and performance feedback via leaderboard (P < .05). However, latent class analysis identified four distinct segments of stakeholders with unique preferences: Segment 1 (n = 121, 35%) strongly preferred financial incentives over all other approaches and included more administrators; Segment 2 (n = 80, 23%) preferred technology-based strategies and was younger, on average; Segment 3 (n = 52, 15%) preferred an improved waiting room to enhance client readiness, strongly disliked any type of clinical consultation, and had the lowest participation in local EBP training initiatives; Segment 4 (n = 90, 26%) strongly preferred clinical consultation strategies and included more clinicians in substance use clinics. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of four heterogeneous subpopulations within this large group of clinicians, supervisors, and administrators suggests optimal implementation may be achieved through targeted strategies derived via elicitation of stakeholder preferences. Best-worst scaling is a feasible and rigorous method for eliciting stakeholders' implementation preferences and identifying subpopulations with unique preferences in behavioral health settings.

A pilot study of participatory and rapid implementation approaches to increase depression screening in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Most individuals with depression go unidentified and untreated. In 2016 the US Preventive Services Task Force released guidelines recommending universal screening in primary care to identify patients with depression and to link them to treatment. Feasible, acceptable, and effective strategies to implement these guidelines are needed. METHODS: This three-phased study employed rapid participatory methods to design and test strategies to increase depression screening at Penn Medicine, a large health system with 90 primary care practices. First, researchers solicited ideas and barriers from stakeholders to increase screening using an innovation tournament-a crowdsourcing method that invites stakeholders to submit ideas to address a workplace challenge. Second, a panel of stakeholders and scientists deliberated over and ranked the tournament ideas. An instant runoff election was held to select the winning idea. Third, the research team piloted the winning idea in a primary care practice using rapid prototyping, an approach that quickly refines and iterates strategy designs. RESULTS: The innovation tournament yielded 31 ideas and 32 barriers from diverse stakeholders (12 primary care physicians, 10 medical assistants, 4 nurse practitioners, 2 practice managers, and 4 patient support assistants). A panel of 6 stakeholders and scientists deliberated on the ideas and voted for patient self-report (i.e., through tablet computers, text message, or an online patient portal) as the winning idea. The research team rapid prototyped tablets in one primary care practice with one physician over 5 five-hour shifts to examine the feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of the strategy. Most patients, the physician, and medical assistants found the tablets acceptable and feasible. However, patient support assistants struggled to incorporate them in their workflow and expressed concerns about scaling up the process. Depression screening rates were higher using tablets compared to usual care; follow-up was comparable between tablets and usual care. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid participatory methods engaged and amplified the voices of diverse stakeholders in primary care. These methods helped design an acceptable and feasible implementation strategy that showed promise for increasing depression screening in a primary care setting. The next step is to evaluate the strategy in a randomized controlled trial across primary care practices.

Dear Pandemic: Nurses as key partners in fighting the COVID-19 infodemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent proliferation of misinformation have created parallel public health crises. Social media offers a novel platform to amplify evidence-based communication to broader audiences. This paper describes the application of science communication engagement on social media platforms by an interdisciplinary team of female scientists in a campaign called Dear Pandemic. Nurses are trusted professionals trained in therapeutic communication and are central to this effort. The Dear Pandemic campaign now has more than 97,000 followers with international and multilingual impact. Public health strategies to combat misinformation and guide individual behavior via social media show promise, and require further investment to support this novel dissemination of science communication.

Applying NUDGE to Inform Design of EBP Implementation Strategies in Community Mental Health Settings.

We demonstrate the application of NUDGE (Narrow, Understand, Discover, Generate, Evaluate), a behavioral economics approach to systematically identifying behavioral barriers that impede behavior enactment, to the challenge of evidence-based practice (EBP) use in community behavioral health. Drawing on 65 clinician responses to a system-wide crowdsourcing challenge about EBP underutilization, we applied NUDGE to discover, synthesize and validate specific behavioral barriers to EBP utilization that directly inform the design of tailored implementation strategies. To our knowledge, this is the first study to apply behavioral economic insights to clinician-proposed solutions to implementation challenges in order to design implementation strategies. The study demonstrates the successful application of NUDGE to implementation strategy design and provides novel targets for intervention.

California's Senate Bill 277: Local Health Jurisdictions' Experiences With the Elimination of Nonmedical Vaccine Exemptions.

Objectives. To understand the experiences of local health jurisdictions with Senate Bill 277 (SB277), the California law that eliminated nonmedical vaccine exemptions for public- and private-school entry.Methods. We conducted semistructured telephone interviews with health officers and local health department (LHD) staff in California between August and September 2017.Results. Two overall themes emerged: (1) vague legislative and regulatory language led to variation in the interpretation and implementation of SB277, and (2) lack of centralized review of medical exemptions allowed medical exemptions that are not consistent with valid contraindications for immunizations to be accepted. Variation in the interpretation and implementation was commonly reported with provisions related to individualized education programs and special education, and independent study programs and homeschooling. Without a centralized review of medical exemption requests, respondents reported variation in the interpretation of which specialties of physicians can write medical exemptions, which conditions constitute a valid contraindication for immunization, and the process for reporting a questionable or suspicious medical exemption.Conclusions. The regulatory language within SB277 led to variation in how the law was interpreted and implemented within and across LHD jurisdictions and school districts.

Acceptability of financial incentives for health-related behavior change: An updated systematic review.

Despite the successes of financial incentives in increasing uptake of evidence-based interventions, acceptability is polarized. Given widespread interest in the use of financial incentives, we update findings from Giles and colleagues' 2015 systematic review (n = 81). The objectives of this systematic review are to identify what is known about financial incentives directed to patients for health-related behavior change, assess how acceptability varies, and address which aspects and features of financial incentives are potentially acceptable and not acceptable, and why. PRISMA guidelines were used for searching peer-reviewed journals across 10 electronic databases. We included empirical and non-empirical papers published between 1/1/14 and 6/1/18. After removal of duplicates, abstract screening, and full-text reviews, 47 papers (n = 31 empirical, n = 16 scholarly) met inclusion criteria. We assessed empirical papers for risk of bias and conducted a content analysis of extracted data to synthesize key findings. Five themes related to acceptability emerged from the data: fairness, messaging, character, liberty, and tradeoffs. The wide range of stakeholders generally preferred rewards over penalties, vouchers over cash, smaller values over large, and certain rewards over lotteries. Deposits were viewed unfavorably. Findings were mixed on acceptability of targeting specific populations. Breastfeeding, medication adherence, smoking cessation, and vaccination presented as more complicated incentive targets than physical activity, weight loss, and self-management. As researchers, clinicians, and policymakers explore the use of financial incentives for challenging health behaviors, additional research is needed to understand how acceptability influences uptake and ultimately health outcomes.

Use of financial incentives and text message feedback to increase healthy food purchases in a grocery store cash back program: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The HealthyFood (HF) program offers members up to 25% cash back monthly on healthy food purchases. In this randomized controlled trial, we tested the efficacy of financial incentives combined with text messages in increasing healthy food purchases among HF members. METHODS: Members receiving the lowest (10%) cash back level were randomized to one of six arms: Arm 1 (Usual Care): 10% cash back, no weekly text, standard monthly text; Arm 2: 10% cash back, generic weekly text, standard monthly text; Arm 3: 10% cash back, personalized weekly text, standard monthly text; Arm 4: 25% cash back, personalized weekly text, standard monthly text; Arm 5: 10 + 15%NET cash back, personalized weekly text, standard monthly text; and, Arm 6: 10 + 15%NET cash back, personalized weekly text, unbundled monthly text. In the 10 + 15%NET cash back, the cash back amount was the baseline 10% plus 15% of the net difference between healthy and unhealthy spending. The generic text included information on HF and healthy eating, while the personalized text had individualized feedback on purchases. The standard monthly text contained the cash back amount. The unbundled monthly text included the amount lost due to unhealthy purchases. The primary outcome was the average monthly percent healthy food spending. Secondary outcomes were the percent unhealthy food spending, and the percent healthy and unhealthy food items. RESULTS: Of the members contacted, 20 opted out, and 2841 met all inclusion criteria. There were no between-arm differences in the examined outcomes. The largest mean (standard deviation) difference in percent healthy spending was between Arm 1 (24.8% [11%]) and Arm 2 (26.8% [13%]), and the largest mean difference in percent unhealthy spending was also between Arm 1 (24.4% [20%]) and Arm 2 (21.7% [17%]), but no differences were statistically significant after correction for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: None of the tested financial incentive structures or text strategies differentially affected food purchasing. Notably, more than doubling the cash back amount and introducing a financial disincentive for unhealthy purchases did not affect purchasing. These findings speak to the difficulty of changing shopping habits and to the need for innovative strategies to shift complex health behaviors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02486588 Increasing Engagement with a Healthy Food Benefit. The trial was prospectively registered on July 1, 2015.

A behavioral design approach to improving a Chagas disease vector control campaign in Peru.

BACKGROUND: Individual behavior change is a critical ingredient in efforts to improve global health. Central to the focus on behavior has been a growing understanding of how the human brain makes decisions, from motivations and mindsets to unconscious biases and cognitive shortcuts. Recent work in the field of behavioral economics and related fields has contributed to a rich menu of insights and principles that can be engineered into global health programs to increase impact and reach. However, there is little research on the process of designing and testing interventions informed by behavioral insights. METHODS: In a study focused on increasing household participation in a Chagas disease vector control campaign in Arequipa, Peru, we applied Datta and Mullainathan's "behavioral design" approach to formulate and test specific interventions. In this Technical Advance article we describe the behavioral design approach in detail, including the Define, Diagnosis, Design, and Test phases. We also show how the interventions designed through the behavioral design process were adapted for a pragmatic randomized controlled field trial. RESULTS: The behavioral design framework provided a systematic methodology for defining the behavior of interest, diagnosing reasons for household reluctance or refusal to participate, designing interventions to address actionable bottlenecks, and then testing those interventions in a rigorous counterfactual context. Behavioral design offered us a broader range of strategies and approaches than are typically used in vector control campaigns. CONCLUSIONS: Careful attention to how behavioral design may affect internal and external validity of evaluations and the scalability of interventions is needed going forward. We recommend behavioral design as a useful complement to other intervention design and evaluation approaches in global health programs.

Associations of Statewide Legislative and Administrative Interventions With Vaccination Status Among Kindergartners in California.

Importance: California implemented 3 interventions to increase uptake of vaccines. In 2014, Assembly bill 2109 tightened requirements for obtaining a personal belief exemption. A 2015 campaign provided educational materials to school staff on the proper application of conditional admission for kindergartners who were not up to date on required vaccinations. In 2016, Senate bill 277 eliminated personal belief exemptions. Prior research has not evaluated these 3 interventions together with regard to the vaccination status of students. Objective: To assess the changes in the yearly rates of kindergartners who were not up to date on required vaccinations who were entering school during the period of the interventions, by focusing on geographic clustering and the potential contacts of these kindergartners. Design, Setting, and Participants: Observational study that used cross-sectional school-entry data from 2000-2017 to calculate the rates of kindergartners attending California schools who were not up to date on required vaccinations. Exposures: Assembly bill 2109, a conditional admission education program, and Senate bill 277. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the yearly rate of kindergartners without up-to-date vaccination status. The secondary outcomes were (1) the modified aggregation index, which was used to assess the potential within-school contacts among kindergartners without up-to-date vaccination status, (2) the number of geographic clusters of schools with rates for kindergartners without up-to-date vaccination status that were higher than the rates for schools located outside the cluster, and (3) the number of schools located inside the geographic clusters. Results: In California between 2000 and 2017, 9 323 315 children started attending kindergarten and 721 593 were not up to date on required vaccinations. Prior to the interventions, the statewide rate of kindergartners without up-to-date status for required vaccinations increased from 7.80% during 2000 to 9.84% during 2013 and then decreased after the interventions to 4.87% during 2017. The percentage chance for within-school contact among kindergartners without up-to-date vaccination status decreased from 26.02% during 2014 to 4.56% (95% CI, 4.21%-4.99%) during 2017. During 2012-2013, there were 124 clusters that contained 3026 schools with high rates of kindergartners without up-to-date vaccination status. During 2014-2015, there were 93 clusters that contained 2290 schools with high rates of kindergartners without up-to-date vaccination status. During 2016-2017, there were 110 clusters that contained 1613 (95% CI, 1565-1691) schools. Conclusions and Relevance: In California, statewide legislative and educational interventions were associated with a decrease in the yearly rates of kindergartners without up-to-date vaccination status. These interventions also were associated with reductions in the number of schools inside the clusters with high rates of kindergartners without up-to-date vaccination status and the potential for contact among these kindergartners.

Kindergarten Vaccination Status in California After Changes to Medical Exemption Policy.

This study evaluates changes in medical exemptions and geographic distribution of kindergarteners in California not up to date on vaccination after changes to state legislation.

Vaccine Hesitancy in Pediatric Primary Care Practices.

Understanding how pediatric practices handle parental vaccine hesitancy is important as it impacts the efficiency and effectiveness of pediatric practices. In total, 21 semi-structured interviews with pediatric practice staff within a primary care network were conducted between May 2012 and March 2013. Thematic analysis focused on the barriers and challenges of vaccine hesitancy and strategies to reduce the burden at the practice level. Barriers and challenges of vaccine hesitancy included time constraints, administrative challenges, financial challenges and strained patient-provider relationships. Strategies to minimize the burden of vaccine hesitancy included training for vaccine counseling, screening for vaccine hesitancy prior to immunization visits, tailored vaccine counseling, and primary care provider visits for follow-up immunization. Pediatric practices reported many challenges when caring for vaccine-hesitant families. Multiple strategies were identified to reduce the burden of vaccine hesitancy, which future studies should explore to determine how effective they are in increasing vaccine acceptance in pediatric practices.