Use of Evidence-Based Interventions to Promote Healthy Weight, Nutrition, and Physical Activity in Community Health Improvement Plans from Large Local Health Departments.

We sought to identify evidence-based healthy weight, nutrition, and physical activity strategies related to obesity prevention in large local health department (LHD) Community Health Improvement Plans (CHIPs). We analyzed the content of the most recent, publicly available plans from 72 accredited LHDs serving a population of at least 500 000 people. We matched CHIP strategies to the County Health Rankings and Roadmaps' What Works for Health (WWFH) database of interventions. We identified 739 strategies across 55 plans, 62.5% of which matched a "WWFH intervention" rated for effectiveness on diet and exercise outcomes. Among the 20 most commonly identified WWFH interventions in CHIPs, 10 had the highest evidence for effectiveness while 4 were rated as likely to decrease health disparities according to WWFH. Future prioritization of strategies by health agencies could focus on strategies with the strongest evidence for promoting healthy weight, nutrition, and physical activity outcomes and reducing health disparities.

Assessing the effectiveness of training models for national scale-up of an evidence-based nutrition and physical activity intervention: a group randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a great need to identify implementation strategies to successfully scale-up public health interventions in order to achieve their intended population impact. The Out-of-school Nutrition and Physical Activity group-randomized trial previously demonstrated improvements in children's vigorous physical activity and the healthfulness of foods and beverages consumed. This implementation study aimed to assess the effects and costs of two training models to scale-up this evidence-based intervention. METHODS: A 3-arm group-randomized trial was conducted to compare effectiveness of in-person and online training models for scaling up the intervention compared to controls. One-third of sites were randomized to the in-person train-the-trainer model: local YMCA facilitators attended a training session and then conducted three learning collaborative meetings and technical assistance. One-third were assigned to the online model, consisting of self-paced monthly learning modules, videos, quizzes, and facilitated discussion boards. Remaining sites served as controls. Fifty-three afterschool sites from three YMCA Associations in different regions of the country completed baseline and follow-up observations using a validated tool of afterschool nutrition and physical activity practices. We used multivariable regression models, accounting for clustering of observations, to assess intervention effects on an aggregate afterschool practice primary outcome, and conducted secondary analyses of nine intervention goals (e.g. serving water). Cost data were collected to determine the resources to implement each training model. RESULTS: Changes in the primary outcome indicate that, on average, sites in the in-person arm achieved 0.44 additional goals compared to controls (95%CI 0.02, 0.86, p = 0.04). Increases in the number of additional goals achieved in sites in the online arm were not significantly greater than control sites (+ 0.28, 95% CI -0.18, 0.73, p = 0.24). Goal-specific improvements were observed for increasing water offered in the in-person arm and fruits and vegetables offered in the online arm. The cost per person trained was $678 for the in-person training model and $336 for the on-line training model. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot trial presents promising findings on implementation strategies for scale-up. It validated the in-person training model as an effective approach. The less expensive online training may be a useful option for geographically disbursed sites where in-person training is challenging. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Although this study does not report the results of a health care intervention on human subjects, it is a randomized trial and was therefore retrospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov on July 4, 2019 in accordance with the BMC guidelines to ensure the complete publication of all results (NCT04009304).

Obesity Prevention Interventions in US Public Schools: Are Schools Using Programs That Promote Weight Stigma?

INTRODUCTION: Despite substantial research on school-based obesity prevention programs, it is unclear how widely they are disseminated. It is also unknown whether schools use obesity programs that inadvertently promote weight stigma or disordered weight-control behaviors. METHODS: In spring 2016, we distributed an online survey about school wellness programming to a simple random sample of US public school administrators (N = 247 respondents; 10.3% response rate). We analyzed survey responses and conducted immersion/crystallization analysis of written open-ended responses. RESULTS: Slightly less than half (n = 117, 47.4%) of schools offered any obesity prevention program. Only 17 (6.9%) reported using a predeveloped program, and 7 (2.8%) reported using a program with evidence for effectiveness. Thirty-seven schools (15.0%) reported developing intervention programs that focused primarily on individual students' or staff members' weight rather than nutrition or physical activity; 28 schools (11.3% of overall) used staff weight-loss competitions. School administrators who reported implementing a program were more likely to describe having a program champion and adequate buy-in from staff, families, and students. Lack of funding, training, and time were widely reported as barriers to implementation. Few administrators used educational (n = 12, 10.3%) or scientific (n = 6, 5.1%) literature for wellness program decision making. CONCLUSION: Evidence-based obesity prevention programs appear to be rarely implemented in US schools. Schools may be implementing programs lacking evidence and programs that may unintentionally exacerbate student weight stigma by focusing on student weight rather than healthy habits. Public health practitioners and researchers should focus on improving support for schools to implement evidence-based programs.

Validity of a practitioner-administered observational tool to measure physical activity, nutrition, and screen time in school-age programs.

BACKGROUND: Nutrition and physical activity interventions have been effective in creating environmental changes in afterschool programs. However, accurate assessment can be time-consuming and expensive as initiatives are scaled up for optimal population impact. This study aims to determine the criterion validity of a simple, low-cost, practitioner-administered observational measure of afterschool physical activity, nutrition, and screen time practices and child behaviors. METHODS: Directors from 35 programs in three cities completed the Out-of-School Nutrition and Physical Activity Observational Practice Assessment Tool (OSNAP-OPAT) on five days. Trained observers recorded snacks served and obtained accelerometer data each day during the same week. Observations of physical activity participation and snack consumption were conducted on two days. Correlations were calculated to validate weekly average estimates from OSNAP-OPAT compared to criterion measures. Weekly criterion averages are based on 175 meals served, snack consumption of 528 children, and physical activity levels of 356 children. RESULTS: OSNAP-OPAT validly assessed serving water (r = 0.73), fruits and vegetables (r = 0.84), juice >4oz (r = 0.56), and grains (r = 0.60) at snack; sugary drinks (r = 0.70) and foods (r = 0.68) from outside the program; and children's water consumption (r = 0.56) (all p <0.05). Reports of physical activity time offered were correlated with accelerometer estimates (minutes of moderate and vigorous physical activity r = 0.59, p = 0.02; vigorous physical activity r = 0.63, p = 0.01). The reported proportion of children participating in moderate and vigorous physical activity was correlated with observations (r = 0.48, p = 0.03), as were reports of computer (r = 0.85) and TV/movie (r = 0.68) time compared to direct observations (both p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: OSNAP-OPAT can assist researchers and practitioners in validly assessing nutrition and physical activity environments and behaviors in afterschool settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Phase 1 of this measure validation was conducted during a study registered at clinicaltrials.gov NCT01396473.

Identifying sources of children's consumption of junk food in Boston after-school programs, April-May 2011.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about how the nutrition environment in after-school settings may affect children's dietary intake. We measured the nutritional quality of after-school snacks provided by programs participating in the National School Lunch Program or the Child and Adult Care Food Program and compared them with snacks brought from home or purchased elsewhere (nonprogram snacks). We quantified the effect of nonprogram snacks on the dietary intake of children who also received program-provided snacks during after-school time. Our study objective was to determine how different sources of snacks affect children's snack consumption in after-school settings. METHODS: We recorded snacks served to and brought in by 298 children in 18 after-school programs in Boston, Massachusetts, on 5 program days in April and May 2011. We measured children's snack consumption on 2 program days using a validated observation protocol. We then calculated within-child change-in-change models to estimate the effect of nonprogram snacks on children's dietary intake after school. RESULTS: Nonprogram snacks contained more sugary beverages and candy than program-provided snacks. Having a nonprogram snack was associated with significantly higher consumption of total calories (+114.7 kcal, P < .001), sugar-sweetened beverages (+0.5 oz, P = .01), desserts (+0.3 servings, P < .001), and foods with added sugars (+0.5 servings; P < .001) during the snack period. CONCLUSION: On days when children brought their own after-school snack, they consumed more salty and sugary foods and nearly twice as many calories than on days when they consumed only program-provided snacks. Policy strategies limiting nonprogram snacks or setting nutritional standards for them in after-school settings should be explored further as a way to promote child health.

Impact of implementation factors on children's water consumption in the Out-of-School Nutrition and Physical Activity group-randomized trial.

National data suggest that children are not consuming enough water. Experimental evidence has linked increased water consumption to obesity prevention, and the National AfterSchool Association has named serving water as ones of its standards for healthy eating and physical activity in out-of-school time settings. From fall 2010 to spring 2011, twenty Boston afterschool program sites participated in the Out-of-School Nutrition and Physical Activity (OSNAP) initiative, a group-randomized trial investigating nutrition and physical activity policies and practices that promote child health. Researchers used data from OSNAP to study the key factors that influence the implementation of practices that promote water intake. Aspects of the organizational capacity of the afterschool programs, characteristics of the providers, and the community context were hypothesized to impact changes in children's water consumption. This chapter demonstrates the effectiveness of an afterschool intervention on increases in children's water consumption. It also outlines the substantial influence that implementation factors can have on the effectiveness of an obesity prevention intervention, highlighting the importance of understanding how interventions are delivered in real-world settings.

Maximizing the impact of community outreach and engagement at US cancer centers.

In 2016, the National Cancer Institute-designated Cancer Centers funding opportunity was expanded to require Community Outreach and Engagement (COE), with explicit attention to cancer inequities, community engagement, and implementation science in the center's catchment area. Resource limitations constrain these activities, and we conducted a qualitative study to understand what COE leaders see as critical needs and supports to increase impact. In the spring of 2021, we interviewed leaders from 56 of 64 Cancer Centers with COE programs and analyzed the data using a reflexive, thematic approach. We identified six categories of needs: 1) centering community engagement among leadership and non-COE researchers; 2) increasing training on implementation science/practice; 3) improving integration into cross-center networks; 4) increasing funding for staffing and sustainment; 5) revising funder guidance and reporting; and 6) facilitating data utilization. COEs need long-term, systems-focused investments to engage communities, increase research translation, and advance health equity.

Identifying whole grain foods: a comparison of different approaches for selecting more healthful whole grain products.

OBJECTIVE: Eating whole grains (WG) is recommended for health, but multiple conflicting definitions exist for identifying whole grain (WG) products, limiting the ability of consumers and organizations to select such products. We investigated how five recommended WG criteria relate to healthfulness and price of grain products. DESIGN: We categorized grain products by different WG criteria including: the industry-sponsored Whole Grain stamp (WG-Stamp); WG as the first ingredient (WG-first); WG as the first ingredient without added sugars (WG-first-no-added-sugars); the word 'whole' before any grain in the ingredients ('whole'-anywhere); and a content of total carbohydrate to fibre of ≤10:1 (10:1-ratio). We investigated associations of each criterion with health-related characteristics including fibre, sugars, sodium, energy, trans-fats and price. SETTING: Two major grocery store chains. SUBJECTS: Five hundred and forty-five grain products. RESULTS: Each WG criterion identified products with higher fibre than products considered non-WG; the 10:1-ratio exhibited the largest differences (+3·15 g/serving, P < 0·0001). Products achieving the 10:1-ratio also contained lower sugar (−1·28 g/serving, P = 0·01), sodium (−15·4 mg/serving, P = 0·04) and likelihood of trans-fats (OR = 0·14, P < 0·0001), without energy differences. WG-first-no-added-sugars performed similarly, but identified many fewer products as WG and also not a lower likelihood of containing trans-fats. The WG-Stamp, WG-first and 'whole'-anywhere criteria identified products with a lower likelihood of trans-fats, but also significantly more sugars and energy (P < 0·05 each). Products meeting the WG-Stamp or 10:1-ratio criterion were more expensive than products that did not (+$US 0·04/serving, P = 0·009 and +$US 0·05/serving, P = 0·003, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Among proposed WG criteria, the 10:1-ratio identified the most healthful WG products. Other criteria performed less well, including the industry-supported WG-Stamp which identified products with higher fibre and lower trans-fats, but also higher sugars and energy. These findings inform efforts by consumers, organizations and policy makers to identify healthful WG products.

De-implementing public health policies: a qualitative study of the process of implementing and then removing body mass index (BMI) report cards in Massachusetts public schools.

BACKGROUND: This study explored reasons for the adoption of a policy to distribute report cards to parents about children's weight status ("BMI report cards") in Massachusetts (MA) public schools in 2009 and the contextual factors influencing the policy removal in 2013. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured, qualitative interviews with 15 key decision-makers and practitioners involved with implementing and de-implementing the MA BMI report card policy. We analyzed interview data using a thematic analytic approach guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) 2.0. RESULTS: Primary themes were that (1) factors other than scientific evidence mattered more for policy adoption, (2) societal pressure spurred policy adoption, (3) problems with the policy design contributed to inconsistent implementation and dissatisfaction, and (4) media coverage, societal pressure, and organizational politics and pressure largely prompted de-implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Numerous factors contributed to the de-implementation of the policy. An orderly process for the de-implementation of a policy in public health practice that manages drivers of de-implementation may not yet exist. Public health research should further focus on how to de-implement policy interventions when evidence is lacking or there is potential for harm.

Implementation of evidence-based primary cancer prevention interventions in MA community health centers: an explanatory sequential mixed methods study.

Background More than half of cancers could be prevented by employing evidence-based interventions (EBIs), including prevention interventions targeting nutrition, physical activity, and tobacco. Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) are the primary source of patient care for over 30 million Americans - making them an optimal setting for ensuring evidence-based prevention that advances health equity. The aims of this study are to: 1) determine the degree to which primary cancer prevention EBIs are being implemented within Massachusetts FQHCs and 2) describe how these EBIs are implemented internally and via community partnerships. Methods We used an explanatory sequential mixed methods design to assess the implementation of cancer prevention EBIs. First, we used quantitative surveys of FQHC staff to determine the frequency of EBI implementation. We followed up with qualitative one-on-one interviews among a sample of staff to understand how the EBIs selected on the survey were implemented. Exploration of contextual influences on implementation and use of partnerships was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Quantitative data were summarized descriptively, and qualitative analyses used reflexive, thematic approaches, beginning deductively with codes from CFIR, then inductively coding additional categories. Results All FQHCs indicated they offered clinic-based tobacco interventions, such as clinician-delivered screening practices and prescription of tobacco cessation medications. Quitline interventions and some diet/physical activity EBIs were available at all FQHCs, but staff perceptions of penetration were low. Only 38% of FQHCs offered group tobacco cessation counseling and 63% referred patients to mobile phone-based cessation interventions. We found multilevel factors influenced implementation across intervention types - including the complexity of intervention trainings, available time and staffing, motivation of clinicians, funding, and external policies and incentives. While partnerships were described as valuable, only one FQHC reported using clinical-community linkages for primary cancer prevention EBIs. Conclusions Adoption of primary prevention EBIs in Massachusetts FQHCs is relatively high, but stable staffing and funding are required to successfully reach all eligible patients. FQHC staff are enthusiastic about the potential of community partnerships to foster improved implementation - providing training and support to build these relationships will be key to fulfilling that promise.

Implementation of evidence-based primary cancer prevention interventions in MA community health centers: an explanatory sequential mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: More than half of cancers could be prevented by employing evidence-based interventions (EBIs), including prevention interventions targeting nutrition, physical activity, and tobacco. Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) are the primary source of patient care for over 30 million Americans - making them an optimal setting for ensuring evidence-based prevention that advances health equity. The aims of this study are to (1) determine the degree to which primary cancer prevention EBIs are being implemented within Massachusetts FQHCs and (2) describe how these EBIs are implemented internally and via community partnerships. METHODS: We used an explanatory sequential mixed methods design to assess the implementation of cancer prevention EBIs. First, we collected 34 quantitative surveys from staff at 16 FQHCs across Massachusetts to determine the frequency of EBI implementation. We followed up with 12 qualitative one-on-one interviews among a sample of staff to understand how the EBIs selected on the survey were implemented. Exploration of contextual influences on implementation and use of partnerships was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Quantitative data were summarized descriptively, and qualitative analyses used reflexive, thematic approaches, beginning deductively with codes from CFIR, then inductively coding additional categories. RESULTS: All FQHCs indicated they offered clinic-based tobacco interventions, such as clinician-delivered screening practices and prescription of tobacco cessation medications. Quitline interventions and some diet/physical activity EBIs were available at all FQHCs, but staff perceptions of penetration were low. Only 38% of FQHCs offered group tobacco cessation counseling and 63% referred patients to mobile phone-based cessation interventions. We found multilevel factors influenced implementation across intervention types - including the complexity of intervention trainings, available time and staffing, motivation of clinicians, funding, and external policies and incentives. While partnerships were described as valuable, only one FQHC reported using clinical-community linkages for primary cancer prevention EBIs. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of primary prevention EBIs in Massachusetts FQHCs is relatively high, but stable staffing and funding are required to successfully reach all eligible patients. FQHC staff are enthusiastic about the potential of community partnerships to foster improved implementation-providing training and support to build these relationships will be key to fulfilling that promise.

Data sharing in the context of community-engaged research partnerships.

Over the past 20 years, the National Institutes for Health (NIH) has implemented several policies designed to improve sharing of research data, such as the NIH public access policy for publications, NIH genomic data sharing policy, and National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Moonshot public access and data sharing policy. In January 2023, a new NIH data sharing policy has gone into effect, requiring researchers to submit a Data Management and Sharing Plan in proposals for NIH funding (NIH. Supplemental information to the, 2020b; NIH. Final policy for data, 2020a). These policies are based on the idea that sharing data is a key component of the scientific method, as it enables the creation of larger data repositories that can lead to research questions that may not be possible in individual studies (Alter and Gonzalez, 2018; Jwa and Poldrack, 2022), allows enhanced collaboration, and maximizes the federal investment in research. Important questions that we must consider as data sharing is expanded are to whom do benefits of data sharing accrue and to whom do benefits not accrue? In an era of growing efforts to engage diverse communities in research, we must consider the impact of data sharing for all research participants and the communities that they represent. We examine the issue of data sharing through a community-engaged research lens, informed by a long-standing partnership between community-engaged researchers and a key community health organization (Kruse et al., 2022). We contend that without effective community engagement and rich contextual knowledge, biases resulting from data sharing can remain unchecked. We provide several recommendations that would allow better community engagement related to data sharing to ensure both community and researcher understanding of the issues involved and move toward shared benefits. By identifying good models for evaluating the impact of data sharing on communities that contribute data, and then using those models systematically, we will advance the consideration of the community perspective and increase the likelihood of benefits for all.

Embedding community-engaged research principles in implementation science: The implementation science center for cancer control equity.

Gaps in the implementation of effective interventions impact nearly all cancer prevention and control strategies in the US including Massachusetts. To close these implementation gaps, evidence-based interventions must be rapidly and equitably implemented in settings serving racially, ethnically, socioeconomically, and geographically diverse populations. This paper provides a brief overview of The Implementation Science Center for Cancer Control Equity (ISCCCE) and describes how we have operationalized our commitment to a robust community-engaged center that aims to close these gaps. We describe how ISCCCE is organized and how the principles of community-engaged research are embedded across the center. Principles of community engagement have been operationalized across all components of ISCCCE. We have intentionally integrated these principles throughout all structures and processes and have developed evaluation strategies to assess whether the quality of our partnerships reflects the principles. ISCCCE is a comprehensive community-engaged infrastructure for studying efficient, pragmatic, and equity-focused implementation and adaptation strategies for cancer prevention in historically and currently disadvantaged communities with built-in methods to evaluate the quality of community engagement. This engaged research center is designed to maximize the impact and relevance of implementation research on cancer control in community health centers.

Price and healthfulness of snacks in 32 YMCA after-school programs in 4 US metropolitan areas, 2006-2008.

INTRODUCTION: A common perception is that healthful foods are more expensive than less healthful foods. We assessed the cost of beverages and foods served at YMCA after-school programs, determined whether healthful snacks were more expensive, and identified inexpensive, healthful options. METHODS: We collected daily snack menus from 32 YMCAs nationwide from 2006 to 2008 and derived prices of beverages and foods from the US Department of Agriculture price database. Multiple linear regression was used to assess associations of healthful snacks and of beverage and food groups with price (n = 1,294 snack-days). We identified repeatedly served healthful snacks consistent with Child and Adult Care Food Program guidelines and reimbursement rate ($0.74/snack). RESULTS: On average, healthful snacks were approximately 50% more expensive than less healthful snacks ($0.26/snack; SE, 0.08; P = .003). Compared to water, 100% juice significantly increased average snack price, after controlling for other variables in the model. Similarly, compared to refined grains with trans fats, refined grains without trans fat significantly increased snack price, as did fruit and canned or frozen vegetables. Fresh vegetables (mostly carrots or celery) or whole grains did not alter price. Twenty-two repeatedly served snacks met nutrition guidelines and the reimbursement rate. CONCLUSION: In this sample of after-school programs, healthful snacks were typically more expensive than less healthful options; however, we identified many healthful snacks served at or below the price of less healthful options. Substituting tap water for 100% juice yielded price savings that could be used toward purchasing more healthful foods (eg, an apple). Our findings have practical implications for selecting snacks that meet health and reimbursement guidelines.

Enabling community input to improve equity in and access to translational research: The Community Coalition for Equity in Research.

Background: The COVID vaccine trials illustrated the critical need for the development of mechanisms to serve as a bridge between least advantaged communities and researchers. Such mechanisms would increase the number of studies that are designed with community needs and interests in mind, in ways that will close gaps rather than widen them. This paper reports on the creation of the Community Coalition for Equity in Research, a community-driven resource designed to build community capacity to provide researchers with credible and actionable input on study design and implementation and increase researchers' understanding of factors that influence community support of research. Methods and Results: We provide a description of the Coalition's structure and process and an evaluation of its first year of operation. Researchers rated their experience very positively and reported that the Coalition's review will improve their research. Coalition members reported high levels of satisfaction with their participation and the processes set up for them to engage with researchers. Members also largely agreed that their participation has value for their community, and that it has increased their interest in research and the likelihood that they would recommend research participation to others. Conclusions: The Coalition represents a model for increasing two-way engagement between researchers and the larger community. We are optimistic that the Coalition will continue to develop and grow into a vibrant entity that will bring value to both investigators and our local communities and will increase the consideration of equity as a foundational principle in all translational research.

The Prevalence of Dissemination and Implementation Research and Training Grants at National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers.

Background: Dissemination and implementation (D&I) research is a key factor in the uptake and use of evidence-based cancer control interventions. National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers are ideal settings in which to further D&I knowledge. The purpose of this study was to summarize the characteristics of NCI-funded D&I science grants in the nation's cancer centers to understand the nature, extent, and opportunity for this key type of translational work. Methods: We used the National Institutes of Health Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tool to identify active NCI-funded grants in D&I science at NCI clinical cancer centers (n = 13) and comprehensive cancer centers (n = 51) as well as their academic affiliates. Active projects were eligible for inclusion if they 1) were awarded directly to an NCI cancer center or an academic or research affiliate, and 2) identified D&I content in the abstract. Portfolio data were collected in February 2021. Results: We identified 104 active NCI-funded D&I research or training grants across the 64 cancer centers; 57.8% of cancer centers had at least 1 NCI-funded D&I grant. Most awards (71.1%) were for research grants. Training grants constituted 29.1% of D&I-focused grants. Overall, 50.0% of grants (n = 52) concentrated on specific cancers. Almost two-thirds of grants (n = 68, 65.4%) had a stated health equity focus. Conclusions: More than one-half of NCI-designated cancer centers have active funding in D&I science, reflecting a substantial investment by NCI. There remains considerable room for further development, which would further support NCI's translational mission.

Evaluation of efforts to reduce sodium and ensure access to healthier beverages in four healthcare settings in Massachusetts, US 2016-2018.

Considerable science links diets lower in sodium and sugar-sweetened beverage consumption with better health outcomes. This study describes the evaluation process and outcomes of intervention strategies to reduce sodium in foods and sugar in beverages as part of a collaborative partnership between state public health, academic, community, and healthcare partners in Massachusetts, US. This quasi-experimental, pre-post study used nutrient data linked to observations of foods and beverages available in cafeterias and vending machines in four community healthcare settings to inform intervention strategies and evaluate changes. At post-assessment, beverages with no or very low sugar were significantly more prevalent in vending machines (OR = 1.93, p < 0.001) and cafeterias (OR = 1.83, p = 0.01) and low-sodium packaged foods were significantly more prevalent in cafeterias (OR = 2.45, p < 0.001), but not vending machines. These types of partnerships and tailored feedback and technical assistance strategies may support healthier food and beverage options within healthcare settings that serve patients, their families, and employees each day.

"It's Not the Stereotypical 80s Movie Bullying": A Qualitative Study on the High School Environment, Body Image, and Weight Stigma.

BACKGROUND: Schools are crucial for preventing negative health outcomes in youth and are an ideal setting to address weight stigma and poor body image. The current study sought to examine and describe the nature of weight stigma and body image in adolescents, ascertain aspects of the school environment that affect body image, and identify recommendations for schools. METHODS: We conducted 24 semi-structured interviews with students at 2 high schools in 2020. Qualitative data were analyzed using inductive coding and an immersion/crystallization approach. RESULTS: Students did not report weight discrimination or harmful body image messaging from teachers or administrators. Physical education (PE) class and dress codes were 2 instances where covert weight stigma appeared. The most common forms of peer weight stigma reported were weight-based teasing and self-directed appearance critiques. Students recommended that schools eliminate dress codes, diversify PE activities, address body image issues in school, and be cognizant of teasing within friend groups. CONCLUSIONS: Weight stigma presents itself in unique ways in high school settings. Schools can play a role in reducing experiences of weight stigma and negative body image. Weight-related teasing within friend groups was common and may not be captured in traditional assessments of bullying. More nuanced survey instruments may be needed.

Addressing COVID-19 Testing Inequities Among Underserved Populations in Massachusetts: A Rapid Qualitative Exploration of Health Center Staff, Partner, and Resident Perceptions.

Introduction: Access to COVID-19 testing has been inequitable and misaligned with community need. However, community health centers have played a critical role in addressing the COVID-19 testing needs of historically disadvantaged communities. The aim of this paper is to explore the perceptions of COVID-19 testing barriers in six Massachusetts communities that are predominantly low income and describe how these findings were used to build tailored clinical-community strategies to addressing testing inequities. Methods: Between November 2020 and February 2021, we conducted 84 semi-structured qualitative interviews with 107 community health center staff, community partners, and residents. Resident interviews were conducted in English, Spanish, Vietnamese, and Arabic. We used a 2-phase framework analysis to analyze the data, including deductive coding to facilitate rapid analysis for action and an in-depth thematic analysis applying the Social Ecological Model. Results: Through the rapid needs assessment, we developed cross-site suggestions to improve testing implementation and communications, as well as community-specific recommendations (e.g., locations for mobile testing sites and local communication channels). Upstream barriers identified in the thematic analysis included accessibility of state-run testing sites, weak social safety nets, and lack of testing supplies and staffing that contributed to long wait times. These factors hindered residents' abilities to get tested, which was further exacerbated by individual fears surrounding the testing process and limited knowledge on testing availability. Discussion: Our rapid, qualitative approach created the foundation for implementing strategies that reached underserved populations at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in winter 2021. We explored perceptions of testing barriers and created actionable summaries within 1-2 months of data collection. Partnering community health centers in Massachusetts were able to use these data to respond to the local needs of each community. This study underscores the substantial impact of upstream, structural disparities on the individual experience of COVID-19 and demonstrates the utility of shifting from a typical years' long research translation process to a rapid approach of using data for action.

Implementing expanded COVID-19 testing in Massachusetts community health centers through community partnerships: Protocol for an interrupted time series and stepped wedge study design.

BACKGROUND: Community Health Centers (CHCs) are a critical source of care for low-income and non-privately insured populations. During the pandemic, CHCs have leveraged their infrastructure and role as a trusted source of care to engage the communities they serve in COVID-19 testing. METHODS: To directly address the impact that COVID-19 has had on historically marginalized populations in Massachusetts, we designed a study of community-engaged COVID-19 testing expansion: (1) leveraging existing partnerships to accelerate COVID-19 testing and rapidly disseminate effective implementation strategies; (2) incorporating efforts to address key barriers to testing participation in communities at increased risk for COVID-19; (3) further developing partnerships between communities and CHCs to address testing access and disparities; (4) grounding the study in the development of a shared ethical framework for advancing equity in situations of scarcity; and (5) developing mechanisms for communication and science translation to support community outreach. We use a controlled interrupted time series design, comparing number of COVID-19 tests overall and among people identified as members of high-risk groups served by intervention CHCs compared with six matched control CHCs in Massachusetts, followed by a stepped wedge design to pilot test strategies for tailored outreach by CHCs. CONCLUSIONS: Here, we describe a community-partnered strategy to accelerate COVID-19 testing in historically marginalized populations that provides ongoing resources to CHCs for addressing testing needs in their communities. The study aligns with principles of community-engaged research including shared leadership, adequate resources for community partners, and the flexibility to respond to changing needs over time.