RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Given high rates of cancer mortality in Native communities, we examined how urban American Indian and Alaska Native elders talk about colorectal cancer (CRC) and CRC screening. METHODS: We conducted seven focus groups with a total of 46 participants in two urban clinics in the Pacific Northwest to assess participant awareness, perceptions, and concerns about CRC and CRC screening. Using speech codes theory, we identified norms that govern when and how to talk about CRC in this population. RESULTS: Our analyses revealed that male participants often avoided screening because they perceived it as emasculating, whereas women often avoided screening because of embarrassment and past trauma resulting from sexual abuse. Both men and women used humor to mitigate the threatening nature of discussions about CRC and CRC screening. CONCLUSIONS: We offer our analytic results to assist others in developing culturally appropriate interventions to promote CRC screening among American Indians and Alaska Natives.
Assuntos
Indígena Americano ou Nativo do Alasca , Neoplasias Colorretais , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Senso de Humor e Humor como Assunto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Indígena Americano ou Nativo do Alasca/psicologia , Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorretais/psicologia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/psicologia , Grupos Focais , População UrbanaRESUMO
In response to community concerns, we used the Tribal Participatory Research framework in collaboration with 5 American-Indian communities in Washington, Idaho, and Montana to identify the appropriate criteria for aggregating health data on small tribes. Across tribal sites, 10 key informant interviews and 10 focus groups (n = 39) were conducted between July 2012 and April 2013. Using thematic analysis of focus group content, we identified 5 guiding criteria for aggregating tribal health data: geographic proximity, community type, environmental exposures, access to resources and services, and economic development. Preliminary findings were presented to focus group participants for validation at each site, and a culminating workshop with representatives from all 5 tribes verified our final results. Using this approach requires critical assessment of research questions and study designs by investigators and tribal leaders to determine when aggregation or stratification is appropriate and how to group data to yield robust results relevant to local concerns. At project inception, tribal leaders should be consulted regarding the validity of proposed groupings. After regular project updates, they should be consulted again to confirm that findings are appropriately contextualized for dissemination.