The impact of socioeconomic status on changes in cancer prevention behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The impacts of socioeconomic status (SES) on COVID-19-related changes in cancer prevention behavior have not been thoroughly investigated. We conducted a cohort study to examine the effects of SES on changes in cancer prevention behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We invited adult participants from previous studies conducted at Ohio State University to participate in a study assessing the impact of COVID-19 on various behaviors. Post-COVID-19 cancer prevention behaviors, including physical activity, daily intake of fruits and vegetables, alcohol and tobacco consumption, and qualitative changes in post-COVID-19 behaviors relative to pre-COVID levels, were used to construct a prevention behavior change index that captures the adherence status and COVID-related changes in each behavior, with higher index scores indicating desirable changes in prevention behaviors. Participants were classified into low, middle, or high SES based on household income, education, and employment status. Adjusted regression models were used to examine the effects of SES on changes in cancer prevention behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: The study included 6,136 eligible participants. The average age was 57 years, 67% were women, 89% were non-Hispanic Whites, and 33% lived in non-metro counties. Relative to participants with high SES, those with low SES had a 24% [adjusted relative ratio, aRR = 0.76 (95%CI 0.72-0.80)], 11% [aRR = 0.89 (95%CI 0.86-0.92)], and 5% [aRR = 0.95 (95%CI 0.93-0.96)], lower desirable changes in prevention behaviors for physical activity, fruit and vegetable intake, and tobacco use, respectively. Low SES had a higher desirable change in alcohol consumption prevention behaviors, 16% [aRR = 1.16 (95%CI 1.13-1.19)] relative to high SES. The adjusted odds of an overall poor change in prevention behavior were adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.55 (95%CI 1.27 to 1.89) and aOR 1.40 (95%CI 1.19 to 1.66), respectively, higher for those with low and middle SES relative to those with high SES. CONCLUSION: The adverse impacts of COVID-19 on cancer prevention behaviors were seen most in those with lower SES. Public health efforts are currently needed to promote cancer prevention behaviors, especially amongst lower SES adults.

Promoting patient engagement in cancer genomics research programs: An environmental scan.

Background: A national priority in the United States is to promote patient engagement in cancer genomics research, especially among diverse and understudied populations. Several cancer genomics research programs have emerged to accomplish this priority, yet questions remain about the meaning and methods of patient engagement. This study explored how cancer genomics research programs define engagement and what strategies they use to engage patients across stages in the conduct of research. Methods: An environmental scan was conducted of cancer genomics research programs focused on patient engagement. Research programs were identified and characterized using materials identified from publicly available sources (e.g., websites), a targeted literature review, and interviews with key informants. Descriptive information about the programs and their definitions of engagement, were synthesized using thematic analysis. The engagement strategies were synthesized and mapped to different stages in the conduct of research, including recruitment, consent, data collection, sharing results, and retention. Results: Ten research programs were identified, examples of which include the Cancer Moonshot Biobank, the MyPART Network, NCI-CONNECT, and the Participant Engagement and Cancer Genome Sequencing (PE-CGS) Network. All programs aimed to include understudied or underrepresented populations. Based on publicly available information, four programs explicitly defined engagement. These definitions similarly characterized engagement as being interpersonal, reciprocal, and continuous. Five general strategies of engagement were identified across the programs: 1) digital (such as websites) and 2) non-digital communications (such as radio broadcasts, or printed brochures); 3) partnering with community organizations; 4) providing incentives; and 5) affiliating with non-academic medical centers. Digital communications were the only strategy used across all stages of the conduct of research. Programs tailored these strategies to their study goals, including overcoming barriers to research participation among diverse populations. Conclusion: Programs studying cancer genomics are deeply committed to increasing research participation among diverse populations through patient engagement. Yet, the field needs to reach a consensus on the meaning of patient engagement, develop a taxonomy of patient engagement measures in cancer genomics research, and identify optimal strategies to engage patients in cancer genomics. Addressing these needs could enable patient engagement to fulfill its potential and accelerate the pace of cancer genomic discoveries.

Developing the Storyline for an Advance Care Planning Video for Surgery Patients: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Engagement from Stakeholder Summit to State Fair.

BACKGROUND: Patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) methods and social learning theory (SLT) require intensive interaction between researchers and stakeholders. Advance care planning (ACP) is valuable before major surgery, but a systematic review found no extant perioperative ACP tools. Consequently, PCOR methods and SLT can inform the development of an ACP educational video for patients and families preparing for major surgery. OBJECTIVE: The objective is to develop and test acceptability of an ACP video storyline. DESIGN: The design is a stakeholder-guided development of the ACP video storyline. Design-thinking methods explored and prioritized stakeholder perspectives. Patients and family members evaluated storyboards containing the proposed storyline. SETTING/SUBJECTS: The study was conducted at hospital outpatient surgical clinics, in-person stakeholder summit, and the 2014 Maryland State Fair. MEASUREMENTS: Measurements are done through stakeholder engagement and deidentified survey. RESULTS: Stakeholders evaluated and prioritized evidence from an environmental scan. A surgeon, family member, and palliative care physician team iteratively developed a script featuring 12 core themes and worked with a medical graphic designer to translate the script into storyboards. For 10 days, 359 attendees of the 2014 Maryland State Fair evaluated the storyboards and 87% noted that they would be "very comfortable" or "comfortable" seeing the storyboard before major surgery, 89% considered the storyboards "very helpful" or "helpful," and 89% would "definitely recommend" or "recommend" this story to others preparing for major surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Through an iterative process utilizing diverse PCOR engagement methods and informed by SLT, storyboards were developed for an ACP video. Field testing revealed the storyline to be highly meaningful for surgery patients and family members.

An environmental scan of advance care planning decision AIDS for patients undergoing major surgery: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Patients who undergo major surgery are at risk for perioperative morbidity and mortality. It would be appropriate to initiate advance care planning with patients prior to surgery, but surgeons may experience difficulty initiating such conversations. Rather than focus on changing clinician behavior, advance care planning decision aids can be an innovative vehicle to motivate advance care planning among surgical patients and their families. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to describe a study protocol for conducting an environmental scan concerning advance care planning decision aids that may be relevant to patients undergoing high-risk surgery. METHODS/DESIGN: This study will gather information from written or verbal data sources that incorporate professional and lay perspectives: a systematic review, a grey literature review, key informant interviews, and patient and family engagement. It is envisioned that this study will generate three outcomes: a synthesis of current evidence, a summary of gaps in knowledge, and a taxonomy of existing advance care planning decision aids. DISCUSSION: This environmental scan will demonstrate principles of patient-centered outcomes research, and it will exemplify a pioneering approach for reviewing complex interventions. Anticipated limitations are that information will be gathered from a small sample of patients and families, and that potentially relevant information could also be missing from the environmental scan due to the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Outcomes from the environmental scan will inform future patient-centered research to develop and evaluate a new decision aid.