Participatory Action Research to Explore the Role of Structural Violence on Marginalized and Racialized Young Parents.

Structural inequities influence young parents' access to health care, housing, transportation, social support, education, and income. The current study adds to the extant literature by providing data directly obtained in collaboration with young parents to understand how structural violence affects the health and well-being of their families, ultimately resulting in community-driven policy recommendations developed in collaboration with the state health department. We engaged a diverse sample of young people-considered as community researchers in the project-including Black, Latinx, and/or LGBTQ+ pregnant and parenting young parents in a participatory action research (PAR) project in the spring of 2022 to explore their health and material needs while living in Springfield, Massachusetts. Together with young parents, we used participatory arts-based methods to conduct community and identity building, define research questions and photo prompts, conduct data collection (photos), engage in group thematic analysis, and take action at the state policy level. We also conducted individual semi-structured life-history interviews with the young parents. Participatory community-led findings indicate an urgent need for systemic change to increase access to safe and affordable housing; living-wage jobs; safe, high-quality, and affordable child care; and to bolster social support and disabilities services for young parents and their families. This participatory study funded by a state health department demonstrates that participatory community-driven data can have the power to mobilize community members and policy makers for social change if prioritized at the state and local levels. Additional practice-based implications include prioritizing participatory mentorship programs intended to aid young parents in navigating the complex systems that are vital to their survival.

A qualitative study of big data and the opioid epidemic: recommendations for data governance.

BACKGROUND: The opioid epidemic has enabled rapid and unsurpassed use of big data on people with opioid use disorder to design initiatives to battle the public health crisis, generally without adequate input from impacted communities. Efforts informed by big data are saving lives, yielding significant benefits. Uses of big data may also undermine public trust in government and cause other unintended harms. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to identify concerns and recommendations regarding how to use big data on opioid use in ethical ways. METHODS: We conducted focus groups and interviews in 2019 with 39 big data stakeholders (gatekeepers, researchers, patient advocates) who had interest in or knowledge of the Public Health Data Warehouse maintained by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. RESULTS: Concerns regarding big data on opioid use are rooted in potential privacy infringements due to linkage of previously distinct data systems, increased profiling and surveillance capabilities, limitless lifespan, and lack of explicit informed consent. Also problematic is the inability of affected groups to control how big data are used, the potential of big data to increase stigmatization and discrimination of those affected despite data anonymization, and uses that ignore or perpetuate biases. Participants support big data processes that protect and respect patients and society, ensure justice, and foster patient and public trust in public institutions. Recommendations for ethical big data governance offer ways to narrow the big data divide (e.g., prioritize health equity, set off-limits topics/methods, recognize blind spots), enact shared data governance (e.g., establish community advisory boards), cultivate public trust and earn social license for big data uses (e.g., institute safeguards and other stewardship responsibilities, engage the public, communicate the greater good), and refocus ethical approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Using big data to address the opioid epidemic poses ethical concerns which, if unaddressed, may undermine its benefits. Findings can inform guidelines on how to conduct ethical big data governance and in ways that protect and respect patients and society, ensure justice, and foster patient and public trust in public institutions.