Community scientist program provides bi-directional communication and co-learning between researchers and community members.

Community involvement in research is key to translating science into practice, and new approaches to engaging community members in research design and implementation are needed. The Community Scientist Program, established at the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston in 2018 and expanded to two other Texas institutions in 2021, provides researchers with rapid feedback from community members on study feasibility and design, cultural appropriateness, participant recruitment, and research implementation. This paper aims to describe the Community Scientist Program and assess Community Scientists' and researchers' satisfaction with the program. We present the analysis of the data collected from 116 Community Scientists and 64 researchers who attended 100 feedback sessions, across three regions of Texas including Northeast Texas, Houston, and Rio Grande Valley between June 2018 and December 2022. Community Scientists stated that the feedback sessions increased their knowledge and changed their perception of research. All researchers (100%) were satisfied with the feedback and reported that it influenced their current and future research methods. Our evaluation demonstrates that the key features of the Community Scientist Program such as follow-up evaluations, effective bi-directional communication, and fair compensation transform how research is conducted and contribute to reducing health disparities.

Promoting Cancer Health Equity: A Qualitative Study of Mentee and Mentor Perspectives of a Training Program for Underrepresented Scholars in Cancer Health Disparities.

Racial and ethnic minorities, and women, experience stark disparities in cancer risk behaviors and mortality rates, yet often remain underrepresented in scientific research positions. We conducted an exploratory, qualitative study to examine the value of mentored research experience as part of an NCI-funded research training program designed to increase the representation of minority and women scientists in cancer disparities research. Using individual interviews, we explored 16 mentees' and 7 mentors' program experiences and perspectives to identify the most effective strategies to build strong mentoring relationships that could ultimately contribute to increased representation in health disparities research. Two expert analysts employed thematic analysis and constant comparison to code, categorize, and summarize the data into themes. Mentees and mentors shared five themes identifying contributions to program success: conditions for building successful mentoring relationships; role of mentor/mentee similarities or differences and their impact on effective collaboration; program elements that fostered developing knowledge, skills, and confidence; program supportive opportunities; and challenges and benefits of in-person vs. virtual program delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings contribute to improving the quality of training programs for historically excluded trainees to advance their cancer disparities research careers and offer a successful model that can guide similar programs.

"UHAND"-A National Cancer Institute Funded Partnership to Advance Cancer Health Equity through Scholar Training.

Black and Hispanic adults are disproportionately affected by cancer incidence and mortality, and experience disparities in cancer relative to their White counterparts in the US. These groups, including women, are underrepresented among scientists in the fields of cancer, cancer disparities, and cancer care. The "UHAND" Program is a partnership between institutions (University of Houston and The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center) aiming to build the capacity of underrepresented and racial/ethnic minority student "scholars" to conduct research on eliminating cancer inequities by reducing social and physical risk factors among at-risk groups. Here, we examine the outcomes of the UHAND Program's first scholar cohort (n = 1 postdoctoral fellow, n = 3 doctoral scholars, n = 6 undergraduate scholars). Data collection included baseline, mid-program, and exit surveys; program records; and monthly scholar achievement queries. From baseline to exit, scholars significantly increased their research self-efficacy (p = 0.0293). Scholars largely met goals for academic products, achieving a combined total of 65 peer-reviewed presentations and nine empirical publications. Eight scholars completed the 2-year program; one undergraduate scholar received her degree early and the postdoctoral fellow accepted a tenure-track position at another university following one year of training. Scholars highly rated UHAND's programming and their mentors' competencies in training scholars for research careers. Additionally, we discuss lessons learned that may inform future training programs.

Use of Complementary Health Practices in a Church-Based African American Cohort.

Objectives: Few studies have examined the use of complementary health practices (e.g., mind/body practices and dietary supplements) among African Americans, particularly those who identify as being spiritual and/or religious. Furthermore, research on the health and health behavior profiles of such complementary health users is scant. The purpose of this study was to explore the use of complementary health practices and their lifestyle and health indicator correlates in a large, church-based African American population. Design: Cross-sectional analysis of 1467 African American adults drawn from a church-based cohort study. Participants reported use of complementary health practices, lifestyle behaviors (e.g., diet and smoking status), and health indicators (e.g., physical health and medical problems). Multiple logistic regressions were conducted to examine associations between lifestyle variables, health indicators, and use of complementary health practices. Outcome measures: Outcomes included prevalence of mind/body practices (e.g., meditation and Reiki) and dietary supplements (multivitamins) along with health indicator and lifestyle correlates of use. Results: Use of complementary health practices was high; 40% reported using any mind/body practice and 50% reported using dietary supplements. Poorer physical health was associated with use of mind/body practices, while likelihood of meeting fruit and vegetable recommendations was significantly associated with dietary supplement use. Conclusions: Complementary health practices were used heavily in a church-based sample of African American adults. Poorer physical health was associated with use of complementary health practices, yet users also displayed health conscious behaviors. Given the high engagement in complementary health practices, it may be prudent to consider adapting complementary health approaches for use in wellness interventions targeting African Americans in faith-based settings.