Equity in Cancer and Chronic Disease Prevention through a Multi-Pronged Network Intervention: Works-in-Progress.

The increasing rates of cancer incidence are disproportionately borne by populations that are ineligible for screening and historically marginalized populations. To address this need, our community-centered model seeks to catalyze the widespread diffusion of evidence-based information and resources (e.g., community-based organizations, federally qualified health centers) to reduce the risks of cancer, chronic disease, and other conditions. In this study, we tested whether improving personal health literacy (i.e., confidence in seeking information) and enabling successful information transfer (i.e., intention to share the specific information learned through the program) among community residents could contribute to greater diffusion intention (i.e., number of network members with whom residents plan to share information and resources). The current study used post-intervention surveys, which were administered to Chicago residents who were 18 years or older and had participated in the program. Among the 1499 diverse Chicago residents, improved personal health literacy was associated with greater diffusion intention (ORs = 2.00-2.68, 95% CI [1.27-4.39], p ≤ 0.003). Successful information transfer was associated with greater diffusion, especially for cancer and other chronic disease risk reductions (ORs = 3.43-3.73, 95% CI [1.95-6.68], p < 0.001). The findings highlight the potential gains for health equity through sustainable, scalable, multi-sectoral partnerships.

Introducing SoNHR-Reporting guidelines for Social Networks In Health Research.

OBJECTIVE: The overall goal of this work is to produce a set of recommendations (SoNHR-Social Networks in Health Research) that will improve the reporting and dissemination of social network concepts, methods, data, and analytic results within health sciences research. METHODS: This study used a modified-Delphi approach for recommendation development consistent with best practices suggested by the EQUATOR health sciences reporting guidelines network. An initial set of 28 reporting recommendations was developed by the author team. A group of 67 (of 147 surveyed) experienced network and health scientists participated in an online feedback survey. They rated the clarity and importance of the individual recommendations, and provided qualitative feedback on the coverage, usability, and dissemination opportunities of the full set of recommendations. After examining the feedback, a final set of 18 recommendations was produced. RESULTS: The final SoNHR reporting guidelines are comprised of 18 recommendations organized within five domains: conceptualization (how study research questions are linked to network conceptions or theories), operationalization (how network science portions of the study are defined and operationalized), data collection & management (how network data are collected and managed), analyses & results (how network results are analyzed, visualized, and reported), and ethics & equity (how network-specific human subjects, equity, and social justice concerns are reported). We also present a set of exemplar published network studies which can be helpful for seeing how to apply the SoNHR recommendations in research papers. Finally, we discuss how different audiences can use these reporting guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: These are the first set of formal reporting recommendations of network methods in the health sciences. Consistent with EQUATOR goals, these network reporting recommendations may in time improve the quality, consistency, and replicability of network science across a wide variety of important health research areas.

Operationalizing patient-centered cancer care: A systematic review and synthesis of the qualitative literature on cancer patients' needs, values, and preferences.

OBJECTIVE: Efficiently addressing patient priorities and concerns remains a challenge in oncology. Systematic operationalization of patient-centered care (PCC) can support improved assessment and practice of PCC in this unique care setting. This review aimed to synthesize the qualitative empirical literature exploring the National Academy of Medicine (NAM)'s PCC constructs of values, needs, and preferences among patients' during their cancer treatment experiences. METHODS: A systematic review of qualitative studies published between 2002 and 2018 addressing adult patient values, needs, and preferences during cancer treatment was conducted. Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and SCOPUS databases were searched on September 10, 2018. Methodological rigor was assessed using a modified version of the Evaluation Tool for Qualitative Studies. Included study findings were analyzed using line-by-line coding; and the emergent themes were compared to the National Academy of Medicine (NAM)'s PCC dimensions. RESULTS: Twenty-nine primary studies were included in the synthesis. Descriptive themes for values (autonomy, being involved, family, hope, normality, and sincerity), needs (care coordination, information, privacy, support of physical well-being, emotional support (family/friends, peer, provider), and self-support), and preferences (care coordination, decision-making, information delivery, source of social support, and treatment) were identified. "Cancer care context" emerged as an important domain in which these constructs are operationalized. This thematic framework outlines PCC attributes that oncology care stakeholders can evaluate to improve patient experiences. CONCLUSIONS: These findings build on previous PCC research and may contribute to the systematic assessment of patient priorities and the improvement of oncology care quality from the patient perspective.

Turning the tide: The shift to climate change mitigation.

In the United States, a growing number of companies are taking progressive steps to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Already, more than half of all Fortune 100 companies have announced clean energy targets, signaling climate change risk reduction is becoming a top priority. Climate change is not without controversy, yet it is a real business concern among corporate executives and health care leaders alike. From fears stoked by devastating wildfires in California to a rising tide of financial hardships due to hurricane flooding in the Southeast, it seems no region is immune to Mother Nature's growing cost to business. This report addresses how health care leaders are approaching climate change initiatives across the country by examining research articles, key opinion leaders, and health care organizations on the bleeding edge of climate change reduction. In an already complex industry, health care leaders have a special responsibility to do no harm to the patients they serve and a financial responsibility to drive monetary returns for invested stakeholders. Significant cost savings, long-term risk reduction, and improved population health are a few of the benefits health care organizations around the country can gain from building a sound climate change mitigation strategy.