Community Health Builders Program: A Collaborative Model Connecting National Health Thought Leaders With Community-Level Champions.

Make Well Known Foundation (MWKF), a nonprofit organization focused on supporting the health of minoritized and underserved populations, piloted the Community Health Builders (CHB) program. This connected MKWF Steering Committee members-national thought leaders in health-with leaders of underserved populations in Greensboro, NC, with the goal of translating research into practice. Steering Committee members provided education, instruction, and resources to community leaders that could then be transferred to area residents to cultivate better health. A roundtable meeting was first organized to allow community leaders to share insights into the highest priority needs of Greensboro's Black residents. Four topics resulted that became the focus of the training modules (called "accelerator forums") that formed the core of the CHB program. Each accelerator forum was led by Steering Committee members and local-level topic experts to educate and share resources with community leaders. The program concluded with a local health and resource fair, which exposed Greensboro residents to the resources shared during CHB program trainings. Overall, the CHB program pilot demonstrated success in the collaborative engagement between national- and community-level leaders based on measures of increased knowledge and self-efficacy in supporting Greensboro residents in the four accelerator forum topics. In a final debrief session, CHB participants shared their perspective that the progress achieved in the community needed to be sustained through continued national- and community-level collaboration and ongoing community training. This key insight and the need for sustained engagement will be incorporated into all future programs.

Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: A qualitative approach to exploring the decision making process.

The proportion of women with unilateral breast cancer and no familial or genetic risk factors who elect contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) has grown dramatically, even in the absence of clear data demonstrating improved outcomes. To further extend the literature that addresses treatment decision-making, qualitative interviews were conducted with eleven women who considered CPM. A social ecological model of breast cancer treatment decision-making provided the conceptual framework, and grounded theory was used to identify the cognitive, psychosocial, and emotional influences motivating treatment choice. This research identified five themes that give context to women's decision-making experience: (1) variability in physician communication, (2) immediacy of the decision, (3) meaning of being proactive about treatment, (4) meaning of risk, and (5) women's relationship with their breasts. The results suggest that greater emphasis should be placed on a more nuanced understanding of patients' emotional reaction to breast cancer and managing the decision-making environment.

Prospective assessment of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy decision-making in women with average risk: an application of perceptual mapping.

Women with early-stage unilateral breast cancer and no familial or genetic risk factors are increasingly electing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM), despite the lack of evidence demonstrating improved outcomes. To better understand and extend the literature focused on treatment decision-making, a survey was conducted among women with early-stage breast cancer and no associated risk factors, who were in the process of making a surgical decision. This prospective study sought to expand our understanding of the factors that influence patients' decision to have CPM, with the goal of providing healthcare providers with useful guidance in supporting breast cancer patients who are making treatment decisions. Data were collected for this prospective study through an internet survey. Results were analyzed using perceptual mapping, a technique that provides visual insight into the importance of specific variables to groups of women making different surgical decisions, not available through conventional analyses. Results suggest that women more likely to elect CPM demonstrate greater worry about breast cancer through experiences with others and feel the need to take control of their health through selection of the most aggressive treatment option. The information obtained offers guidance for the development of targeted intervention and counsel that will support patients' ability to make high quality, informed decisions.

Attitudes and perceptions of urban African Americans of a "dirty bomb" radiological terror event: results of a qualitative study and implications for effective risk communication.

OBJECTIVES: Radiological terror presents a real threat, but little is known about how low-income, urban African Americans may respond to such threats. The aim of this study was to understand the unique challenges of this group and to explore their knowledge of what a "dirty bomb" is, their intended behaviors should one occur, and their barriers to complying with "shelter in place" recommendations. METHODS: Thirty-seven 18-65-year-olds who were users of community centers in disadvantaged areas participated in 3 focus groups in Philadelphia. Results were analyzed by using the Krueger method of analyzing narrative text. RESULTS: The responses highlighted little knowledge or concern about a dirty bomb. Lack of trust in local authorities was expressed, with participants indicating that they did not feel their needs were addressed. While shelter in place was understood, most said they would still check on family or talk with others to get the "whole truth" because the most trusted information sources were neighbors and community leaders. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that a risk communication intervention for urban minorities may support desirable behaviors in the event of a dirty bomb, but successful communication will require establishing a local leader as a spokesperson to convince people of the importance of sheltering in place.

Comparing standard versus prosocial internet support groups for patients with breast cancer: a randomized controlled trial of the helper therapy principle.

PURPOSE: Internet support group (ISG) members benefit from receiving social support and, according to the helper therapy principle, by providing support to others. To test the mental health benefits of providing support to others, this trial compared the efficacy of a standard ISG (S-ISG) and an enhanced prosocial ISG (P-ISG). METHODS: A two-armed randomized controlled trial with 1-month pretest and post-test assessments was conducted with women (N = 184) diagnosed in the past 36 months with nonmetastatic breast cancer who reported elevated anxiety or depression. Women were randomly assigned to either the S-ISG or P-ISG condition. Both conditions included six professionally facilitated live chat sessions (90-minute weekly sessions) and access to an asynchronous discussion board; P-ISG also included structured opportunities to help and encourage others. RESULTS: Relative to the S-ISG, participants in the P-ISG condition exhibited more supportive behaviors (emotional, informational, and companionate support), posted more messages that were other-focused and fewer that were self-focused, and expressed less negative emotion (P < .05). Relative to the S-ISG, participants in the P-ISG condition had a higher level of depression and anxiety symptoms after the intervention (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Despite the successful manipulation of supportive behaviors, the P-ISG did not produce better mental health outcomes in distressed survivors of breast cancer relative to an S-ISG. The prosocial manipulation may have inadvertently constrained women from expressing their needs openly, and thus, they may not have had their needs fully met in the group. Helping others may not be beneficial as a treatment for distressed survivors of breast cancer.