Examining Differences in Parent Knowledge About Pediatric Food Allergies.

OBJECTIVE: Pediatric food allergy (FA) is a serious health condition that has become increasingly prevalent. Parents often play a primary role in assessing and managing risk for their child's FAs, making it critical that they remain informed of the most recent guidelines for FA management. This study aimed to examine if diagnostic source (i.e., pediatrician vs. allergist) and child- and parent-level variables predicted parental FA knowledge using a comprehensive measure. METHODS: The Food Allergy Knowledge Test (FAKT) was administered to parents (N = 518) of children aged 3-17 years with (n = 349) and without (n = 169; i.e., control group) FAs using internet-sampling procedures. The sample was further partitioned into parents of children diagnosed by an allergist or a pediatrician, and control group parents who did or did not endorse knowing someone with an FA. RESULTS: Significant group differences were found with respect to the overall FAKT score and diagnostic source. Among the FA group, parental relationship to child, income, identification with a minority status, parental anxiety, and child possession of an emergency action plan were significant predictors of FAKT scores. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of FA was poor across all groups. Education for caregivers both with and without food-allergic children is important to ensure FA safety in multiple settings. Future directions and limitations are discussed.

Comparing in person and internet methods to recruit low-SES populations for tobacco control policy research.

Tobacco use and the associated consequences are much more prevalent among low-SES populations in the U.S. However, tobacco-based research often does not include these harder-to-reach populations. This paper compares the effectiveness and drawbacks of three methods of recruiting low-SES adult smokers in the Northeast. From a 5-year, [funding blinded] grant about impacts of graphic warning labels on tobacco products, three separate means of recruiting low-SES adult smokers emerged: 1) in person in the field with a mobile lab vehicle, 2) in person in the field with tablet computers, and 3) online via Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk). We compared each of these methods in terms of the resulting participant demographics and the "pros" and "cons" of each approach including quality control, logistics, cost, and engagement. Field-based methods (with a mobile lab or in person with a tablet) yielded a greater proportion of disadvantaged participants who could be biochemically verified as current smokers-45% of the field-based sample had an annual income of <$10,000 compared to 16% of the MTurk sample; 40-45% of the field-based sample did not complete high school compared to 2.6% of the MTurk sample. MTurk-based recruitment was substantially less expensive to operate (1/14th the cost of field-based methods) was faster, and involved less logistical coordination, though was unable to provide immediate biochemical verification of current smoking status. Both MTurk and field-based methods provide access to low-SES participants-the difference is the proportion and the degree of disadvantage. For research and interventions where either inclusion considerations or external validity with low-SES populations is critical, especially the most disadvantaged, our research supports the use of field-based methods. It also highlights the importance of adequate funding and time to enable the recruitment and participation of these harder-to-reach populations.