Participation in Cost-offset Community Supported Agriculture by Low-income Households in the U.S. is Associated with Community Characteristics and Operational Practices.

OBJECTIVE: Subsidized or cost-offset community supported agriculture (CO-CSA) connects farms directly to low-income households and can improve fruit and vegetable intake. This analysis identifies factors associated with participation in CO-CSA. DESIGN: Farm Fresh Foods for Healthy Kids (F3HK) provided a half-price, summer CO-CSA plus healthy eating classes to low-income households with children. Community characteristics (population, socio-demographics, health statistics) and CO-CSA operational practices (share sizes, pick-up sites, payment options, produce selection) are described and associations with participation levels examined. SETTING: Ten communities in New York (NY), North Carolina (NC), Vermont, and Washington states in USA. PARTICIPANTS: Caregiver-child dyads enrolled in spring 2016 or 2017. RESULTS: Residents of micropolitan communities had more education and less poverty than in small towns. The one rural location (NC2) had the fewest college graduates (10%) and most poverty (23%), and poor health statistics. Most F3HK participants were white, except in NC where 45.2% were African American. CO-CSA participation varied significantly across communities from 33% (NC2) to 89% (NY1) of weeks picked-up. Most CO-CSAs offered multiple share sizes (69.2%) and participation was higher than when not offered (76.8% vs. 57.7% of weeks); whereas 53.8% offered a community pick-up location, and participation in these communities was lower than elsewhere (64.7% vs. 78.2% of weeks). CONCLUSION: CO-CSAs should consider offering choice of share size and innovate to address potential barriers such as rural location and limited education and income among residents. Future research is needed to better understand barriers to participation, particularly among participants utilizing community pick-up locations.

Developing an Environmental Health Sciences COVID-19 Research Agenda: Results from the NIEHS Disaster Research Response (DR2) Work Group's Modified Delphi Method.

Leveraging the community of practice recently established through the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) Disaster Research Response (DR2) working group, we used a modified Delphi method to identify and prioritize environmental health sciences Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and associated Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) research questions. Twenty-six individuals with broad expertise across a variety of environmental health sciences subdisciplines were selected to participate among 45 self-nominees. In Round 1, panelists submitted research questions and brief justifications. In Round 2, panelists rated the priority of each question on a nine-point Likert scale. Responses were trichotomized into priority categories (low priority; medium priority; and high priority). A research question was determined to meet consensus if at least 69.2% of panelists rated it within the same priority category. Research needs that did not meet consensus in round 2 were redistributed for re-rating. Fourteen questions met consensus as high priority in round 2, and an additional 14 questions met consensus as high priority in round 3. We discuss the impact and limitations of using this approach to identify and prioritize research questions in the context of a disaster response.

Integrating Health Research into Disaster Response: The New NIH Disaster Research Response Program.

The need for high quality and timely disaster research has been a topic of great discussion over the past several years. Recent high profile incidents have exposed gaps in knowledge about the health impacts of disasters or the benefits of specific interventions-such was the case with the 2010 Gulf Oil Spill and recent events associated with lead-contaminated drinking water in Flint, Michigan, and the evolving health crisis related to Zika virus disease. Our inability to perform timely research to inform the community about health and safety risks or address specific concerns further heightens anxiety and distrust. Since nearly all disasters, whether natural or man-made, have an environmental health component, it is critical that specialized research tools and trained researchers be readily available to evaluate complex exposures and health effects, especially for vulnerable sub-populations such as the elderly, children, pregnant women, and those with socioeconomic and environmental disparities. In response, the National Institute of Environmental Health Science has initiated a Disaster Research Response Program to create new tools, protocols, networks of researchers, training exercises, and outreach involving diverse groups of stakeholders to help overcome the challenges of disaster research and to improve our ability to collect vital information to reduce the adverse health impacts and improve future preparedness.

Developing a multilingual questionnaire and surname list to sample Utah Pacific Islanders.

CONTEXT: Analyses of Utah vital records indicated that Utah Pacific Islanders had unique health problems that merited further investigation through a behavioral survey. However, statewide surveys did not reach a large enough sample of Pacific Islanders and were not administered in Samoan or Tongan. OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to complete a surveillance study of Utah Pacific Islanders. DESIGN: The authors created a surname list on the basis of names of parents who identified themselves as Pacific Islanders on Utah birth certificates. A questionnaire was developed with input of local Pacific Islanders and administered in English, Samoan, and Tongan. SETTING: Utah. PARTICIPANTS: We interviewed 605 adult Utah Pacific Islanders. RESULTS: The Utah Pacific Islander Survey (UPIS) generated estimates of health status among Utah Pacific Islanders with smaller confidence intervals than those derived from the Utah Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), even when combining 6 years of BRFSS data. Standard errors were less than half the value of the BRFSS estimates in all cases. The UPIS estimated higher rates than the BRFSS for Pacific Islander diabetes, obesity, and male arthritis. Respondents interviewed in Samoan or Tongan had higher rates of diabetes, obesity, and high blood pressure. CONCLUSIONS: The UPIS identified significant health disparities among the Utah Pacific Islander population that warrant public health intervention, such as high rates of obesity, diabetes, and high blood pressure and low rates of preventive screening. The UPIS estimates of Utah Pacific Islander health status are more precise than those acquired by the BRFSS, establishing strong baseline data that can be used to measure the success of interventions targeting these disparities.