Prevención transfronteriza de la obesidad infantil: comentario de los National Institutes of Health.

En respuesta al aumento de las tasas de obesidad infantil, Estados Unidos y algunos países de Latinoamérica han financiado numerosos estudios que analizan estrategias e intervenciones innovadoras. A pesar de ello, los avances han sido lentos, irregulares y esporádicos, lo cual demuestra la necesidad de intensificar el intercambio de conocimientos y la colaboración en la investigación para acelerar la adaptación e implementación de intervenciones prometedoras en el campo de la obesidad infantil. Con la intención de compartir resultados de estudios, problemas y estrategias de intervención de probada eficacia entre los investigadores latinoamericanos y estadounidenses (especialmente los que trabajan con poblaciones latinas y latinoamericanas), los National Institutes of Health (NIH) reunieron a investigadores de Estados Unidos y Latinoamérica para destacar las sinergias entre los estudios de Latinoamérica y los realizados en poblaciones latinas de Estados Unidos. El fin último de esta iniciativa fue catalizar nuevas relaciones e identificar preguntas y estrategias comunes para la investigación. Este artículo se centra en la investigación y las prioridades de los NIH en materia de prevención de la obesidad infantil, así como en las áreas para futuras acciones, incluidos los planes generales de los NIH y las inversiones de sus institutos, centros y oficinas en áreas concretas relacionadas con la prevención de la obesidad infantil en Latinoamérica y en las poblaciones latinas de Estados Unidos.

Childhood obesity prevention across borders: A National Institutes of Health commentary.

In response to the increasing rates of childhood obesity, the United States and countries across Latin America have invested in research that tests innovative strategies and interventions. Despite this, progress has been slow, uneven, and sporadic, calling for increased knowledge exchange and research collaboration that accelerate the adaptation and implementation of promising childhood obesity interventions. To share research results, challenges, and proven intervention strategies among Latin American and US researchers, particularly those working with Latino and Latin American populations, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) convened researchers from the United States and Latin America to highlight synergies between research conducted in Latin America and among Latino populations in the United States with the goal of catalyzing new relationships and identifying common research questions and strategies. This article highlights the NIH's research and priorities in childhood obesity prevention as well as areas for future direction, including overarching NIH plans and NIH institutes, centers, and offices investments in specific areas related to childhood obesity prevention in Latin America and/or among Latino populations in the United States.

Food insecurity and obesity: research gaps, opportunities, and challenges.

Food insecurity, defined as a lack of consistent access to enough food for an active, healthy life, is a major public health concern with 11.8% of U.S. households (15.0 million) estimated to be affected at some point in 2017 according to the United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service. While the link between food insecurity, diet quality, and obesity is well documented in the literature, additional research and policy considerations are needed to better understand underlying mechanisms, associated risks, and effective strategies to mitigate the adverse impact of obesity related food insecurity on health. With its Strategic Plan for NIH Obesity Research, the NIH has invested in a broad spectrum of obesity research over the past 10 years to understand the multifaceted factors that contribute to the disease. The issue of food insecurity, obesity and nutrition is cross-cutting and relates to many activities and research priorities of the institutes and centers within the NIH. Several research gaps exist, including the mechanisms and pathways that underscore the complex relationship between food insecurity, diet, and weight outcomes, the impacts on pregnant and lactating women, children, and other vulnerable populations, its cumulative impact over the life course, and the development of effective multi-level intervention strategies to address this critical social determinant of health. Challenges and barriers such as the episodic nature of food insecurity and the inconsistencies of how food insecurity is measured in different studies also remain. Overall, food insecurity research aligns with the upcoming release of the Strategic Plan for NIH Nutrition Research and will continue to be prioritized in order to enhance health, lengthen life, reduce illness and disability and health disparities.

Leveraging Science to Advance Health Equity: A Regional Health Policy Research Center's Approach.

Advancing health equity and reducing disparities through evidence-based policy research requires the expertise, insights, and active participation of various policy stakeholders - particularly those representing vulnerable populations who may be disproportionately affected by such policies. Unfortunately, there are few sustainable settings for these diverse stakeholders to convene, share their knowledge, develop and execute research in a collaborative fashion, and effectively translate evidence-based findings. The development of a health policy-focused center supports the collaborative structure needed to present a unified, multi-disciplinary approach toward informing health policy. The Transdisciplinary Collaborative Center for Health Disparities Research (TCC) at Morehouse School of Medicine (U54MD008173) was funded in 2012 by the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD) as an innovative approach for conducting health policy research and disseminating evidence-based science to diverse stakeholders. This article provides an overview of the research projects, pilot project programs, infrastructure cores, communications, and strategic dissemination activities supported by the TCC.

Applying a Health Equity Lens to Evaluate and Inform Policy.

Health disparities have persisted despite decades of efforts to eliminate them at the national, regional, state and local levels. Policies have been a driving force in creating and exacerbating health disparities, but they can also play a major role in eliminating disparities. Research evidence and input from affected community-level stakeholders are critical components of evidence-based health policy that will advance health equity. The Transdisciplinary Collaborative Center (TCC) for Health Disparities Research at Morehouse School of Medicine consists of five subprojects focused on studying and informing health equity policy related to maternal-child health, mental health, health information technology, diabetes, and leadership/workforce development. This article describes a "health equity lens" as defined, operationalized and applied by the TCC to inform health policy development, implementation, and analysis. Prioritizing health equity in laws and organizational policies provides an upstream foundation for ensuring that the laws are implemented at the midstream and downstream levels to advance health equity.

Role of Health Information Technology in Addressing Health Disparities: Patient, Clinician, and System Perspectives.

Over the last decade, health information technology (IT) has dramatically transformed medical practice in the United States. On May 11-12, 2017, the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, in partnership with the National Science Foundation and the National Health IT Collaborative for the Underserved, convened a scientific workshop, "Addressing Health Disparities with Health Information Technology," with the goal of ensuring that future research guides potential health IT initiatives to address the needs of health disparities populations. The workshop examined patient, clinician, and system perspectives on the potential role of health IT in addressing health disparities. Attendees were asked to identify and discuss various health IT challenges that confront underserved communities and propose innovative strategies to address them, and to involve these communities in this process. Community engagement, cultural competency, and patient-centered care were highlighted as key to improving health equity, as well as to promoting scalable, sustainable, and effective health IT interventions. Participants noted the need for more research on how health IT can be used to evaluate and address the social determinants of health. Expanding public-private partnerships was emphasized, as was the importance of clinicians and IT developers partnering and using novel methods to learn how to improve health care decision-making. Finally, to advance health IT and promote health equity, it will be necessary to record and capture health disparity data using standardized terminology, and to continuously identify system-level deficiencies and biases.

Racism and the Life Course: Taking Time Seriously.

The adage "time is money" signifies that time itself is a major social resource, but the role of time as a determinant of health inequities remains underappreciated. Time is fundamental to health promotion and human agency, as in having time to exercise and maintain social relationships. Further, scarcity in time is related to stress and illness. Time is also racialized, such that racial/ethnic minorities often have less free time and suffer a time penalty in multiple facets of life. Such penalties manifest in problems such as greater time in prison or more time spent accessing services. We argue that time may be a social determinant of health that is shaped by racism across the life course. We focus on three aspects: time as age, time as exposure, and time as a resource and privilege. We distinguish between chronological age, biological age, and social age. We discuss issues of accelerated aging and potential interconnections with critical periods. We also examine racial inequities in time. By more deeply considering time, we may advance our understanding of racial inequities in health.

Behavioral Interventions Using Consumer Information Technology as Tools to Advance Health Equity.

The digital divide related to consumer information technologies (CITs) has diminished, thus increasing the potential to use CITs to overcome barriers of access to health interventions as well as to deliver interventions situated in the context of daily lives. However, the evidence base regarding the use and impact of CIT-enabled interventions in health disparity populations lags behind that for the general population. Literature and case examples are summarized to demonstrate the use of mHealth, telehealth, and social media as behavioral intervention platforms in health disparity populations, identify challenges to achieving their use, describe strategies for overcoming the challenges, and recommend future directions. The evidence base is emerging. However, challenges in design, implementation, and evaluation must be addressed for the promise to be fulfilled. Future directions include (1) improved design methods, (2) enhanced research reporting, (3) advancement of multilevel interventions, (4) rigorous evaluation, (5) efforts to address privacy concerns, and (6) inclusive design and implementation decisions.

The National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities Research Framework.

We introduce the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD) research framework, a product that emerged from the NIMHD science visioning process. The NIMHD research framework is a multilevel, multidomain model that depicts a wide array of health determinants relevant to understanding and addressing minority health and health disparities and promoting health equity. We describe the conceptual underpinnings of the framework and define its components. We also describe how the framework can be used to assess minority health and health disparities research as well as priorities for the future. Finally, we describe how fiscal year 2015 research project grants funded by NIMHD map onto the framework, and we identify gaps and opportunities for future minority health and health disparities research.

The vitamin D paradox in Black Americans: a systems-based approach to investigating clinical practice, research, and public health - expert panel meeting report.

The Office of Dietary Supplements, the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, the National Institute on Aging, and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, all components of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, co-sponsored an expert panel meeting to discuss the vitamin D paradox in Black Americans. The paradox is that despite markedly low (or "deficient") measures of vitamin D status in Black Americans, the incidence of falls, fractures, or osteopenia are significantly lower compared to White American counterparts with similar vitamin D status. Six panelists were invited to engage in guided discussions on the state of the science with respect to key knowledge gaps impacting vitamin D status and bone health. They were also asked to reflect on best approaches for advancing the science. A central theme throughout the discussions was that there may be many factors that impact Vitamin D levels in Black Americans and understanding these factors may be key to understanding mechanisms for improving bone health in all populations. Data presented showed that although adiposity, skin pigmentation, vitamin D binding protein polymorphisms, and genetics all contributed to differences in 25(OH)D levels in Black vs. White Americans, no one factor alone could fully explain the vitamin D paradox in Black Americans. However, the panelists did agree that the paradox is significant and warrants further investigation. There was consensus that Black Americans gained no skeletal benefits from high doses of vitamin D supplementation, and that high levels of the biomarker of vitamin D status, serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D or 25(OH)D, in this population are almost certain to result in adverse effects. Some panelists proposed that additional studies are needed so that the Institute of Medicine (IOM) can better define the safe upper limits of vitamin D intake in this and other subpopulations. Others suggested a need for better, more generalizable biomarkers of bone health to advance the science.

Design of a cluster-randomized minority recruitment trial: RECRUIT.

BACKGROUND: Racial/ethnic minority groups remain underrepresented in clinical trials. Many strategies to increase minority recruitment focus on minority communities and emphasize common diseases such as hypertension. Scant literature focuses on minority recruitment to trials of less common conditions, often conducted in specialty clinics and dependent on physician referrals. We identified trust/mistrust of specialist physician investigators and institutions conducting medical research and consequent participant reluctance to participate in clinical trials as key-shared barriers across racial/ethnic groups. We developed a trust-based continuous quality improvement intervention to build trust between specialist physician investigators and community minority-serving physicians and ultimately potential trial participants. To avoid the inherent biases of non-randomized studies, we evaluated the intervention in the national Randomized Recruitment Intervention Trial (RECRUIT). This report presents the design of RECRUIT. Specialty clinic follow-up continues through April 2017. METHODS: We hypothesized that specialist physician investigators and coordinators trained in the trust-based continuous quality improvement intervention would enroll a greater proportion of minority participants in their specialty clinics than specialist physician investigators in control specialty clinics. Specialty clinic was the unit of randomization. Using continuous quality improvement, the specialist physician investigators and coordinators tailored recruitment approaches to their specialty clinic characteristics and populations. Primary analyses were adjusted for clustering by specialty clinic within parent trial and matching covariates. RESULTS: RECRUIT was implemented in four multi-site clinical trials (parent trials) supported by three National Institutes of Health institutes and included 50 associated specialty clinics from these parent trials. Using current data, we have 88% power or greater to detect a 0.15 or greater difference from the currently observed control proportion adjusting for clustering. We detected no differences in baseline matching criteria between intervention and control specialty clinics (all p values > 0.17). CONCLUSION: RECRUIT was the first multi-site randomized control trial to examine the effectiveness of a trust-based continuous quality improvement intervention to increase minority recruitment into clinical trials. RECRUIT's innovations included its focus on building trust between specialist investigators and minority-serving physicians, the use of continuous quality improvement to tailor the intervention to each specialty clinic's specific racial/ethnic populations and barriers to minority recruitment, and the use of specialty clinics from more than one parent multi-site trial to increase generalizability. The effectiveness of the RECRUIT intervention will be determined after the completion of trial data collection and planned analyses.