A four-year longitudinal analysis examining the effects of e-cigarette advertisements and disparities among youth with internalizing problems.

BACKGROUND: Prior research indicates a direct, short-term effect of e-cigarette advertising on e-cigarette use among youth. This study seeks to investigate the long-term effects of e-cigarette advertisements and disparities in exposure among adolescents with different levels of internalizing problems. METHODS: Panel data of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study Waves 3-5 (2015-2019) were analyzed. Youth aged 12-17 who were non-e-cigarette users at the time of Wave 3 were included (n = 4,678). A moderated mediation model was employed to examine the mediating role of perceived harm of e-cigarettes and the moderating effect of internalizing problems. RESULTS: Exposure to e-cigarette advertisements in Wave 3 predicted lower harm perception of e-cigarette in Wave 4 (bp = -0.055, p <.01), leading to more e-cigarette use in Wave 5 (bp = -0.042, p <.001). While e-cigarette advertisements exhibited a lasting indirect effect (bp = 0.002, p <.05), there was no long-term direct effect (bp = 0.017, p >.05) on youth e-cigarette use. Furthermore, a moderating effect of internalizing problems was observed (bp = 0.107, p <.05). CONCLUSIONS: E-cigarette advertisements can exert a lasting influence indirectly by diminishing harm perception, particularly among those with lower internalizing problems. Adolescents with higher internalizing problems exhibit lower susceptibility to advertisement influence, yet their perceived harm of e-cigarettes is notably lower than their peers with fewer internalizing problems. These disparities underscore the need for tailored prevention strategies: implementing anti-e-cigarette education programs for adolescents with low internalizing problems and providing mental health care for those facing internalizing challenges. Regulatory measures targeting e-cigarette advertising are also crucial.

How does patient-centered communication work? Trend analysis of mediation through cancer worry and health self-efficacy, 2011-2020.

This study proposed and tested the cross-sectional effects of patient-centered communication (PCC) on cancer screening behaviors via an affective-cognitive sequential chain of mediation through cancer worry and health self-efficacy. Cross-sectional data were analyzed from four iterations of the Health Information National Trends Survey (2011, 2014, 2017, and 2020). The results found that lowered cancer worry following PCC does not show a cross-sectional positive effect in promoting cancer screening behaviors, while enhanced health self-efficacy as a subsequent state is a facilitator of screening behaviors. The findings further demonstrated increased PCC, a rise in cancer worry, and a sustained level of health self-efficacy. Also, our research has identified an upward trend in cancer screening behaviors from 2011 to 2017, followed by a notable decrease in 2020. These insights underscore the nuanced ways PCC can foster cancer screening behaviors, emphasizing the importance of emotional and cognitive aspects in clinical settings.

Overcoming obstacles to mammography screening: Examining the role of offline healthcare barriers and online patient-provider communication.

Barriers to accessing offline healthcare may discourage patients from undergoing mammography screening. Online patient-provider communication (OPPC) offers a supplementary health resource that can complement traditional medical encounters and facilitate mammography screening. This study examines how offline healthcare barriers influence mammography screening, taking into account OPPC as an independent variable and cancer fatalism and patient activation as two mediators. Data from the 2017, 2018, and 2020 iterations of the Health Information National Trends Survey were used for this study. Results showed that OPPC was positively linked to mammography screening. Offline healthcare barriers had a negative association with patient activation and subsequent mammography behaviors. Moreover, offline healthcare barriers and OPPC were associated with mammography screening through serial mediation of cancer fatalism and patient activation. This study has important implications for encouraging mammography screening.

Longitudinal relationship between social media and e-cigarette use among adolescents: the roles of internalizing problems and academic performance.

BACKGROUND: Prior research has investigated the influence of social media on e-cigarette use among adolescents, predominantly through the display of e-cigarette content and advertisements. However, the psychological mechanism underlying this relationship remains underexplored. This study aims to address the mediating effect of youths internalizing problems and elucidate the moderating effect of academic performance from a longitudinal perspective. METHODS: Panel data from the Public Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study Waves 3-5 (2015-2019) were utilized in this study. The sample consisted of 3,975 youths between the ages of 12 and 17 years old. A moderated mediation model was utilized for analyses. RESULTS: Adolescents using social media more frequently in Wave 3 reported higher odds of internalizing problems in Wave 4 (bp = 0.061, p < .01), which led to more e-cigarette use in Wave 5 (bp = 0.029, p < .01). A negative moderating effect of academic performance was found in the association between internalizing problems and e-cigarette use (bp=-0.088, p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Frequent social media use among young individuals leads to an increase in e-cigarette use through enhanced internalizing problems. However, adolescents who perform well academically exhibit higher resistance to e-cigarette use. Based on our findings, we recommend that tailored anti-e-cigarette campaigns and mental health interventions be used to target frequent social media users and academically struggling adolescents to prevent adverse health outcomes.

Social media and partnership jointly alleviate caregivers' psychological distress: exploring the effects of online and offline connectedness.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of caregiving in the United States has increased from 16.6% to 19.2% during the period between 2015 and 2020. Caregivers play a critical public health role post-pandemic and as the population ages. However, caregiving can be detrimental to the health of caregivers. Many studies have shown that communication and connectedness are effective forms of health intervention for caregivers, but how this can be achieved requires further investigation. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the indirect effect of caregiving on problems of alcohol drinking through psychological distress. Moreover, this study aimed to provide initial evidence of the distinct effects of online and offline communication and connectedness on caregivers' well-being. METHODS: The predictions were evaluated by examining responses to the Health Information National Trends Survey 2020 (n = 3,865). A mediation analysis was conducted to test the mediating effect of psychological distress on the association between caregiving and alcohol drinking. A second-level moderation analysis was performed. The online communication and connectedness, social media use for health, and the offline type, marital or romantic partnership, were tested as moderators to lessen the psychological distress of caregiving. RESULTS: A competitive mediation was identified. We found a positive indirect effect from caregiving to alcohol drinking mediated by psychological distress (bp = .0017, p < .05) but a negative direct effect from caregiving to alcohol drinking (bp = -.0340, p < .05). Furthermore, the study reported a strongly positive effect of moderated moderation on the linkage from caregiving to psychological distress. The negative impact of caregiving on mental distress was greater among those who used social media less, particularly those without a romantic or marital partner. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that caregivers experience more mental distress, which leads to risky behavior. This study highlights the crucial role of both online and offline connectedness in mitigating the adverse consequences of caregiving.

Associations Between COVID-19 Information Acquisition and Vaccination Intention: The Roles of Anticipated Regret and Collective Responsibility.

While public health communication has been suggested to be a key for improving acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination, this study tested mediation pathways through which three types of vaccine information acquisition, i.e. seeking, scanning, and discussing, affect COVID-19 vaccination intention. The pathways comprise two mediators, i.e. anticipated regret due to inaction and collective responsibility. Results suggest that information seeking and discussing may have encouraged the intention to get vaccinated, but mainly indirectly through the two mediators. Information seeking and discussing may have elicited anticipated regret and collective responsibility, which in turn increased vaccination intention. The paths from information scanning were smaller in effect sizes and statistically unacknowledged. Implications and limitations are discussed.

Interrater reliability estimators tested against true interrater reliabilities.

BACKGROUND: Interrater reliability, aka intercoder reliability, is defined as true agreement between raters, aka coders, without chance agreement. It is used across many disciplines including medical and health research to measure the quality of ratings, coding, diagnoses, or other observations and judgements. While numerous indices of interrater reliability are available, experts disagree on which ones are legitimate or more appropriate. Almost all agree that percent agreement (ao), the oldest and the simplest index, is also the most flawed because it fails to estimate and remove chance agreement, which is produced by raters' random rating. The experts, however, disagree on which chance estimators are legitimate or better. The experts also disagree on which of the three factors, rating category, distribution skew, or task difficulty, an index should rely on to estimate chance agreement, or which factors the known indices in fact rely on. The most popular chance-adjusted indices, according to a functionalist view of mathematical statistics, assume that all raters conduct intentional and maximum random rating while typical raters conduct involuntary and reluctant random rating. The mismatches between the assumed and the actual rater behaviors cause the indices to rely on mistaken factors to estimate chance agreement, leading to the numerous paradoxes, abnormalities, and other misbehaviors of the indices identified by prior studies. METHODS: We conducted a 4 × 8 × 3 between-subject controlled experiment with 4 subjects per cell. Each subject was a rating session with 100 pairs of rating by two raters, totaling 384 rating sessions as the experimental subjects. The experiment tested seven best-known indices of interrater reliability against the observed reliabilities and chance agreements. Impacts of the three factors, i.e., rating category, distribution skew, and task difficulty, on the indices were tested. RESULTS: The most criticized index, percent agreement (ao), showed as the most accurate predictor of reliability, reporting directional r2 = .84. It was also the third best approximator, overestimating observed reliability by 13 percentage points on average. The three most acclaimed and most popular indices, Scott's π, Cohen's κ and Krippendorff's α, underperformed all other indices, reporting directional r2 = .312 and underestimated reliability by 31.4 ~ 31.8 points. The newest index, Gwet's AC1, emerged as the second-best predictor and the most accurate approximator. Bennett et al's S ranked behind AC1, and Perreault and Leigh's Ir ranked the fourth both for prediction and approximation. The reliance on category and skew and failure to rely on difficulty explain why the six chance-adjusted indices often underperformed ao, which they were created to outperform. The evidence corroborated the notion that the chance-adjusted indices assume intentional and maximum random rating while the raters instead exhibited involuntary and reluctant random rating. CONCLUSION: The authors call for more empirical studies and especially more controlled experiments to falsify or qualify this study. If the main findings are replicated and the underlying theories supported, new thinking and new indices may be needed. Index designers may need to refrain from assuming intentional and maximum random rating, and instead assume involuntary and reluctant random rating. Accordingly, the new indices may need to rely on task difficulty, rather than distribution skew or rating category, to estimate chance agreement.