One size doesn't fit all: methodological reflections in conducting community-based behavioural science research to tailor COVID-19 vaccination initiatives for public health priority populations.

BACKGROUND: Promoting the uptake of vaccination for infectious diseases such as COVID-19 remains a global challenge, necessitating collaborative efforts between public health units (PHUs) and communities. Applied behavioural science can play a crucial role in supporting PHUs' response by providing insights into human behaviour and informing tailored strategies to enhance vaccination uptake. Community engagement can help broaden the reach of behavioural science research by involving a more diverse range of populations and ensuring that strategies better represent the needs of specific communities. We developed and applied an approach to conducting community-based behavioural science research with ethnically and socioeconomically diverse populations to guide PHUs in tailoring their strategies to promote COVID-19 vaccination. This paper presents the community engagement methodology and the lessons learned in applying the methodology. METHODS: The community engagement methodology was developed based on integrated knowledge translation (iKT) and community-based participatory research (CBPR) principles. The study involved collaboration with PHUs and local communities in Ontario, Canada to identify priority groups for COVID-19 vaccination, understand factors influencing vaccine uptake and co-design strategies tailored to each community to promote vaccination. Community engagement was conducted across three large urban regions with individuals from Eastern European communities, African, Black, and Caribbean communities and low socioeconomic neighbourhoods. RESULTS: We developed and applied a seven-step methodology for conducting community-based behavioural science research: (1) aligning goals with system-level partners; (2) engaging with PHUs to understand priorities; (3) understanding community strengths and dynamics; (4) building relationships with each community; (5) establishing partnerships (community advisory groups); (6) involving community members in the research process; and (7) feeding back and interpreting research findings. Research partnerships were successfully established with members of prioritized communities, enabling recruitment of participants for theory-informed behavioural science interviews, interpretation of findings, and co-design of targeted recommendations for each PHU to improve COVID-19 vaccination uptake. Lessons learned include the importance of cultural sensitivity and awareness of sociopolitical context in tailoring community engagement, being agile to address the diverse and evolving priorities of PHUs, and building trust to achieve effective community engagement. CONCLUSION: Effective community engagement in behavioural science research can lead to more inclusive and representative research. The community engagement approach developed and applied in this study acknowledges the diversity of communities, recognizes the central role of PHUs, and can help in addressing complex public health challenges.

A new landscape in illness uncertainty: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of the experience of uncertainty in patients with advanced cancer receiving immunotherapy or targeted therapy.

OBJECTIVE: Over the past 20 years, immunotherapy and targeted therapy (TT) have been extending the life expectancy and providing hope for a growing number of patients with advanced and metastatic cancer. However, the efficacy, side effects, and overall prognosis of these treatments are highly unpredictable. Recent research suggests that these patients may be experiencing significant uncertainty which impacts their functioning. This study reviewed the literature on the experiences of uncertainty for individuals with advanced or metastatic cancer patients who are receiving immunotherapy or TT. METHOD: A systematic literature review was conducted. Data was extracted from studies by pairs of reviewers. Literature quality was appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program checklist. Following data extraction, thematic synthesis was used to summarize findings across studies and generate overarching themes. RESULTS: Fifteen qualitative studies were included. Findings highlighted impacts of various sources of uncertainty (financial, emotional, social), unmet needs related to uncertainty (practical, informational, communication), and recommendations for the management of uncertainty. Clinical implications and study limitations were indicated. CONCLUSIONS: Findings were situated within Mishel's Uncertainty in Illness Theory and the literature on supportive care for advanced cancer populations. Recommendations related to improving healthcare provider communication and balancing hope and expectations for treatment outcomes were highlighted. Further research is needed to investigate experiences of uncertainty in this population. Tailored interventions for uncertainty may be warranted.