Associations of Adolescent School Social Networks, Gender Norms, and Adolescent-to-Young Adult Changes in Male Gender Expression With Young Adult Substance Use.

PURPOSE: Male gender expression (MGE), which is shaped by sociocultural pressures around masculinity, has been previously associated with health. This study examines associations of adolescent social network variables and school gender norms with MGE changes from adolescence to young adulthood, and associations of these changes with young adult substance use. METHODS: Analyzing data from Waves I (1994-95, adolescents, aged 12-18) and IV (2008-09, young adults, 24-32) of a nationally representative longitudinal cohort study, male participants' MGE was assessed in each wave using a validated, empirically derived measure. Linear regression was used to evaluate associations of adolescent-to-young adult MGE changes between waves with adolescent social network characteristics and school gender norms. Logistic regression was used to examine associations between adolescent-to-young adult MGE changes and young adult substance uses (cigarette, marijuana, heavy alcohol, and recreational drug use, and prescription drug misuse). RESULTS: Among 4,776 male participants, adolescent-to-young adult MGE changes were significantly associated with school gender norms such that adolescents whose MGE markedly departed from their schools' average exhibited greater MGE changes in the direction of their schools' average (ß = -0.83, p < .01) relative to those who were more similar to school means. Adolescent-to-young adult increases in MGE were significantly associated with greater odds of all young adult substance use behaviors except prescription drug misuse. DISCUSSION: Adolescents' MGE relative to other males at their school was associated with MGE changes toward school norms, with implications for young adult substance use. Adolescent gender norms may be an underexplored strategy for interventions to reduce substance misuse.

Interventions addressing health-related social needs among patients with cancer.

Health-related social needs are prevalent among cancer patients; associated with substantial negative health consequences; and drive pervasive inequities in cancer incidence, severity, treatment choices and decisions, and outcomes. To address the lack of clinical trial evidence to guide health-related social needs interventions among cancer patients, the National Cancer Institute Cancer Care Delivery Research Steering Committee convened experts to participate in a clinical trials planning meeting with the goal of designing studies to screen for and address health-related social needs among cancer patients. In this commentary, we discuss the rationale for, and challenges of, designing and testing health-related social needs interventions in alignment with the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 5As framework. Evidence for food, housing, utilities, interpersonal safety, and transportation health-related social needs interventions is analyzed. Evidence regarding health-related social needs and delivery of health-related social needs interventions differs in maturity and applicability to cancer context, with transportation problems having the most maturity and interpersonal safety the least. We offer practical recommendations for health-related social needs interventions among cancer patients and the caregivers, families, and friends who support their health-related social needs. Cross-cutting (ie, health-related social needs agnostic) recommendations include leveraging navigation (eg, people, technology) to identify, refer, and deliver health-related social needs interventions; addressing health-related social needs through multilevel interventions; and recognizing that health-related social needs are states, not traits, that fluctuate over time. Health-related social needs-specific interventions are recommended, and pros and cons of addressing more than one health-related social needs concurrently are characterized. Considerations for collaborating with community partners are highlighted. The need for careful planning, strong partners, and funding is stressed. Finally, we outline a future research agenda to address evidence gaps.

Screening for Financial Hardship: Comparing Patient Survey Responses Using Two Different Screening Tools.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare delivery organizations are increasingly screening patients for social risks using tools that vary in content and length. OBJECTIVES: To compare two screening tools both containing questions related to financial hardship. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of adult patients (n = 471) in three primary care clinics. MAIN MEASURES: Participants randomly assigned to self-complete either: (1) a screening tool developed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) consisting of six questions on financial hardship (housing stability, housing quality, food security, transportation security, utilities security); or (2) social and behavioral risk measures recommended by the National Academy of Medicine (NAM), including one question on financial hardship (financial strain). We compared patient acceptability of screening, positive screening rates for financial hardship, patient interest in assistance, and self-rated health. RESULTS: Ninety-one percent of eligible/interested patients completed the relevant survey questions to be included in the study (N = 471/516). Patient acceptability was high for both tools, though more participants reported screening was appropriate when answering the CMS versus NAM questions (87% vs. 79%, p = 0.02). Of respondents completing the CMS tool, 57% (132/232) reported at least one type of financial hardship; on the NAM survey, 52% (125/239) reported financial hardship (p = 0.36). Nearly twice as many respondents indicated interest in assistance related to financial hardship after completing items on the CMS tool than on the NAM question (39% vs. 21%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients reported high acceptability of both social risk assessment tools. While rates of positive screens for financial hardship were similar across the two measures, more patients indicated interest in assistance after answering questions about financial hardship on the CMS tool. This might be because the screening questions on the CMS tool help patients to appreciate the types of assistance related to financial hardship that may be available after screening. Future research should assess the validity and comparative validity of individual measures and measure sets. Tool selection should be based on setting and population served, screening goals, and resources available.

Mystery Shopper Study of State Medicaid Coverage for Out-of-State Abortion Care.

This cross-sectional study uses a mystery shopper survey to examine variation in state Medicaid agency responses to coverage questions on out-of-state abortion care.

CommunityRx, a social care assistance intervention for family and friend caregivers delivered at the point of care: two concurrent blinded randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: CommunityRx is an evidence-based social care intervention delivered to family and friend caregivers ("caregivers") at the point of healthcare to address health-related social risks (HRSRs). Two CommunityRx randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are being fielded concurrently on Chicago's South Side, a predominantly African American/Black community. CommunityRx-Hunger is a double-blind RCT enrolling caregivers of hospitalized children. CommunityRx-Dementia is a single-blind RCT enrolling caregivers of community-residing people with dementia. RCTs with caregivers face recruitment barriers, including caregiver burden and lack of systematic strategies to identify caregivers in clinical settings. COVID-19 pandemic-related visitor restrictions exacerbated these barriers and prompted the need for iteration of the protocols from in-person to remote operations. This study describes these protocols and methods used for successful iteration to overcome barriers. METHODS AND FINDINGS: CommunityRx uses individual-level data to generate personalized, local community resource referrals for basic, health and caregiving needs. In early 2020, two in-person RCT protocols were pre-tested. In March 2020, when pandemic conditions prohibited face-to-face clinical enrollment, both protocols were iterated to efficient, caregiver-centered remote operations. Iterations were enabled in part by the Automated Randomized Controlled Trial Information-Communication System (ARCTICS), a trial management system innovation engineered to integrate the data collection database (REDCap) with community resource referral (NowPow) and SMS texting (Mosio) platforms. Enabled by engaged Community Advisory Boards and ARCTICS, both RCTs quickly adapted to remote operations. To accommodate these adaptations, launch was delayed until November (CommunityRx-Hunger) and December (CommunityRx-Dementia) 2020. Despite the delay, 65% of all planned participants (CommunityRx-Hunger n = 417/640; CommunityRx-Dementia n = 222/344) were enrolled by December 2021, halfway through our projected enrollment timeline. Both trials enrolled 13% more participants in the first 12 months than originally projected for in-person enrollment. DISCUSSION: Our asset-based, community-engaged approach combined with widely accessible institutional and commercial information technologies facilitated rapid migration of in-person trials to remote operations. Remote or hybrid RCT designs for social care interventions may be a viable, scalable alternative to in-person recruitment and intervention delivery protocols, particularly for caregivers and other groups that are under-represented in traditional health services research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: CommunityRx-Hunger (NCT04171999, 11/21/2019); CommunityRx for Caregivers (NCT04146545, 10/31/2019).

Effect of a Social Care Intervention on Health Care Experiences of Caregivers of Hospitalized Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Health-related social risks (HRSRs), like food and housing insecurity, are stigmatized conditions that, when addressed in clinical settings, could inadvertently compromise health care experiences. Objective: To test the noninferiority hypothesis that a low-intensity, high-scale social care intervention does not promote experiences of discrimination or diminish satisfaction with care compared to usual care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a double-blind randomized clinical trial conducted from November 2020 to June 2022 with 12-month follow-up analyzing data obtained 1 week after baseline intervention at a 155-bed academic urban children's hospital with 5300 annual admissions. Participants were recruited from their children's hospital rooms during their children's inpatient hospital stays. Inclusion criteria were identifying as the primary caregiver of a child younger than 18 years who was hospitalized in the general, intensive care, or transplant units; living in 1 of 42 target zip codes; and consenting to receive text messages. Caregivers of healthy newborns and caregivers of children expected to be hospitalized for less than 24 hours or greater than 30 days were excluded. A total of 637 eligible parents and caregivers were enrolled. Interventions: Participants were randomized to usual care or usual care plus CommunityRx, a low-intensity, universally delivered, electronic medical record-integrated social care assistance intervention providing personalized information about local resources alongside education about HRSRs and how to access additional support. Usual care included an admission brochure about hospital-based free food options and nonsystematic provision of resource information. Main Outcomes and Measures: Experiences of discrimination, measured using the Discrimination in Medical Settings Scale (range 7-35; higher scores indicate more frequent discrimination) and satisfaction with hospital discharge 1 week postdischarge using Child HCAHPS (range 0-100; higher scores indicate higher satisfaction). The a priori noninferiority margins (control minus intervention) were -0.9 (discrimination) and 1.6 (satisfaction). Results: Of 637 eligible caregiver participants, most identified as female (n = 600 [94.3%]), Black (n = 505 [79.4%]), and had household income less than $50 000 per year (n = 488 [78.5%]). One-third were experiencing food insecurity (n = 223). Half of participants reported discrimination experiences during the pediatric hospitalization (n = 259). Discrimination experiences among the intervention group were noninferior to those among the control group (mean [SD] score: control, 10.3 [4.7] vs intervention, 10.0 [4.6]; difference, 0.2; 90% CI, -0.5 to 0.9). Mean (SD) satisfaction with discharge was high (control, 84.2 [23.8] vs intervention, 81.9 [24.8]), but evidence was insufficient to support intervention noninferiority for this end point (difference, 2.3; 90% CI, -1.2 to 5.8). Food security status did not moderate the relationship between intervention and either outcome. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings suggest that a universally delivered social care assistance intervention did not promote caregiver experiences of discrimination during a child's hospitalization but were inconclusive regarding satisfaction. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04171999.

Childhood Parental Incarceration and Adult-Onset Hypertension and Cardiovascular Risk.

Importance: Parental incarceration is an adverse childhood experience that disproportionately affects racially minoritized individuals and has been associated with long-term health risks. Although cardiovascular disease remains the primary cause of mortality differences between Black and White individuals in the US, the association between parental incarceration and cardiovascular risk remains poorly understood. Objective: To examine the association between parental incarceration during childhood and incident cardiovascular risk in adulthood. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study included data from waves IV (2008-2009) and V (2016-2018) of the US National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health. Participants represented US adults transitioning from young adulthood to adulthood. Data were analyzed from October 28, 2021, to May 1, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Parental incarceration was defined as a parent or parent-like figure going to jail or prison when participants were aged younger than 18 years. Outcome measures included self-reported diagnoses of obesity, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, diabetes, or heart disease as well as serum elevations in non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (≥160 mg/dL) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP >3 mg/L), a marker of inflammation used to estimate risk of future coronary events. Using sampling weights, incident development of each outcome was modeled as a function of parental incarceration, adjusting for participant- and neighborhood-level characteristics. Results: This study included 9629 participants representing 16 077 108 US adults. Approximately half of participants were women (5498 [weighted 50.3%]) and the majority (5895 [weighted 71.4%]) were White. The mean participant age was 37.8 years (95% CI, 37.5 to 38.0 years) in wave V compared with 28.9 years (95% CI, 28.6 to 29.1 years) in wave IV. In wave V, those with childhood exposure to parental incarceration had lower educational attainment (91 [weighted 8.2%] vs 245 [weighted 4.2%] completing less than high school), had higher rates of public insurance (257 [weighted 20.6%] vs 806 [weighted 11.0%]), and were disproportionately Black (374 [weighted 22.5%] vs 1488 [weighted 13.6%]). Parental incarceration was associated with 33% higher adjusted odds (95% CI, 1.05 to 1.68) of developing hypertension and 60% higher adjusted odds (95% CI, 1.03 to 2.48) of developing elevated hsCRP. Associations between childhood parental incarceration and other diagnoses (ie, obesity, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, or heart disease) and serum lipid levels were not observed. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of US adults transitioning from young adulthood to adulthood, an increased incidence of hypertension and high-risk hsCRP, but not other cardiovascular risk factors, was observed among those exposed to parental incarceration during childhood. These findings suggest possible transgenerational health consequences of mass incarceration.

Social Risk and Smoking Among Women Smokers Early in the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Role of Mental Health.

Background: We examined patterns of smoking in relation to health-related socioeconomic vulnerability (HRSV) among U.S. women early in the pandemic and whether mental health symptoms mediated these relationships. Materials and Methods: Data were obtained from the April 2020 National U.S. Women's Health COVID-19 Study (N = 3200). Among current smokers, adjusted odds of increased smoking since the start of the pandemic (vs. same or less) by incident and worsening HRSVs were modeled. Structural equation modeling was used to assess anxiety, depression, and traumatic stress symptoms as mediators of the relationship between six HRSVs (food insecurity; housing, utilities, and transportation difficulties; interpersonal violence; financial strain) and increased smoking early in the pandemic. Results: Nearly half (48%) of current smokers reported increased smoking since the pandemic started. Odds of increased smoking were higher among women with incident financial strain (aOR = 2.0, 95% CI 1.2-3.3), incident food insecurity (aOR = 2.9, 95% CI 1.7-5.1), any worsening HRSV (aOR = 2.2, 95% CI 1.5-3.0), and worsening food insecurity (aOR = 1.9, 95% CI 1.3-3.0). Anxiety symptoms were a significant, partial mediator of the relationship between increased smoking and any worsening HRSVs (proportion mediated = 0.17, p = 0.001) and worsening food insecurity (0.19, p = 0.023), specifically. Depression symptoms were a significant, partial mediator of the relationship between increased smoking and any worsening HRSVs (0.15, p = 0.004) and incident financial strain (0.19, p = 0.034). Traumatic stress was not a significant mediator of any tested relationship. Conclusions: Anxiety and depression symptoms partially explain the relationship between rising socioeconomic vulnerability and increased smoking among women early in the pandemic. Addressing HRSVs and mental health may help reduce increased smoking during a public health crisis.

Perceived Appropriateness of Assessing for Health-related Socioeconomic Risks Among Adult Patients with Cancer.

Cancer treatment can trigger or exacerbate health-related socioeconomic risks (HRSR; food/housing insecurity, transportation/utilities difficulties, and interpersonal violence). The American Cancer Society and National Cancer Institute recommend HRSR screening and referral, but little research has examined the perceptions of patients with cancer on the appropriateness of HRSR screening in healthcare settings. We examined whether HRSR status, desire for assistance with HRSRs, and sociodemographic and health care-related factors were associated with perceived appropriateness of HRSR screening in health care settings and comfort with HRSR documentation in electronic health records (EHR). A convenience sample of adult patients with cancer at two outpatient clinics completed self-administered surveys. We used χ 2 and Fisher exact tests to test for significant associations. The sample included 154 patients (72% female, 90% ages 45 years or older). Thirty-six percent reported ≥1 HRSRs and 27% desired assistance with HRSRs. Overall, 80% thought it was appropriate to assess for HRSRs in health care settings. The distributions of HRSR status and sociodemographic characteristics were similar among people who perceived screening to be appropriate and those who did not. Participants who perceived screening as appropriate were three times as likely to report prior experience with HRSR screening (31% vs. 10%, P = 0.01). Moreover, 60% felt comfortable having HRSRs documented in the EHR. Comfort with EHR documentation of HRSRs was significantly higher among patients desiring assistance with HRSRs (78%) compared with those who did not (53%, P < 0.01). While initiatives for HRSR screening are likely to be seen by patients with cancer as appropriate, concerns may remain over electronic documentation of HRSRs. Significance: National organizations recommend addressing HRSRs such as food/housing insecurity, transportation/utilities difficulties, and interpersonal violence among patients with cancer. In our study, most patients with cancer perceived screening for HRSRs in clinical settings as appropriate. Meanwhile, concerns may remain over the documentation of HRSRs in EHRs.

Two concurrent randomized controlled trials of CommunityRx, a social care intervention for family and friend caregivers delivered at the point of care.

Background: CommunityRx is an evidence-based social care intervention delivered to family and friend caregivers ("caregivers") at the point of healthcare to address health-related social risks (HRSRs). CommunityRx-Hunger is a double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) that enrolls caregivers of hospitalized children. CommunityRx-Dementia is a single-blind RCT that enrolls caregivers of community-residing people with dementia. Clinical trials that enroll caregivers face recruitment barriers, including caregiver burden and lack of systematic strategies to identify and track caregivers. COVID-19 pandemic-related visitor restrictions exacerbated these barriers and prompted the need for iteration of the CommunityRx protocols from in-person to remote operations. This study describes the novel methods used to iterate existing RCT protocols and factors contributing to their successful iteration. Methods: CommunityRx uses individual-level data to generate personalized community resource referrals for basic, health and caregiving needs. Our research program uses an asset-based, community-engaged approach including study-specific community advisory boards (CABs). In early 2020, both RCT protocols were pre-tested in-person. In March 2020, when pandemic conditions prohibited enrollment during clinical encounters, both protocols were iterated to efficient, caregiver-centered remote operations. Iterations were enabled in part by the Automated Randomized Controlled Trial Information-Communication System (ARCTICS), a trial management system innovation engineered to integrate the data collection database (REDCap) with community resource referral (NowPow) and SMS texting (Mosio) platforms. Results: Enabled by engaged CABs and ARCTICS, both RCTs quickly adapted to remote operations. Designed before the pandemic, we had planned to launch both trials by March 2020 and complete enrollment by December 2021. The pandemic postponed launch until November (CommunityRx-Hunger) and December (CommunityRx-Dementia) 2020. Despite the delay, 65% of all planned participants (CommunityRx-Hunger n = 417/640; CommunityRx-Dementia n = 222/344) were enrolled by December 2021, halfway through our projected enrollment timeline. Both trials enrolled 13% more participants in 12 months than originally projected in-person. Conclusions: Our asset-based, community-engaged approach combined with widely accessible institutional and commercial information technologies facilitated rapid migration to remote trial operations. Remote or hybrid RCT designs for social care interventions may be a viable, scalable alternative to in-person recruitment and intervention delivery protocols, particularly for caregivers and other groups that are under-represented in traditional health services research. Trial Status: Both studies are registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: CommunityRx-Hunger (NCT04171999); CommunityRx for Caregivers (NCT04146545); My Diabetes My Community (NCT04970810).

Breast sensorisexual function: a novel patient-reported outcome measure of sexual sensory functions of the breast.

BACKGROUND: A validated measure assessing sexual sensory functions of the breast is needed to optimize sexual and other health outcomes after breast procedures. AIM: To describe the development of a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) to assess breast sensorisexual function (BSF). METHODS: We applied the PROMIS standards (Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) for measure development and evaluation of validity. An initial conceptual model of BSF was developed with patients and experts. A literature review yielded a pool of 117 candidate items that underwent cognitive testing and iteration. Forty-eight items were administered to an ethnically diverse, national panel-based sample of sexually active women with breast cancer (n = 350) or without (n = 300). Psychometric analyses were performed. OUTCOMES: The main outcome was BSF, a measure that assesses affective (satisfaction, pleasure, importance, pain, discomfort) and functional (touch, pressure, thermoreception, nipple erection) sensorisexual domains. RESULTS: A bifactor model fit to 6 domains-excluding 2 domains with only 2 items each and 2 pain-related domains-revealed a single general factor representing BSF that may be adequately measured by the average of the items. This factor, with higher values denoting better function and with the standard deviation set to 1, was highest among women without breast cancer (mean, 0.24), intermediate among women with breast cancer but not bilateral mastectomy and reconstruction (-0.01), and lowest among those with bilateral mastectomy and reconstruction (-0.56). Between women with and without breast cancer, the BSF general factor accounted for 40%, 49%, and 100% of the difference in arousal, ability to orgasm, and sexual satisfaction, respectively. Items in each of 8 domains demonstrated unidimensionality (ie, they measured 1 underlying BSF trait) and high Cronbach's alphas for the entire sample (0.77-0.93) and the cancer group (0.71-0.95). Correlations with sexual function, health, and quality of life were positive for the BSF general factor and mostly negative for the pain domains. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The BSF PROM can be used to assess the impact of breast surgery or other procedures on the sexual sensory functions of the breast in women with and without breast cancer. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: The BSF PROM was developed by using evidence-based standards, and it applies to sexually active women with and without breast cancer. Generalizability to sexually inactive women and other women warrants further study. CONCLUSION: The BSF PROM is a measure of women's breast sensorisexual function with evidence of validity among women affected and unaffected by breast cancer.

Association of Hospital Quality and Neighborhood Deprivation With Mortality After Inpatient Surgery Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

Importance: Although the hospital at which a patient is treated is a known source of variation in mortality after inpatient surgery, far less is known about how the neighborhoods from which patients come may also contribute. Objective: To compare postoperative mortality among Medicare beneficiaries based on the level of neighborhood deprivation where they live and hospital quality where they received care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study examined outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing 1 of 5 common surgical procedures (colon resection, coronary artery bypass, cholecystectomy, appendectomy, or incisional hernia repair) between 2014 and 2018. Hospital quality was assigned using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Star Rating. Each beneficiary's neighborhood was identified at the census tract level and sorted in quintiles based on its Area Deprivation Index score, a composite measure of neighborhood quality, including education, employment, and housing quality. A risk matrix across hospital quality and neighborhood deprivation was created to determine the relative contribution of each to mortality after surgery. Data were analyzed from June 1 to December 31, 2021. Exposures: Hospital quality and neighborhood deprivation. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was risk-adjusted 30-day mortality after surgery using a multivariable logistic regression model taking into account patient factors and procedure type. Results: A total of 1 898 829 Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 74.8 [7.0] years; 961 216 [50.6%] male beneficiaries; 28 432 [1.5%] Asian, 145 160 [77%] Black, and 1 622 304 [86.5%] White beneficiaries) were included in analyses. Patients from all neighborhood deprivation group quintiles sought care at hospitals across hospital quality levels. For example, 9.1% of patients from the highest deprivation neighborhoods went to a hospital in the highest star rating of quality and 4.2% of patients from the lowest deprivation neighborhoods went to a hospital in the lowest star rating of quality. Thirty-day risk-adjusted mortality varied across high- and low-quality hospitals (4.3% vs 7.2%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.78; 95% CI, 1.66-1.92) and across the least and most deprived neighborhoods (4.5% vs 6.8%; aOR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.53-1.64). When combined, comparing patients from the least deprived neighborhoods going to high-quality hospitals vs patients from the most deprived neighborhoods going to low-quality hospitals, the variation increased further (3.8% vs 8.1%; aOR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.96-2.46). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that characteristics of a patient's neighborhood and the hospital where they received treatment were both associated with risk of death after commonly performed inpatient surgical procedures. The associations of these factors on mortality may be additive. Efforts and investments to address variation in postoperative mortality should include both hospital quality improvement as well as addressing drivers of neighborhood deprivation.

"If you're in a community together, then you're basically a family": Perceptions of community among a predominantly African-American/Black youth cohort in a semi-rural region in the Southeastern United States.

Geographic racism gives rise to health inequities that impact communities in detrimental ways. Southern ethnic minority groups, particularly African American/Black semi-rural communities, are subject to especially unjust outcomes in health, education, and wealth. Asset-based community development (ABCD) is a way of engaging with communities in participatory and positive ways that center community voices as expert. Youth can participate in ABCD, are sensitive to the ways in which their communities are structured, and have insights as to how to improve the places they live. We undertook a qualitative interview study which included a cognitive mapping exercise with 28 youth to understand how African American/Black youth who had participated in an ABCD-informed summer program conceptualized community and preferences about where they lived. Using a phenomenological approach to qualitative analysis, our study revealed that many youth defined community as a combination of people and place, enjoyed engaging with unique resources in their communities as well as seeking peace and quiet, experienced hardships as "something everybody knows" when observing constraints on their communities, and were committed to their communities and interested in seeing-and participating in-their flourishing. Our study provides a nuanced and contemporary understanding of the ways in which African American/Black semi-rural youth experience community which can contribute to cyclical asset-based development strategy aimed at empowering young people and improving health outcomes in resilient communities.

Caregiving in a Pandemic: Health-Related Socioeconomic Vulnerabilities Among Women Caregivers Early in the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: Family and friends who provide regular care for a sick or dependent individual ("caregivers") are at increased risk of health-related socioeconomic vulnerabilities (HRSVs). This study examined pre-pandemic prevalence of and early pandemic changes in HRSVs among women caregivers compared with non-caregivers. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in April 2020 (early pandemic) with 3,200 English-speaking US women aged 18 years or older, 30% of whom identified as caregivers. We modeled adjusted odds of self-reported HRSVs (financial strain, food/housing insecurity, interpersonal violence, transportation/utilities difficulties) before and changes during the early pandemic by caregiving status. Models were adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, marital status, education, income, number of people in household, number of children in household, physical and mental health, and number of comorbidities. RESULTS: Pre-pandemic, 63% of caregivers and 47% of non-caregivers reported 1 or more vulnerability (P <.01); food insecurity was most prevalent (48% of caregivers vs 33% of non-caregivers, P <.01). In the early pandemic, caregivers had higher odds than non-caregivers of financial strain, both incident (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.1; 95% CI, 1.6-2.7) and worsening (AOR = 2.0; 95% CI, 1.4-2.8); incident interpersonal violence (AOR = 2.0; 95% CI, 1.5-2.7); incident food insecurity (AOR = 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-2.1); incident transportation difficulties (AOR = 1.9; 95% CI, 1.3-2.6); and incident housing insecurity (AOR = 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3). CONCLUSION: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic increased risk of incident and worsening HRSVs for caregivers more than for non-caregivers. COVID-19 response and recovery efforts should target caregivers to reduce modifiable HRSVs and promote the health of caregivers and those who depend on them.Annals Online First article.

Food Insecurity Among People With Cancer: Nutritional Needs as an Essential Component of Care.

A cancer diagnosis can upend work and family life, leading patients to reallocate resources away from essentials such as food. Estimates of the percentage of people navigating a cancer diagnosis and food insecurity range between 17% and 55% of the cancer patient population. The complexity of addressing food insecurity among those diagnosed with cancer during different phases of treatment is multifactorial and often requires an extensive network of support throughout each phase. This commentary explores the issue of food insecurity in the context of cancer care, explores current mitigation efforts, and offers a call to action to create a path for food insecurity mitigation in the context of cancer. Three programs that address food insecurity among those with cancer at various stages of care are highlighted, drawing attention to current impact and actionable recommendations to make programs like these scalable and sustainable. Recommendations are grounded in the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine social care framework through 5 essential domain areas: awareness, adjustment, assistance, alignment, and advocacy. This commentary seeks to highlight opportunities for the optimization of cancer care and reframe food access as an essential part of treatment and long-term care plans.

Feed1st, No Questions Asked: How a Hospital-Based Food Pantry Program Grew Its Impact During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Feed1st, a no-questions-asked, self-serve food pantry program at a Chicago, Illinois, medical center, increased its impact during the COVID-19 pandemic, adding five new pantries and distributing 124% more food in March 2020 to November 2021 (42 970 pounds or 36 000 meals) than in the same period of 2018 to 2019 (19 220 pounds or 16 000 meals). Of 11 locations, distribution was highest in a phlebotomy waiting area and a cafeteria pantry. The community-engaged model enabled Feed1st to increase food access for patients, caregivers, and workers during the pandemic. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(10):1394-1398. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306984).

A Framework for Cross-Sector Partnerships to Address Childhood Adversity and Improve Life Course Health.

Childhood adversity and its structural causes drive lifelong and intergenerational inequities in health and well-being. Health care systems increasingly understand the influence of childhood adversity on health outcomes but cannot treat these deep and complex issues alone. Cross-sector partnerships, which integrate health care, food support, legal, housing, and financial services among others, are becoming increasingly recognized as effective approaches address health inequities. What principles should guide the design of cross-sector partnerships that address childhood adversity and promote Life Course Health Development (LCHD)? The complex effects of childhood adversity on health development are explained by LCHD concepts, which serve as the foundation for a cross-sector partnership that optimizes lifelong health. We review the evolution of cross-sector partnerships in health care to inform the development of an LCHD-informed partnership framework geared to address childhood adversity and LCHD. This framework outlines guiding principles to direct partnerships toward life course-oriented action: (1) proactive, developmental, and longitudinal investment; (2) integration and codesign of care networks; (3) collective, community and systemic impact; and (4) equity in praxis and outcomes. Additionally, the framework articulates foundational structures necessary for implementation: (1) a shared cross-sector theory of change; (2) relational structures enabling shared leadership, trust, and learning; (3) linked data and communication platforms; and (4) alternative funding models for shared savings and prospective investment. The LCHD-informed cross-sector partnership framework presented here can be a guide for the design and implementation of cross-sector partnerships that effectively address childhood adversity and advance health equity through individual-, family-, community-, and system-level intervention.

Why Add "Abolition" to the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's Social Care Framework?

Abundant evidence demonstrates that enduring, endemic racism plays an important role in determining patient health. This commentary reviews a patient case about disease self-management and subsequent health outcomes that are shaped by social and economic circumstances. We analyze the case using a framework for social care developed in 2019 by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). We then propose that the NASEM framework be adapted by adding the category abolition, which could make the other social care practices transformative for historically marginalized populations.

Toward a better measure of midlife sexual function: pooled analyses in nearly 1,000 women participating in MsFLASH randomized trials.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate appropriateness of the current Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI)-19 value of <26.6 to designate female sexual dysfunction (FSD) in postmenopausal women, using the Female Sexual Distress-Revised (FSDS-R) scale to measure distress. METHODS: Participant-level data containing standardized measures from five completed Menopause Strategies: Finding Lasting Answers for Symptoms and Health trials was pooled. Baseline characteristics and FSFI-19 scores were compared across trials (F-test, homogeneity). FSFI-19 score associations with the FSDS-R were described. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to illustrate the choice of optimal FSFI-19 value to predict sexual distress. ROC curves were also estimated adjusting for trial number, clinical center, age, education, race, smoking, and BMI. RESULTS: Nine hundred ninety eight women (79.2% postmenopausal), mean age 55.9 (SD 4.8) had complete FSFI-19, FSDS-R, and covariate data. Baseline mean FSFI-19 score among all participants and sexually active participants was 18.7 (SD 9.5) and 22.0 (SD 7.2), respectively. There was a consistent pattern across the trials of inverse association between poorer sexual function (FSFI-19) and greater sexual distress. Based on the ROC curve showing the likelihood of FSDS-R frequent or greater distress according to cut points of FSFI, the optimal cut point for FSD was FSFI-19 <21 for all participants. This cut point corresponded to sensitivity 87.2% (95% CI, 83.4-91.0), specificity 57.9% (95% CI, 54.3-61.6) and adjusted area under the ROC curve 78.8% (95% CI, 75.8-81.8). CONCLUSIONS: A new FSFI-19 cut point of ≥21 should be considered to describe normal sexual function in periand postmenopausal women as opposed to the standard cut point of >26.6. VIDEO SUMMARY: http://links.lww.com/MENO/A915.