Social Processes and COVID-19 Vaccination of Children of Hesitant Mothers.

OBJECTIVE: Investigate relationships between pediatric COVID-19 vaccination and social processes of healthcare provider recommendations and school encouragement to provide insights into social processes that may support pediatric COVID-19 vaccination among hesitant mothers. METHODS: We analyzed survey data from a subsample (n = 509) of vaccine-hesitant mothers to child patients (ages 2 to 17) in regional clinics across Arkansas. Data were collected between September 16th and December 6th, 2022. Full information maximum likelihood multivariable logistic regression was conducted to evaluate associations with pediatric COVID-19 vaccination. RESULTS: Adjusted odds of pediatric COVID-19 vaccination were more than three times greater when a child's healthcare provider recommended vaccination compared to when they did not (aOR = 3.52; 95% CI[2.06, 6.01]). Adjusted odds of pediatric COVID-19 vaccination were 85% greater when a child's school encouraged parents to vaccinate compared to when the school did not (aOR = 1.85; 95% CI[1.13, 3.03]). CONCLUSIONS: For pediatric COVID-19 vaccination, having a personal healthcare provider is not significantly different from having no personal healthcare provider if they do not recommend the child be vaccinated. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Clinical and public health interventions should consider social processes of healthcare provider recommendations and school encouragement.

Influences on COVID-19 booster uptake among adults intending to receive a booster: a qualitative study.

Bivalent COVID-19 vaccine boosters have been recommended for all Americans 12 years of age and older. However, uptake remains suboptimal with only 17% of the United States (US) population boosted as of May 2023. This is a critical public health challenge for mitigating the ongoing effects of COVID-19 infection. COVID-19 booster uptake is not currently well understood, and few studies in the US have explored the vaccination process for booster uptake in a 'post-pandemic' context. This study fills gaps in the literature through qualitative analysis of interviews with a racially/ethnically diverse sample of Arkansans who received the COVID-19 vaccine main series and expressed intent to receive a booster (n = 14), but had not yet received the COVID-19 booster at the time we recruited them. All but one did not receive the booster by the time of the interview. Participants described influences on their vaccination behavior and uptake of boosters including reduced feelings of urgency; continued concerns about the side effects; social contagion as a driver of urgency; increasing practical barriers to access and missing provider recommendations. Our findings highlight the importance of considering vaccination as an ongoing, dynamic process drawing on past/current attitudes, prior experience, perceptions of risk and urgency and practical barriers. Based on these findings, healthcare providers should continue to provide strong, consistent recommendations for COVID-19 boosters to patients, even among those with histories of vaccine uptake.

Barriers, facilitators, and priority needs related to cancer prevention, control, and research in rural, persistent poverty areas.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify the barriers, facilitators, and priority needs related to cancer prevention, control, and research in persistent poverty areas. METHODS: We conducted three focus groups with 17 providers and staff of primary care clinics serving persistent poverty areas throughout the state of Arkansas. RESULTS: We identified multiple barriers, facilitators, and priority needs related to cancer prevention and control at primary care clinics serving persistent poverty areas. Barriers included transportation, medical costs, limited providers and service availability, and patient fear/discomfort with cancer topics. Facilitators identified were cancer navigators and community health events/services, and priority needs included patient education, comprehensive workflows, improved communication, and integration of cancer navigators into healthcare teams. Barriers to cancer-related research were lack of provider/staff time, patient uncertainty/skepticism, patient health literacy, and provider skepticism/concerns regarding patient burden. Research facilitators included better informing providers/staff about research studies and leveraging navigators as a bridge between clinic and patients. CONCLUSION: Our results inform opportunities to adapt and implement evidence-based interventions to improve cancer prevention, control, and research in persistent poverty areas. To improve cancer prevention and control, we recommend locally-informed strategies to mitigate patient barriers, improved patient education efforts, standardized patient navigation workflows, improved integration of cancer navigators into care teams, and leveraging community health events. Dedicated staff time for research, coordination of research and clinical activities, and educating providers/staff about research studies could improve cancer-related research activities in persistent poverty areas.

Reaching late adopters: factors influencing COVID-19 vaccination of Marshallese and Hispanic adults.

BACKGROUND: Marshallese and Hispanic communities in the United States have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19. Identifying strategies to reach late vaccine adopters is critical for ongoing and future vaccination efforts. We utilized a community-engaged approach that leveraged an existing community-based participatory research collaborative of an academic healthcare organization and Marshallese and Hispanic faith-based organizations (FBO) to host vaccination events. METHODS: Bilingual Marshallese and Hispanic study staff conducted informal interviews with 55 participants during the 15-minute post-vaccination observation period and formal semi-structured interviews with Marshallese (n = 5) and Hispanic (n = 4) adults post-event to assess the implementation of community vaccine events at FBOs, with a focus on factors associated with the decision to attend and be vaccinated. Formal interview transcripts were analyzed using thematic template coding categorized with the socio-ecological model (SEM). Informal interview notes were coded via rapid content analysis and used for data triangulation. RESULTS: Participants discussed similar factors influencing attitudes and behaviors toward receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. Themes included: (1) intrapersonal - myths and misconceptions, (2) interpersonal - protecting family and family decision-making, (3) community - trust of community location of events and influence of FBO members and leaders, (4) institutional - trust in a healthcare organization and bilingual staff, and (5) policy. Participants noted the advantages of vaccination delivery at FBOs, contributing to their decision to attend and get vaccinated. CONCLUSIONS: The following strategies may improve vaccine-related attitudes and behaviors of Marshallese and Hispanic communities not only for the COVID-19 vaccine but also for other preventive vaccinations: 1) interpersonal-level - develop culturally-focused vaccine campaigns targeting the family units, 2) community-level - host vaccination events at convenient and/or trusted locations, such as FBOs, and engage community and/or FBO formal or lay leaders as vaccine ambassadors or champions, and 3) institutional-level - foster trust and a long-term relationship with the healthcare organization and provide bilingual staff at vaccination events. Future research would be beneficial to investigate the effects of replicating these strategies to support vaccine uptake among Marshallese and Hispanic communities.

Understanding Vaccination Among Hesitant Adopters of the COVID-19 Vaccine Using the Increasing Vaccination Model.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) was the third leading cause of death in 2021 in the United States and has led to historic declines in life expectancy for Americans. While vaccination is an effective mitigation strategy for COVID-19, vaccine hesitancy remains a major barrier to individual and population-level protection. An emerging literature on hesitant adopters of COVID-19 vaccines highlights co-occurrence of hesitancy and vaccine uptake as an understudied phenomenon, with the potential to provide insight into factors that lead hesitant individuals to become vaccinated despite their hesitancy. We use qualitative interviews among hesitant adopters in Arkansas to examine vaccine hesitancy among this understudied group. Drawing on the Increasing Vaccination Model, we find that the most frequently reported motivations of hesitant adopters were within the domain of social processes, pointing to a critical focal point for targeted health communications intervening in this domain (e.g. social norms, social networks, and altruistic behavior). We find that recommendations from health care workers (HCWs) other than physicians/providers may serve as an effective influence to vaccinate. We also demonstrate negative effects of low provider and HCW confidence and weak recommendations on motivations to vaccinate among individuals expressing vaccine hesitancy. Additionally, we find individual information-seeking behaviors among hesitant adopters bolstered confidence in the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine. Based on these findings, clear, accessible, and authoritative health communication has a role in combatting the COVID-19 misinformation/disinformation infodemic.

Key Conversations and Trusted Information Among Hesitant Adopters of the COVID-19 Vaccine.

COVID-19 vaccines effectively protect against COVID-19-related hospitalization or death, and 67.1% of the US population is fully vaccinated. However, the disparity in COVID-19 vaccination persists among minority and rural populations who often report greater hesitancy about COVID-19 vaccines. This exploratory study aimed to understand and document trusted sources of information about the COVID-19 vaccine among a diverse sample of hesitant adopters with in-depth interviews. Participants (n = 21) described how information from trusted sources influenced their decision to get a COVID-19 vaccine despite being hesitant. Participants reported health care professionals, family members, friends, coworkers, community leaders, public health experts, government officials, and the mainstream media as trusted sources of information about the COVID-19 vaccines. Participants discussed obtaining trusted information from multiple modes, including direct conversations with trusted messengers and public health communications from public influencers who reinforced the information shared with trusted messengers. Notably, participants discussed having multiple conversations with trusted messengers during their decision-making process, and these trusted messengers often facilitated the participants' vaccination process. Study findings highlight the continued need for clear, understandable information about vaccine side effects, safety, and efficacy to address concerns that contribute to vaccine hesitancy.

Overcoming barriers and enhancing facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination in the Hispanic community.

BACKGROUND: Hispanic communities in the United States have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations, and death. Vaccination against COVID-19 is critical for controlling the pandemic; however, higher levels of vaccine hesitancy and reduced vaccine uptake constrain efforts to mitigate the pandemic and could perpetuate disparities. The aim of this study was to understand barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination through the lived experiences of Hispanic persons living in Arkansas. METHODS: Bilingual community partners facilitated recruitment, made initial contact with potential participants, and scheduled interviews and focus groups. Individuals over the age of 18 who identified as Hispanic were invited to participate. Data was collected from 49 participants in 10 individual interviews and five focus groups. This study used a qualitative exploratory design and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Five themes emerged as barriers for Hispanic participants: technological literacy and pre-registration, language and literacy, health insurance/health care costs, immigration status, and location and transportation. Three themes emerged as facilitators: workplace vaccination, health care provider recommendations, and engagement through schools. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the findings of this study, a multi-modal and flexible approach will be implemented by the authors to address barriers to vaccine uptake among the Hispanic community in Arkansas.

Motivations to Vaccinate Among Hesitant Adopters of the COVID-19 Vaccine.

Vaccination is a critical means for mitigating the worst effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States (US). However, the initial high demand for COVID-19 vaccines has not persisted, and the rate of vaccination slowed significantly in the summer of 2021. This study seeks to understand the motivations to receive the COVID-19 vaccine among hesitant adopters. Hesitant adopters are individuals who express some level of hesitancy about the vaccine but have also received at least one dose of the vaccine. Using a qualitative descriptive design, three loci for motivation emerged during analysis: extrinsic motivators, intrinsic motivators, and structural motivators. Extrinsic motivations, such as protecting one's community, family, and friends, were reported as driving vaccination behavior. Among intrinsic motivators, the desire to protect themselves from COVID-19 was the most frequently reported. Structural motivators were also identified, indicating that vaccine mandates also serve to motivate hesitant adopters of the COVID-19 vaccine. These findings have important implications in ongoing efforts to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the US and highlight the multi-dimensional motivations for vaccination among hesitant adopters. Additionally, we provide recommendations for practice based on our findings.

Complicity in sociology and community-based participatory research with Marshallese.

Complicity with colonialism can be reflected in a particular approach to research, whose interests it serves, and who has power or ownership over the research process. It can also be reflected in neglect, inaction or methodological erasure of groups historically subjected to domination by colonial empires. Social scientists have often failed to account for colonialism's role or the complicit role they have played. We provide a brief historical overview of colonialism in the Marshall Islands and the role social scientists-and their methodological and epistemological approaches-played in the US empire's expansion into the region. We discuss the tenets of Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR), setting the research agenda, co-direction of the research process, research team membership, collaboration challenges, and the action and outputs which have come from our team's health disparities research among the largest Marshallese population in the continental US. We argue CBPR is a promising but imperfect approach to guarding against complicity within medical sociology and situate our methodological approach within ongoing debates regarding objectivity and advocacy within sociology. We reflect on successes and shortcomings of our CBPR efforts to address health disparities among Marshallese, as well as how those successes and shortcomings overlap with questions of complicity.

Perceptions of adult Arkansans regarding trusted sources of information about the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The United States leads the world in confirmed COVID-19 cases; Arkansas ranks fifth in average daily cases per 100,000. Historically, Americans relied on health communications from governmental sources and the news media. However, there has been a documented decline of trust in these sources. The present study seeks to understand trusted sources of information about COVID-19 to improve health messaging because research shows the level of trust is associated with adherence to recommendations. METHODS: Data were collected using an online survey from participants (N = 1221) who were 18 years of age or older and residing, employed, or accessing health care in Arkansas. A qualitative descriptive design was used to summarize participants' experiences and perceptions related to trusted sources of COVID-19 information. RESULTS: Two primary themes related to participants' perceptions of sources of information about COVID-19 are reported: 1) trusted sources of information and 2) distrust or lack of trust in sources of information. Several subthemes emerged within each primary theme. Results showed high trust in the academic medical center, federal and state public health agencies, and local health care providers. The study also documents diverging voices of distrust and uncertainty in making sense of contradictory information. Participants reported the main reason for their lack of trust was the rapidly changing information and the lack of consistency in information provided across sources. CONCLUSIONS: This finding provides insight into the importance of coordination between national, state, and local communications to bolster trust. Personal recommendations and testimonies from trusted health care providers and professionals could inform public health messaging interventions to increase vaccine uptake.

'Just doing the best we can': health care providers' perceptions of barriers to providing care to Marshallese patients in Arkansas.

Introduction: Marshallese migrating to the United States encounter challenges in accessing health care. Previous literature has investigated Marshallese participants' perceptions of the barriers they face in accessing health care. For this study, health care providers managing the care of Marshallese patients were interviewed to understand the providers' perception of barriers that their Marshallese patients encounter. Methods: A qualitative research design was utilized to explore health care providers' perceptions of and experiences with the barriers faced by their Marshallese patients when accessing the US health care system. Results: The primary barriers identified were: (1) economic barriers; (2) communication challenges; (3) difficulty understanding and navigating the western health care system; and (4) structural and system barriers. Conclusion: This study provides insight on the barriers Marshallese patients face in accessing health care as well as the barriers providers face in delivering care to Marshallese patients. A better understanding of these barriers can help health care providers and educators to begin initiating improvements in the delivery of care to Marshallese patients.

Electronic cigarette use and psychological distress in the Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander adults compared with other racial/ethnic groups: Data from the National Health Interview Survey, 2014.

Document the prevalence of electronic cigarette (E-cigarette) use among the native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander (NHPI) adults compared with other racial/ethnic groups, and examine associations between psychological distress and E-cigarette use. 2014 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and 2014 NHPI-NHIS were combined for comparisons. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Rao-Scott χ2 test, and multivariable logistic regression. E-cigarette use among NHPI (5.6%) was significantly higher than among Blacks (2.1%), Hispanics (2.2%), and Asians (1.7%; p < .001). NHPI with Kessler 6 (K6) score of 11-24 had greater odds of using E-cigarettes (odds ratio [OR]: 3.90; 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 1.81-8.42) as compared to those with a K6 score of 0. Associations between having a K6 score of 11-24 and using E-cigarettes were also found for Whites (OR: 3.49; CI: 2.44-4.99), Asians (OR: 5.29; CI: 1.29-21.70), and Hispanics (OR: 6.14; CI: 2.72-13.83). E-cigarette use was higher among NHPI relative to other racial/ethnic groups. NHPI with K6 score of 11-24 had greater odds of using E-cigarettes as compared to those with a K6 score of 0. Policies and strategies to reduce E-cigarette use among NHPI should give careful consideration to the associations between E-cigarette use and psychological distress in the NHPI population.

Diabetes Disparities and Promising Interventions to Address Diabetes in Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Populations.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (NHPI) population is rapidly growing in the USA. NHPIs face significant health disparities and have a high prevalence of diabetes compared to the general US population. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent culturally-adapted diabetes interventions have shown promise in addressing these disparities among NHPI communities. The interventions showed success by utilizing a community-based approach that honored NHPIs' collectivist culture, addressed social determinants of health that influence disease control and prevention, and utilized NHPI community health workers (CHWs) and peer educators for key roles in implementation of the intervention. To address health disparities in the NHPI community, much can be learned from existing, successful interventions. Promising interventions share several attributes. The interventions were: culturally adapted using a community-based participatory research approach; addressed specific social determinants of health (i.e., cost of healthy food, transportation, access to health care) that influence disease control and prevention; honored the collectivist culture of NHPI communities by integrating social networks and extended family members; and utilized NHPI community members, including peer educators and CHWs, for intervention implementation. Further investment to scale these interventions for regional and national implementation is needed to address the significant diabetes disparities that NHPIs face.

Health researchers' experiences, perceptions and barriers related to sharing study results with participants.

BACKGROUND: Although research participants are generally interested in receiving results from studies in which they participate, health researchers rarely communicate study findings to participants. The present study was designed to provide opportunity for a broad group of health researchers to describe their experiences and concerns related to sharing results (i.e. aggregate study findings) with research participants. METHODS: We used a mixed-methods concurrent triangulation design, relying on an online survey to capture health researchers' experiences, perceptions and barriers related to sharing study results with participants. Respondents were health researchers who conduct research that includes the consent of human subjects and hold a current appointment at an accredited academic medical institution within the United States. For quantitative data, the analytic strategy focused on item-level descriptive analyses. For the qualitative data, analyses focused on a priori themes and emergent subthemes. RESULTS: Respondents were 414 researchers from 44 academic medical institutions; 64.5% reported that results should always be shared with participants, yet 60.8% of respondents could identify studies in which they had a leadership role where results were not shared. Emergent subthemes from researchers' reasons why results should be shared included participant ownership of findings and benefits of results sharing to science. Reasons for not sharing included concerns related to participants' health literacy and participants' lack of desire for results. Across all respondents who described barriers to results sharing, the majority described logistical barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings contribute to the literature by documenting researchers' perspectives and experiences about sharing results with research participants, which can inform efforts to improve results sharing. Most respondents indicated that health research results should always be shared with participants, although the extent to which many respondents described barriers to results sharing as well as reported reasons not to share results suggests difficulties with a one-size-fits-all approach to improving results sharing.

Structural and Socio-cultural Barriers to Prenatal Care in a US Marshallese Community.

Objectives Pacific Islanders are disproportionately burdened by poorer perinatal health outcomes with higher rates of pre-term births, low birth weight babies, infant mortality, and inadequate or no prenatal care. The aim of this study is to examine Marshallese mothers' beliefs, perceptions, and experiences of prenatal care and to identify potential barriers. Methods Three focus groups were conducted with Marshallese mothers, who were 18 years or older, and living in Arkansas. Focus groups focused on mothers' beliefs, perceptions, and experiences of prenatal care. A thematic qualitative analysis was conducted to identify salient themes within the data. Results The results demonstrated that negotiating health insurance, transportation, and language barriers were all major structural barriers that constrain prenatal care. The social-cultural barriers that emerged included a lack of understanding of the importance of seeking early and consistent prenatal care, as well as how to navigate the healthcare process. The more complicated challenges that emerged were the feelings of shame and embarrassment due to the perception of their age or being unmarried during pregnancy not being acceptable in American culture. Furthermore, the participants described perceived discrimination from prenatal care providers. Lastly, the participants described fear as a barrier to seeking out prenatal care. Conclusions for Practice This study identified both structural and socio-cultural barriers that can be incorporated into suggestions for policy makers to aid in alleviating maternal health disparities among Pacific Islander women. Further research is needed to address the Marshallese mothers' perceived discrimination from maternal health care providers.

Integrating Interprofessional Education and Cultural Competency Training to Address Health Disparities.

PROBLEM: Many U.S. medical schools have accreditation requirements for interprofessional education and training in cultural competency, yet few programs have developed programs to meet both of these requirements simultaneously. Furthermore, most training programs to address these requirements are broad in nature and do not focus on addressing health disparities. The lack of integration may reduce the students' ability to apply the knowledge learned. Innovative programs that combine these two learning objectives and focus on disenfranchised communities are needed to train the next generation of health professionals. INTERVENTION: A unique interprofessional education program was developed at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Northwest. The program includes experiential learning, cultural exposure, and competence-building activities for interprofessional teams of medicine, nursing, and pharmacy students. The activities include (a) educational seminars, (b) clinical experiential learning in a student-led clinic, and (c) community-based service-learning through health assessments and survey research events. CONTEXT: The program focuses on interprofessional collaboration to address the health disparities experienced by the Marshallese community in northwest Arkansas. The Marshallese are Pacific Islanders who suffer from significant health disparities related to chronic and infectious diseases. OUTCOME: Comparison tests revealed statistically significant changes in participants' retrospectively reported pre/posttest scores for Subscales 1 and 2 of the Readiness for Interpersonal Learning Scale and for the Caffrey Cultural Competence in Healthcare Scale. However, no significant change was found for Subscale 3 of the Readiness for Interpersonal Learning Scale. Qualitative findings demonstrated a change in students' knowledge, attitudes, and behavior toward working with other professions and the underserved population. LESSONS LEARNED: The program had to be flexible enough to meet the educational requirements and class schedules of the different health professions' education programs. The target community spoke limited English, so providing interpretation services using bilingual Marshallese community health workers was integral to the program's success.

Identifying and Understanding Barriers and Facilitators to Medication Adherence Among Marshallese Adults in Arkansas.

Background: Significant health disparities are present in Marshallese adults residing in the United States, most notably a high incidence of type 2 diabetes and other chronic conditions. There is limited research on medication adherence in the Marshallese population. Objective: This study explored perceptions of and experiences with medication adherence among Marshallese adults residing in Arkansas, with the aim of identifying and better understanding barriers and facilitators to medication adherence. Methods: Eligible participants were Marshallese adults taking at least one medication for a chronic health condition. Each participant completed a brief survey and semistructured interview conducted in Marshallese by a bilingual Marshallese staff member. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and translated from Marshallese to English. Qualitative data were coded for a priori and emergent themes. Results: A total of 40 participants were included in the study. The most common contributing factor for nonadherence was forgetting to take medication (82%). A majority of participants (70%) reported difficulty paying for medicine, 45% reported at least one form of cost-related nonadherence, and 40% engaged in more than one cost-related nonadherence practice. Family support and medication pill boxes were identified as facilitators for medication adherence. The majority of the participants (76.9%) stated that they understood the role of a pharmacist. Participants consistently desired more education on their medications from pharmacy providers. Conclusion: This is the first study to explore barriers and facilitators to medication adherence among Marshallese patients. The findings can be used to develop methods to improve medication adherence among Marshallese.

Engagement practices that join scientific methods with community wisdom: designing a patient-centered, randomized control trial with a Pacific Islander community.

This article illustrates how a collaborative research process can successfully engage an underserved minority community to address health disparities. Pacific Islanders, including the Marshallese, are one of the fastest growing US populations. They face significant health disparities, including extremely high rates of type 2 diabetes. This article describes the engagement process of designing patient-centered outcomes research with Marshallese stakeholders, highlighting the specific influences of their input on a randomized control trial to address diabetes. Over 18 months, an interdisciplinary research team used community-based participatory principles to conduct patient-engaged outcomes research that involved 31 stakeholders in all aspects of research design, from defining the research question to making decisions about budgets and staffing. This required academic researcher flexibility, but yielded a design linking scientific methodology with community wisdom.

Interpretive policy analysis: Marshallese COFA migrants and the Affordable Care Act.

BACKGROUND: Since the enactment of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the rate of uninsured in the United States has declined significantly. However, not all legal residents have benefited equally. As part of a community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnership with the Marshallese community, an interpretative policy analysis research project was conducted to document Marshallese Compact of Free Association (COFA) migrants' understanding and experiences regarding the ACA and related health policies. This article is structured to allow the voice of Marshallese COFA migrants to explain their understanding and interpretation of the ACA and related polices on their health in their own words. METHODS: Qualitative data was collected from 48 participants in five focus groups conducted at the local community center and three individual interviews for those unable to attend the focus groups. Marshallese community co-investigators participated throughout the research and writing process to ensure that cultural context and nuances in meaning were accurately captured and presented. Community co-investigators assisted with the development of the semi-structured interview guide, facilitated focus groups, and participated in qualitative data analysis. RESULTS: Content analysis revealed six consistent themes across all focus groups and individual interviews that include: understanding, experiences, effect on health, relational/historical lenses, economic contribution, and pleas. Working with Marshallese community co-investigators, we selected quotations that most represented the participants' collective experiences. The Marshallese view the ACA and their lack of coverage as part of the broader relationship between the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) and the United States. The Marshallese state that they have honored the COFA relationship, and they believe the United States is failing to meet its obligations of care and support outlined in the COFA. CONCLUSION: While the ACA and Medicaid Expansion have reduced the national uninsured rate, Marshallese COFA migrants have not benefited equally from this policy. The lack of healthcare coverage for the Marshallese COFA migrants exacerbates the health disparities this underserved population faces. This article is an important contribution to researchers because it presents the Marshallese's interpretation of the policy, which will help inform policy makers that are working to improve Marshallese COFA migrant health.

Understanding HPV Vaccine Hesitancy and What Helped Hesitant Adopter Parents Have Their Children Vaccinated Despite Their Hesitancy.

INTRODUCTION: One out of four parents reported HPV vaccine hesitancy; however, little is known about HPV vaccine-hesitant parents who vaccinate their children (e.g., hesitant adopters). METHOD: We use individual interviews (n = 8) to explore hesitancy and facilitators for overcoming hesitancy among hesitant adopter parents. We drew a priori codes from the Increasing Vaccination Model domains and identified seven emergent secondary themes. RESULTS: Understandable information about safety, side effects, and effectiveness could address HPV vaccine hesitancy. Health care professionals, family, friends, and coworkers were trusted vaccine and vaccination information sources. The study documents the lack of access to HPV vaccines with established health care providers as a barrier to vaccination. DISCUSSION: This is the first study of hesitant adopter parents that expands our understanding of factors driving HPV vaccination among them. Study insights can inform future efforts to increase HPV vaccine uptake among the hesitant.