Community Engagement to Inform Multilevel Analyses of the Role of Neighborhood Factors in Cancer Control Behaviors in African Americans

BACKGROUND

Although community engagement has had a substantial presence in public health research, community input to inform geospatial and health analyses remains underutilized and novel. This article reports on community engagement activities to solicit stakeholder perspectives on the role of neighborhood conditions in health and cancer. We discuss how this community input refined an a priori conceptual model to be tested in the larger Families, Friends, and Neighborhoods Study.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured virtual interviews with 82 stakeholders (e.g., community and faith leaders, educators, and healthcare workers) across four states (Maryland, Connecticut, Alabama, and Missouri). Participants discussed the impact where a person lives can have on their health and cancer risk. We subsequently convened a virtual group discussion with 17 randomly selected interviewees. Our study team individually reviewed discussion notes, which were synthesized into a consensus document.

RESULTS

In addition to constructs from the original conceptual model, participants identified neighborhood-level factors not present in the original model, including K-12 educational quality, local property investment, homelessness, public transportation infrastructure, proximity to healthcare facilities, environmental toxin exposures, access to healthy foods, and cost of living. These factors will be incorporated into the Families, Friends, and Neighborhoods Study analytic models.

CONCLUSIONS

Although geospatial analyses in health research have not traditionally employed community engagement techniques, this study illustrates the value of informing multilevel analytic models with the lived experiences of those negatively affected by neighborhood conditions that underlie the risk, prevention, and screening behaviors driving cancer incidence and mortality.

IMPACT

Future social epidemiology research can be enriched through community engagement.

A Public Health Emergency: Breast Cancer Among Black Communities in the United States

While Black people have a similar incidence of breast cancer compared to White people, they have a 40% increased death rate. Black people are more likely to be diagnosed with aggressive subtypes such as triple-negative breast cancer. However, despite biological factors, systemic racism and social determinants of health create delays in care and barriers to treatment. While genetic testing holds incredible promise for Black people, uptake remains low and results may be challenging to interpret. There is a need for more robust, multidisciplinary, and antiracist interventions to reverse breast cancer-related racial disparities.

Evidence of Racial Disparities in the Lung Cancer Screening Process: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Annual lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose chest computed tomography for high-risk individuals reduces lung cancer mortality, with greater reduction observed in Black participants in clinical trials. While racial disparities in lung cancer mortality exist, less is known about disparities in LCS participation. We conducted a systematic review to explore LCS participation in Black compared with White patients in the USA.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted through a search of published studies in MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied-Health Literature Database, from database inception through October 2020. We included studies that examined rates of LCS participation and compared rates by race. Studies were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

We screened 18,300 titles/abstracts; 229 studies were selected for full-text review, of which nine studies met inclusion criteria. Studies were categorized into 2 groups: studies that reported the screening rate among an LCS-eligible patient population, and studies that reported the screening rate among a patient population referred for LCS. Median LCS participation rates were 14.4% (range 1.7 to 62.6%) for eligible patient studies and 68.5% (range 62.6 to 88.8%) for referred patient studies. The meta-analyses showed screening rates were lower in the Black compared to White population among the LCS-eligible patient studies ([OR]=0.43, [95% CI: 0.25, 0.74]). However, screening rates were the same between Black and White patients in the referred patient studies (OR=0.94, [95% CI: 0.74, 1.19]).

DISCUSSION

Black LCS-eligible patients are being screened at a lower rate than White patients but have similar rates of participation once referred. Differences in referrals by providers may contribute to the racial disparity in LCS participation. More studies are needed to identify barriers to LCS referral and develop interventions to increase provider awareness of the importance of LCS in Black patients. Trial Registry PROSPERO; No.: CRD42020214213; URL: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO.