1
|
Screening for lung cancer: 2023 guideline update from the American Cancer Society. CA Cancer J Clin 2024; 74:50-81. [PMID: 37909877 DOI: 10.3322/caac.21811] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2023] [Accepted: 09/14/2023] [Indexed: 11/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Lung cancer is the leading cause of mortality and person-years of life lost from cancer among US men and women. Early detection has been shown to be associated with reduced lung cancer mortality. Our objective was to update the American Cancer Society (ACS) 2013 lung cancer screening (LCS) guideline for adults at high risk for lung cancer. The guideline is intended to provide guidance for screening to health care providers and their patients who are at high risk for lung cancer due to a history of smoking. The ACS Guideline Development Group (GDG) utilized a systematic review of the LCS literature commissioned for the US Preventive Services Task Force 2021 LCS recommendation update; a second systematic review of lung cancer risk associated with years since quitting smoking (YSQ); literature published since 2021; two Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network-validated lung cancer models to assess the benefits and harms of screening; an epidemiologic and modeling analysis examining the effect of YSQ and aging on lung cancer risk; and an updated analysis of benefit-to-radiation-risk ratios from LCS and follow-up examinations. The GDG also examined disease burden data from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. Formulation of recommendations was based on the quality of the evidence and judgment (incorporating values and preferences) about the balance of benefits and harms. The GDG judged that the overall evidence was moderate and sufficient to support a strong recommendation for screening individuals who meet the eligibility criteria. LCS in men and women aged 50-80 years is associated with a reduction in lung cancer deaths across a range of study designs, and inferential evidence supports LCS for men and women older than 80 years who are in good health. The ACS recommends annual LCS with low-dose computed tomography for asymptomatic individuals aged 50-80 years who currently smoke or formerly smoked and have a ≥20 pack-year smoking history (strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence). Before the decision is made to initiate LCS, individuals should engage in a shared decision-making discussion with a qualified health professional. For individuals who formerly smoked, the number of YSQ is not an eligibility criterion to begin or to stop screening. Individuals who currently smoke should receive counseling to quit and be connected to cessation resources. Individuals with comorbid conditions that substantially limit life expectancy should not be screened. These recommendations should be considered by health care providers and adults at high risk for lung cancer in discussions about LCS. If fully implemented, these recommendations have a high likelihood of significantly reducing death and suffering from lung cancer in the United States.
Collapse
|
2
|
Lung cancer diagnosis and mortality beyond 15 years since quit in individuals with a 20+ pack-year history: A systematic review. CA Cancer J Clin 2024; 74:84-114. [PMID: 37909870 DOI: 10.3322/caac.21808] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2022] [Revised: 07/20/2023] [Accepted: 07/21/2023] [Indexed: 11/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Current US lung cancer screening recommendations limit eligibility to adults with a pack-year (PY) history of ≥20 years and the first 15 years since quit (YSQ). The authors conducted a systematic review to better understand lung cancer incidence, risk and mortality among otherwise eligible individuals in this population beyond 15 YSQ. The PubMed and Scopus databases were searched through February 14, 2023, and relevant articles were searched by hand. Included studies examined the relationship between adults with both a ≥20-PY history and ≥15 YSQ and lung cancer diagnosis, mortality, and screening ineligibility. One investigator abstracted data and a second confirmed. Two investigators independently assessed study quality and certainty of evidence (COE) and resolved discordance through consensus. From 2636 titles, 22 studies in 26 articles were included. Three studies provided low COE of elevated lung cancer incidence beyond 15 YSQ, as compared with people who never smoked, and six studies provided moderate COE that the risk of a lung cancer diagnosis after 15 YSQ declines gradually, but with no clinically significant difference just before and after 15 YSQ. Studies examining lung cancer-related disparities suggest that outcomes after 15 YSQ were similar between African American/Black and White participants; increasing YSQ would expand eligibility for African American/Black individuals, but for a significantly larger proportion of White individuals. The authors observed that the risk of lung cancer not only persists beyond 15 YSQ but that, compared with individuals who never smoked, the risk may remain significantly elevated for 2 or 3 decades. Future research of nationally representative samples with consistent reporting across studies is needed, as are better data from which to examine the effects on health disparities across different populations.
Collapse
|
3
|
Robot-Assisted General Surgery Procedures at the Veterans Health Administration: A Comparison of Surgical Techniques. J Surg Res 2022; 279:330-337. [PMID: 35810550 DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2022.06.032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2022] [Revised: 06/03/2022] [Accepted: 06/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The use of the robot in general surgery has exploded in the last decade. The Veterans Health Administration presents a unique opportunity to study differences between surgical approaches due to the ability to control for health system and insurance variability. This study compares clinical outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic or open techniques for three general surgery procedures. METHODS A retrospective observational study using the Veterans Affair Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Operative time, length of stay, and complications were compared for cholecystectomy (robot-assisted versus laparoscopic), ventral, and inguinal hernia repair (robot-assisted versus laparoscopic or open) from 2015 to 2019. RESULTS More than 80,000 cases were analyzed (21,652 cholecystectomy, 9214 ventral hernia repairs, and 51,324 inguinal hernia repairs). Median operative time was longer for all robot-assisted approaches as compared to laparoscopic or open techniques with the largest difference seen between open and robot-assisted primary ventral hernia repair (unadjusted difference of 93 min, P < 0.001). Median length of stay was between 1 and 4 d and significantly for robot-assisted ventral hernia repairs (versus open, P < 0.01; versus lap for recurrent hernia, P < 0.05). Specific postoperative outcomes of interest were overall low with few differences between techniques. CONCLUSIONS While the robotic platform was associated with longer operative time, these findings must be interpreted in the context of a learning curve and indications for use (i.e., use of the robot for technically challenging cases). Our findings suggest that at the Veterans Health Administration, the robot is as safe a platform for common general surgery procedures as traditional approaches. Future studies should focus on patient-centered outcomes including pain and cosmesis.
Collapse
|
4
|
Factors Associated with Health Inequalities in Infectious Disease Pandemics Predating COVID-19 in the United States: A Systematic Review. Health Equity 2022; 6:254-269. [PMID: 35402773 PMCID: PMC8985532 DOI: 10.1089/heq.2021.0049] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective Previous pandemics may offer evidence on mediating factors that contributed to disparities in infection and poor outcomes, which could inform the effort to mitigate potential unequal outcomes during the current COVID-19 pandemic. This systematic review sought to examine those factors. Methods We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane to May 2020. We included studies examining health disparities in adult U.S. populations during infectious disease epidemics or pandemics. Two investigators screened abstracts and full text. We assessed study quality using the Newcastle/Ottawa Scale or the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Checklist for Qualitative Studies. Results Sixteen articles were included, of which 14 focused on health disparities during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic. Studies showed that disparities during the H1N1 pandemic were more related to differential exposure to the virus than to susceptibility or access to care. Overall, pandemic-related disparities emanate primarily from inequalities in social conditions that place racial and ethnic minorities and low socioeconomic status populations at greater risk of exposure and infection, rather than individual-level factors such as health behaviors and comorbidities. Conclusions Policy- and systems-level interventions should acknowledge and address these social determinants of heightened risk, and future research should evaluate the effects of such interventions to avoid further exacerbation of health inequities during the current and future pandemics.
Collapse
|
5
|
Preventing Unequal Health Outcomes in COVID-19: A Systematic Review of Past Interventions. Health Equity 2022; 5:856-871. [PMID: 35018320 PMCID: PMC8742307 DOI: 10.1089/heq.2021.0016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/10/2021] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: We sought to identify interventions that reduced disparities in health outcomes in infectious disease outbreaks or natural disasters in the United States to understand whether these interventions could reduce health disparities in the current COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We searched MEDLINE and other databases to May 2020 to find studies that examined interventions to mitigate health inequalities in previous infectious disease pandemics or disasters. We assessed study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) Checklist for Qualitative Studies. Results: We included 14 articles (12 studies) and 5 Centers for Disease Control (CDC) stakeholder meeting articles on pandemic influenza preparedness in marginalized populations. Studies called for intervention and engagement before pandemic or disaster onset. Several studies included interventions that could be adapted to COVID-19, including harnessing technology to reach disadvantaged populations, partnering with trusted community liaisons to deliver important messaging around disease mitigation, and using culturally specific communication methods and messages to best reach marginalized groups. Discussion: To our knowledge this is the first systematic review to examine interventions to mitigate health inequities during an infectious disease pandemic. However, given that we identified very few disparities-focused infectious disease intervention studies, we also included studies from the disaster response literature, which may not be as generalizable to the current context of COVID-19. Overall, community outreach and tailored communication are essential in disease mitigation. More research is needed to evaluate systemic interventions that target the distal determinants of poor health outcomes among marginalized populations during pandemics and natural disasters.
Collapse
|
6
|
Disparities in H1N1 Vaccination Rates: a Systematic Review and Evidence Synthesis to Inform COVID-19 Vaccination Efforts. J Gen Intern Med 2021; 36:1734-1745. [PMID: 33791935 PMCID: PMC8011776 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-021-06715-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2021] [Accepted: 03/10/2021] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Data suggest that there were disparities in H1N1 vaccine uptake, and these may inform COVID-19 vaccination efforts. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate disparities in H1N1 vaccine uptake, factors contributing to disparities, and interventions to reduce them. METHODS We searched English-language articles in MEDLINE ALL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from database inception through May 8, 2020. Observational studies examining H1N1 vaccine uptake by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, rurality, and disability status in US settings were included. Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility. Single-reviewer data abstraction was confirmed by a second reviewer. We conducted independent dual quality assessment, and collective strength of evidence assessment. RESULTS We included 21 studies. African American/Black, Latino, and low-socioeconomic status participants had disproportionately lower H1N1 vaccination rates (low- to moderate-strength evidence). However, Latinos were more likely than Whites to intend to be vaccinated, and African American/Blacks and participants with lower-socioeconomic status were just as likely to intend to be vaccinated as their White and higher-socioeconomic status counterparts (low-strength evidence). Vaccine uptake for other groups has been insufficiently studied. Factors potentially contributing to disparities in vaccine uptake included barriers to vaccine access, inadequate information, and concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy. Studies were largely cross-sectional. Many of the studies are a decade old and were conducted in the context of a different pandemic. The categorization of racial and ethnic groups was not consistent across studies and not all groups were well-studied. DISCUSSION Efforts to avoid disparities in COVID-19 vaccination uptake should prioritize vaccine accessibility and convenience in African American/Black, Latino, and low-SES communities; engage trusted stakeholders to share vaccine information; and address concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Health Services Research & Development. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION PROSPERO CRD42020187078.
Collapse
|
7
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Data suggest that the effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) differ among U.S. racial/ethnic groups. PURPOSE To evaluate racial/ethnic disparities in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection rates and COVID-19 outcomes, factors contributing to disparities, and interventions to reduce them. DATA SOURCES English-language articles in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus, searched from inception through 31 August 2020. Gray literature sources were searched through 2 November 2020. STUDY SELECTION Observational studies examining SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalizations, or deaths by race/ethnicity in U.S. settings. DATA EXTRACTION Single-reviewer abstraction confirmed by a second reviewer; independent dual-reviewer assessment of quality and strength of evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS 37 mostly fair-quality cohort and cross-sectional studies, 15 mostly good-quality ecological studies, and data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and APM Research Lab were included. African American/Black and Hispanic populations experience disproportionately higher rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, and COVID-19-related mortality compared with non-Hispanic White populations, but not higher case-fatality rates (mostly reported as in-hospital mortality) (moderate- to high-strength evidence). Asian populations experience similar outcomes to non-Hispanic White populations (low-strength evidence). Outcomes for other racial/ethnic groups have been insufficiently studied. Health care access and exposure factors may underlie the observed disparities more than susceptibility due to comorbid conditions (low-strength evidence). LIMITATIONS Selection bias, missing race/ethnicity data, and incomplete outcome assessments in cohort and cross-sectional studies must be considered. In addition, adjustment for key demographic covariates was lacking in ecological studies. CONCLUSION African American/Black and Hispanic populations experience disproportionately higher rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related mortality but similar rates of case fatality. Differences in health care access and exposure risk may be driving higher infection and mortality rates. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Health Services Research & Development. (PROSPERO: CRD42020187078).
Collapse
|
8
|
Pharmacotherapy for the Treatment of Cannabis Use Disorder. Ann Intern Med 2020; 173:248-249. [PMID: 32745455 DOI: 10.7326/l20-0691] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
|
9
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cannabis use disorder (CUD) is a growing concern, and evidence-based data are needed to inform treatment options. PURPOSE To review the benefits and risks of pharmacotherapies for the treatment of CUD. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and clinical trial registries from inception through September 2019. STUDY SELECTION Pharmacotherapy trials of adults or adolescents with CUD that targeted cannabis abstinence or reduction, treatment retention, withdrawal symptoms, and other outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION Data were abstracted by 1 investigator and confirmed by a second. Study quality was dually assessed, and strength of evidence (SOE) was determined by consensus according to standard criteria. DATA SYNTHESIS Across 26 trials, the evidence was largely insufficient. Low-strength evidence was found that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) do not reduce cannabis use or improve treatment retention. Low- to moderate-strength evidence was found that buspirone does not improve outcomes and that cannabinoids do not increase abstinence rates (moderate SOE), reduce cannabis use (low SOE), or increase treatment retention (low SOE). Across all drug studies, no consistent evidence of increased harm was found. LIMITATIONS Few methodologically rigorous trials have been done. Existing trials are hampered by small sample sizes, high attrition rates, and heterogeneity of concurrent interventions and outcomes assessment. CONCLUSION Although data on pharmacologic interventions for CUD are scarce, evidence exists that several drug classes, including cannabinoids and SSRIs, are ineffective. Because of increasing access to and use of cannabis in the general population, along with a high prevalence of CUD among current cannabis users, an urgent need exists for more research to identify effective pharmacologic treatments. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. (PROSPERO: CRD42018108064).
Collapse
|
10
|
Pay-for-Performance and Veteran Care in the VHA and the Community: a Systematic Review. J Gen Intern Med 2018; 33:1155-1166. [PMID: 29700789 PMCID: PMC6025676 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-018-4444-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2018] [Revised: 03/09/2018] [Accepted: 04/10/2018] [Indexed: 10/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although pay-for-performance (P4P) strategies have been used by the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) for over a decade, the long-term benefits of P4P are unclear. The use of P4P is further complicated by the increased use of non-VHA healthcare providers as part of the Veterans Choice Program. We conducted a systematic review and key informant interviews to better understand the effectiveness and potential unintended consequences of P4P, as well as the implementation factors and design features important in both VHA and non-VHA/community settings. METHODS We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL through March 2017 and reviewed reference lists. We included trials and observational studies of P4P targeting Veteran health. Two investigators abstracted data and assessed study quality. We interviewed VHA stakeholders to gain further insight. RESULTS The literature search yielded 1031 titles and abstracts, of which 30 studies met pre-specified inclusion criteria. Twenty-five examined P4P in VHA settings and 5 in community settings. There was no strong evidence supporting the effectiveness of P4P in VHA settings. Interviews with 17 key informants were consistent with studies that identified the potential for overtreatment associated with performance metrics in the VHA. Key informants' views on P4P in community settings included the need to develop relationships with providers and health systems with records of strong performance, to improve coordination by targeting documentation and data sharing processes, and to troubleshoot the limited impact of P4P among practices where Veterans make up a small fraction of the patient population. DISCUSSION The evidence to support the effectiveness of P4P on Veteran health is limited. Key informants recognize the potential for unintended consequences, such as overtreatment in VHA settings, and suggest that implementation of P4P in the community focus on relationship building and target areas such as documentation and coordination of care.
Collapse
|
11
|
Abstract
With over half of individuals incarcerated having serious mental health concerns, correctional settings offer excellent opportunities for epidemiological, prevention, and intervention research. However, due to unique ethical and structural challenges, these settings create risks and vulnerabilities for participants not typically encountered in research populations. We surveyed 1,224 researchers, IRB members, and IRB prisoner representatives to assess their perceptions of risks associated with mental health research conducted in correctional settings. Highest-ranked risks were related to privacy, stigma, and confidentiality; lowest-ranked risks were related to prisoners' loss of privileges or becoming targets of violence due to having participated in research. Cognitive impairment, mental illness, lack of autonomy, and limited access to services emerged as the greatest sources of vulnerability; being male, being female, being over age of 60, being a minority, and being pregnant were the lowest-ranked sources of vulnerability. Researchers with corrections experience perceived lower risks and vulnerabilities than all other groups, raising the question whether these researchers accurately appraise risk and vulnerability based on experience, or if their lower risk and vulnerability perceptions reflect potential bias due to their vested interests. By identifying areas of particular risk and vulnerability, this study provides important information for researchers and research reviewers alike.
Collapse
|
12
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Over the last decade, various pay-for-performance (P4P) programs have been implemented to improve quality in health systems, including the VHA. P4P programs are complex, and their effects may vary by design, context, and other implementation processes. We conducted a systematic review and key informant (KI) interviews to better understand the implementation factors that modify the effectiveness of P4P. METHODS We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL through April 2014, and reviewed reference lists. We included trials and observational studies of P4P implementation. Two investigators abstracted data and assessed study quality. We interviewed P4P researchers to gain further insight. RESULTS Among 1363 titles and abstracts, we selected 509 for full-text review, and included 41 primary studies. Of these 41 studies, 33 examined P4P programs in ambulatory settings, 7 targeted hospitals, and 1 study applied to nursing homes. Related to implementation, 13 studies examined program design, 8 examined implementation processes, 6 the outer setting, 18 the inner setting, and 5 provider characteristics. Results suggest the importance of considering underlying payment models and using statistically stringent methods of composite measure development, and ensuring that high-quality care will be maintained after incentive removal. We found no conclusive evidence that provider or practice characteristics relate to P4P effectiveness. Interviews with 14 KIs supported limited evidence that effective P4P program measures should be aligned with organizational goals, that incentive structures should be carefully considered, and that factors such as a strong infrastructure and public reporting may have a large influence. DISCUSSION There is limited evidence from which to draw firm conclusions related to P4P implementation. Findings from studies and KI interviews suggest that P4P programs should undergo regular evaluation and should target areas of poor performance. Additionally, measures and incentives should align with organizational priorities, and programs should allow for changes over time in response to data and provider input.
Collapse
|
13
|
HIV/AIDS Research in Correctional Settings: A Difficult Task Made Even Harder? JOURNAL OF CORRECTIONAL HEALTH CARE 2016; 21:101-11. [PMID: 25788606 DOI: 10.1177/1078345815572347] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Housing a large number of individuals living with or at risk for HIV/AIDS, correctional settings have considerable potential for epidemiological, prevention, and treatment research. However, federal regulations and institutional challenges have limited the extent and types of such research with prisoners. This study examines the degree to which HIV/AIDS correctional researchers report greater challenges than do their noncorrectional counterparts. Results indicate that correctional researchers reported significantly more frequent challenges than those in noncorrectional settings, even after controlling for experience, with the dominant difference related to challenges due to the research setting. These findings add empirical data and support previous research in the field; however, additional research should include correctional staff and incarcerated individuals, and explore whether these differences extend to other research topics.
Collapse
|
14
|
Abstract
The present study was a random-effects model meta-analysis of 26 studies published between 1990 and 2010 (k = 32; n = 39,777) that (a) examined the association between acculturation and cigarette smoking in Hispanic women and (b) evaluated age, national origin, and measure and dimensionality (unidimensional vs. bidimensional) of acculturation as moderating variables. Results indicate a strong positive relationship and suggest larger effects of acculturation on cigarette smoking in women of Mexican descent as compared with women originating from other Latin American countries for current and lifetime smoking, as well as smoking overall. The effect of acculturation on cigarette smoking was larger in adults as compared with adolescents for current smoking and smoking overall. Few differences in effect size by measure or dimensionality of acculturation emerged. Results are discussed with regard to implications for future research and the measurement of acculturation.
Collapse
|
15
|
HIV/AIDS research in correctional settings: perspectives on training needs from researchers and IRB members. AIDS EDUCATION AND PREVENTION : OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR AIDS EDUCATION 2014; 26:565-576. [PMID: 25490736 PMCID: PMC4469272 DOI: 10.1521/aeap.2014.26.6.565] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
Being disproportionately represented by individuals living with HIV/AIDS, correctional facilities are an important venue for potentially invaluable HIV/AIDS epidemiological and intervention research. However, unique ethical, regulatory, and environmental challenges exist in these settings that have limited the amount and scope of research. We surveyed 760 HIV/AIDS researchers, and IRB chairs, members, and prisoner representatives to identify areas in which additional training might ameliorate these challenges. Most commonly identified training needs related to federal regulations, ethics (confidentiality, protection for participants/researchers, coercion, privacy, informed consent, and general ethics), and issues specific to the environment (culture of the correctional setting; general knowledge of correctional systems; and correctional environments, policies, and procedures). Bolstering availability of training on the challenges of conducting HIV/AIDS research in correctional settings is a crucial step toward increasing research that will yield significant benefits to incarcerated individuals and society as a whole.
Collapse
|
16
|
Association of acculturation with drinking games among Hispanic college students. THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DRUG AND ALCOHOL ABUSE 2014; 40:359-66. [DOI: 10.3109/00952990.2014.910521] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
|
17
|
Surveying the literature on acculturation and alcohol use among Hispanic college students: we're not all on the same page. Subst Use Misuse 2014; 49:1074-8. [PMID: 24779508 DOI: 10.3109/10826084.2014.887731] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Abstract
During the past several years, a steadily growing body of literature examining acculturation and alcohol use among Hispanic college students has emerged. A review of this literature suggests that there have been (and continues to be) mixed findings regarding the association between acculturation and alcohol use in this population. Thus, the exact nature of this association is not clear. This paper provides an overview of this literature and outlines recommendations for future research that will help to elucidate the complexities inherent in this line of work.
Collapse
|