Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Vaccine hesitancy is a growing problem in the United States. However, our understanding of the mechanisms by which socioeconomic status (SES) shapes the experience of vaccine hesitancy and decision-making is incomplete. Aim The aim of this study was to understand how social class influences the experiences and perspectives of vaccine-hesitant mothers. Methods We conducted semistructured interviews with middle- and working-class vaccine-hesitant mothers. Participants were identified through neighborhood parenthood groups in the Philadelphia area, as well as in-person and online groups whose members express concerns about vaccines. Interviews were audio recorded and inductively analyzed. Results Interviews were conducted with 37 vaccine-hesitant mothers, who described their vaccine decision-making through the lens of interactions with three institutional stakeholders: 1) pediatric clinicians; 2) school administrators; and 3) emergency room staff. In discussing these interactions, middle- and working-class mothers invoked distinct levels of authority in relation to these institutions. Specifically, working-class mothers expressed concerns that medical or school professionals could act as reporters for state intervention, including Child Protective Services, while middle-class mothers did not. These interactions highlighted the ways middle- and working-class mothers in our study felt differently empowered and constrained in their vaccine choices, and ultimately influenced their perceptions of available actions. Conclusions Our findings indicate that experiences of vaccine hesitancy may be influenced by mothers’ social class via their relationships to institutional authorities. These findings have implications for how clinicians communicate with parents from different social backgrounds to best build trust and facilitate vaccine uptake.

There have been repeated calls for academic institutions to develop policies and procedures to manage institutional conflicts of interest (ICOI) arising from technology transfer activities. While prior research has examined adoption of ICOI policies by medical schools and universities, little is known about how these institutions handle ICOI in practice, hindering the development of evidence-based recommendations to improve ICOI management. To address this gap, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 25 senior administrators responsible for research integrity and conflict of interest issues at academic institutions. Data were analyzed using a descriptive qualitative content analysis approach, combining flexible coding to index the interview data with close examination, interpretation, and synthesis of coded content. Participants identified communication and information sharing between conflict of interest (COI) and technology transfer (TT) offices as a critical factor in the effective management of ICOI and suggested several strategies to strengthen coordination between these offices. These findings suggest that academic research institutions could strengthen COI programs by taking measures to improve communication and information sharing between COI and TT offices.

Achieving health equity (where every person has the opportunity to attain their full health potential) requires the removal of obstacles to health, including barriers to high-quality medical care. Innovations in service delivery can inadvertently maintain, worsen, or introduce inequities. As such, implementation of innovations must be accompanied by a dual commitment to evaluate impact on marginalized groups and to restructure systems that obstruct people from health and healthcare. Understanding the impact innovations have on access to high-quality care is central to this effort. In this Perspective, we join conceptual models of healthcare access and quality with health equity frameworks to conceptualize healthcare receipt as a series of interactions between people and systems unfolding over time. This synthesized model is applied to illustrate the effects of telemedicine on patient, population, and system outcomes. Telemedicine may improve or worsen health equity by altering access to care and by altering quality of care once it is accessed. Teasing out these varied effects is complex and requires considering multilevel influences on the outcome of a care-seeking episode. This synthesized model can be used to inform research, practice, and policy surrounding the equity implications of care delivery innovations more broadly.

To assess association of pharmacist gender with acceptance of antibiotic stewardship recommendations. A retrospective evaluation of the Reducing Overuse of Antibiotics at Discharge (ROAD) Home intervention. The study was conducted from May to October 2019 in a single academic medical center. The study included patients receiving antibiotics on a hospitalist service who were nearing discharge. During the intervention, clinical pharmacists (none who had specialist postgraduate infectious disease residency training) reviewed patients on antibiotics and led an antibiotic timeout (ie, structured conversation) prior to discharge to improve discharge antibiotic prescribing. We assessed the association of pharmacist gender with acceptance of timeout recommendations by hospitalists using logistic regression controlling for patient characteristics. Over 6 months, pharmacists conducted 295 timeouts: 158 timeouts (53.6%) were conducted by 12 women, 137 (46.4%) were conducted by 8 men. Pharmacists recommended an antibiotic change in 82 timeouts (27.8%), of which 51 (62.2%) were accepted. Compared to male pharmacists, female pharmacists were less likely to recommend a discharge antibiotic change: 30 (19.0%) of 158 versus 52 (38.0%) of 137 (P < .001). Female pharmacists were also less likely to have a recommendation accepted: 10 (33.3%) of 30 versus 41 (8.8%) of 52 (P < .001). Thus, timeouts conducted by female versus male pharmacists were less likely to result in an antibiotic change: 10 (6.3%) of 158 versus 41 (29.9%) of 137 (P < .001). After adjustments, pharmacist gender remained significantly associated with whether recommended changes were accepted (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.10; 95%confidence interval [CI], 0.03-0.36 for female versus male pharmacists). Antibiotic stewardship recommendations made by female clinical pharmacists were less likely to be accepted by hospitalists. Gender bias may play a role in the acceptance of clinical pharmacist recommendations, which could affect patient care and outcomes.

Background Implementation outcomes, including acceptability, are of critical importance in both implementation research and practice. The gold standard measure of acceptability, Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), skews positively with a limited range. In an ongoing hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial, we aimed to evaluate clinician acceptability of induction standardization. Here, we describe an innovative mixed-methods approach to maximize the interpretability of the AIM using a case study in maternal health. Methods In this explanatory sequential mixed methods study, we distributed the validated, 4-question AIM (total 4–20) to labor and delivery clinicians 6 months post-implementation at 2 sites (Site 1: 3/2021; Site 2: 6/2021). Respondents were grouped by total score into tertiles. The top (“High” Acceptability) and bottom (“Low” Acceptability) tertiles were invited to participate in a 30-minute semi-structured qualitative interview from 6/2021 to 10/2021 until thematic saturation was reached in each acceptability group. Participants were purposively sampled by role and site. Interviews were coded using an integrated approach, incorporating a priori attributes (Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs) into a modified content analysis approach. Results 104 clinicians completed the initial survey; 24 were interviewed (12 “High” and 12 “Low” Acceptability). Median total AIM scores were 20/20 IQR[20–20] in the High and 12.5/20 IQR[11–14] in the Low Acceptability groups. In both groups, clinicians were enthusiastic about efforts to standardize labor induction, believing it reduces inter-clinician variability and improves equitable, evidence-based care. In the Low Acceptability group, clinicians stated the need for flexibility and consideration for patient uniqueness. Rarely, clinicians felt labor induction could not or should not be standardized, citing discomfort with medicalization of labor, and concerns with “bulldozing” the patient with interventions. Suggested strategies for overcoming negative sentiment included comprehensive clinician education, as well as involving patients as active participants in the protocol prenatally. Conclusions This study utilized AIM in an innovative sequential mixed-methods approach to characterize clinician acceptability, which may be generalizable across implementation endeavors. By performing this work during a hybrid trial, implementation strategies to improve acceptability emerged (clinician education focusing on respect for flexibility; involving patients as active participants prenatally) for year 2, which will inform future multi-site work.

Background Racial and ethnic disparities in outcomes for Black and Hispanic children with acute leukemia have been well documented, however little is known about the determinants of diagnostic delays in pediatric leukemia in the United States. The primary objective of this study is to identify factors contributing to delays preceding a pediatric leukemia diagnosis. Methods This qualitative study utilized in-depth semi-structured interviews. Parents and/or patients within two years of receiving a new acute leukemia diagnosis were asked to reflect upon their family’s experiences preceding the patient’s diagnosis. Subjects were purposively sampled for maximum variation in race, ethnicity, income, and language. Interviews were analyzed using inductive theory-building and the constant comparative method to understand the process of diagnosis. Chart review was conducted to complement qualitative data. Results Thirty-two interviews were conducted with a diverse population of English and Spanish speaking participants from two tertiary care pediatric cancer centers. Parents reported feeling frustrated when their intuition conflicted with providers’ management decisions. Many felt laboratory testing was not performed soon enough. Additional contributors to delays included misattribution of vague symptoms to more common diagnoses, difficulties in obtaining appointments, and financial disincentives to seek urgent or emergent care. Reports of difficulty obtaining timely appointments and financial concerns were disproportionately raised among low-income Black and Hispanic participants. Comparatively, parents with prior healthcare experiences felt better able to navigate the system and advocate for additional testing at symptom onset. Conclusions While there are disease-related factors contributing to delays in diagnosis, it is important to recognize there are multiple non-disease-related factors that also contribute to delays. Evidence-based approaches to reduce outcome disparities in pediatric cancer likely need to start in the primary care setting where timeliness of diagnosis can be addressed.

Background Physical activity reduces the risk of major cardiovascular events, but many people who are most at-risk do not get enough exercise. In the BE ACTIVE randomized controlled trial, - a study in which text messages were used to communicate with participants– game playing (gamification), financial incentives, and the combination of gamification plus financial incentives increased physical activity from baseline more than control over a 12-month intervention period. Participants randomized to gamification plus financial incentives maintained a significantly greater increase than control over the 6-month post-intervention follow-up. To understand the impact of the interventions on motivation and performance we conducted semi-structured interviews with a subset of participants. Methods Using extreme case sampling, interviewees were selected from participants who were randomized to an intervention arm and were identified as either high or low performers based on their change from baseline to the end of the trial in mean daily step count. During semi-structured telephone interviews, participants were asked their thoughts and feelings about the trial, motivations for participation, and about specific aspects of the intervention. Interviews were conducted within 6 months after the participant completed participation in the trial. Thematic analysis was conducted inductively and deductively, and identified themes were mapped onto the COM-B Framework to understand the interaction between different themes. Results We achieved saturation after conducting interviews with 55 participants (30 high performers and 25 low performers); 19 in the gamification arm, 19 in the financial incentives arm, and 17 in the gamification plus financial incentives arm. Based on qualitative interviews, the importance of individual accountability via goal setting and feedback appears to be a primary factor in behavior change in this trial; however, the combination of accountability with the opportunity of access to the intervention had additional impact on the results. Conclusion Gamification and financial incentives both increased physical activity in the BE ACTIVE study, but results may be improved by tailoring interventions based on participants’ personal traits and level of social support to optimize motivation. (328 words) Trial registration NCT03911141 Registration date: 04/09/2019.

Stigma around hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is an important and understudied barrier to HCV prevention, treatment, and elimination. To date, no validated instrument exists to measure patients' experiences of HCV stigma. This study aimed to revise the Berger (2001) HIV stigma scale and evaluate its psychometric properties among patients with HCV infection. The Berger HIV stigma scale was revised to ask about HCV and administered to patients with HCV (n = 270) in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Scale reliability was evaluated as internal consistency by calculating Cronbach's alpha. Exploratory factor analysis was performed to evaluate construct validity by comparing item clustering to the Berger HIV stigma scale subscales. Item response theory was employed to further evaluate individual items and to calibrate items for simulated computer adaptive testing sessions in order to identify potential shortened instruments. The revised HCV Stigma Scale was found to have good reliability (α = 0.957). After excluding items for low loadings, the exploratory factor analysis indicated good construct validity with 85% of items loading on pre-defined factors. Analyses strongly suggested the predominance of an underlying unidimensional factor solution, which yielded a 33-item scale after items were removed for low loading and differential item functioning. Adaptive simulations indicated that the scale could be substantially shortened without detectable information loss. The 33-item HCV Stigma Scale showed sufficient reliability and construct validity. We also conducted computer adaptive testing simulations and identified shortened six- and three-item scale alternatives that performed comparably to the original 40-item scale.

Most patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection perceive some degree of disease-related stigma. Misunderstandings about diseases may contribute to disease-related stigma. The objective of this study was to evaluate patient-level knowledge about HCV infection transmission and natural history and its association with HCV-related stigma among HCV-infected patients. We conducted a cross-sectional survey study among 265 patients with HCV in Philadelphia using the HCV Stigma Scale and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) Hepatitis C Follow-up Survey (2001–2008). The association between HCV knowledge and HCV-related stigma was evaluated via linear regression. Overall knowledge about HCV transmission and natural history was high, with >80% of participants answering ≥9 of 11 items correctly (median number of correct responses, 9 [82%]), HCV-related knowledge was similar between HIV/HCV-coinfected and HCV-monoinfected participants (p = 0.30). A higher level of HCV-related knowledge was associated with greater perceived HCV-related stigma (β, 2.34 ([95% CI, 0.51–4.17]; p = 0.013). Results were similar after adjusting for age, race, ethnicity, HIV status, education level, stage of HCV management, time since diagnosis, and history of injection drug use. In this study, increased HCV-related knowledge was associated with greater perceptions of HCV stigma. Clinicians may consider allotting time to address common misconceptions about HCV when educating patients about HCV infection, which may counterbalance the stigmatizing impact of greater HCV-related knowledge.