Project description:BackgroundRacism and racial discrimination are fundamental causes and determinants of health and health inequalities globally, with children and adolescents particularly vulnerable. Racial discrimination is a common stressor in the lives of many children and adolescents, with growing evidence of negative associations between racial discrimination and multiple domains of child and adolescent health. Addressing racism and racial discrimination must be core public health priorities, even more so among children and young people. Schools are key settings in the lives of children and adolescents and become increasingly more important to identity formation. School communities, teachers and peers greatly influence children and adolescents' beliefs about race and difference. Schools are therefore key sites for the delivery of population-based programs to reduce racism and promote proactive bystander behaviour and healthy resistance to racism among all children and adolescents as well as among the adults.MethodsThis study examines the feasibility and acceptability of the 'Speak Out Against Racism (SOAR)' program, a whole of school, multi-level, multi-strategy program that aimed to promote effective bystander responses to racism and racial discrimination in primary schools. A mixed-methods, quasi-experimental design was used. Students in Years 5 and 6 (10-12 years) across six schools completed surveys pre- and post- intervention (N = 645; 52% female; 6% Indigenous, 10% Middle Eastern, African, Latinx or Pacific Islander, 21% Asian, 52% Anglo/European). Focus groups with students and interviews with staff collected qualitative data about their experiences of the program and their views about the program's perceived need, implementation, impacts and suggested improvements.ResultsQuantitative data showed student prosocial skills and teacher inter-racial climate improved in intervention schools compared to comparison schools. Qualitative data highlighted teacher attitudinal and behaviour change regarding racism, and student reduced interpersonal racial discrimination, improved peer prosocial norms, commitment to anti-racism, knowledge of proactive bystander responses and confidence and self-efficacy to intervene to address racism.ConclusionsThis study provides quantitative evidence of the potential of the SOAR program to improve the prosocial skills of students and their perceptions of the inter-racial school climate provided by their teachers. This program also provided qualitative evidence of the potential to promote teacher and student attitudinal and behavioural change. Further refinement and testing of the program in a large scale implementation trial is recommended.
Project description:This article explores the fit between the advertised brand and the pandemic as a potential influence on consumers' intentions to engage in socially responsible health behaviors (social distancing, mask wearing, and getting tested when exposed). In an advanced and emerging market setting we find that advertisements for brands that are perceived as high on brand-pandemic fit enhance consumers' socially desirable COVID-19 health behavioral intentions and changes in brand credibility is the mechanism that drives such intentions. Fit is especially beneficial on the intentions of consumers whose health beliefs reflect only low to moderate concern about COVID-19. Consumers with low or moderate (vs. high) COVID-19 health beliefs exhibit an increased susceptibility to the fit-desirable health behavioral intentions relationship. The results are also corroborated in an emerging market context. Together, the results establish links between brand-pandemic fit of advertisements, brand credibility, health beliefs, and consumers' intentions to engage in socially desirable health behaviors. The results suggest that advertising can play a role in encouraging desirable health behaviors and can promote consumer welfare via ads of high fit products and services that provide benefits during the pandemic in both advanced and emerging markets.
Project description:BackgroundThere has been little examination of consumer attitudes towards the commercial advertising of healthcare services in Australia and how marketing is used by consumers in their health decision-making. In this research, we examined how consumers reported commercial advertising helped them to understand the health services available to them and the influence that marketing had upon their choices.MethodsA survey instrument using a Likert scale to indicate agreement or disagreement with 21 questions was developed using qualitative interviews before being distributed online within Australia. Sampling of participants was stratified by age, gender and location. The results were subjected to statistical analysis with Spearman Rank Correlation test being used for bivariate analysis.ResultsOne thousand five hundred sixty-four complete surveys were collected. The results revealed certain consumer beliefs, for example; the title of 'Dr' was believed to indicate skill and high levels of training (81.0%), with 80.3% agreeing incorrectly that use of the title was strictly regulated. Participants reported to have a higher confidence in their own abilities (71.2%) than the public (52.8%) in assessing health advertising. The level of self-confidence increased with higher education level and decreased by age (p < 0.05). Testimonials were reported to be lacking in reliability (67.7%) and that they should not be used in healthcare in the same manner as they are used in other industries. Only 44.8% of participants reported that they felt confident to spot a review that was not written by a genuine user of a service.ConclusionsThe data demonstrated that many health consumers felt that while commercial health advertising was helpful, it was also confusing, with many participants also holding mistaken beliefs around other elements of commercial health advertising. While the advertising of healthcare services might have educational effects and be superficially empowering, advertising is primarily intended to sell, not educate. This research demonstrates that there is significant potential for healthcare advertising to mislead. Future developments in regulatory health advertising policy, and the related ethical frameworks developed by professional healthcare associations, need to consider how the consumers of healthcare services might be better protected from misleading and predatory advertising practices.
Project description:Changes in demographic and socioeconomic characteristics have contributed to an increase in away-from-home food consumption. Although consumers are increasingly demanding higher quality food, unbalanced nutrition intakes and health issues such as obesity remain prominent predicaments. This paper investigates the relationship between the frequency of having Food Away From Home (FAFH), balanced dietary intakes, and obesity (controlling for covariates) among Korean adults aged 19 to 64. Whether there exists a linear relationship between the number of having FAFH and health outcome is investigated and the optimal number of having FAFH that leads to the best health outcome is identified in the study. The results suggest that Food Away From Home generally increases deviations of dietary intakes from the reference intakes and high-frequency FAFH consumers have an elevated chance of being obese (36.22%). However, having FAFH 1-7 times per week is associated with decreased body mass index (BMI) and a lower chance of being obese in comparison to the outcomes of having food at home. The optimal level of consuming FAFH is identified to be 5-7 times per week in terms of BMI and obesity. However, consuming no FAFH is suggested to be the best in terms of balanced nutrition intake.
Project description:Bioinformatics has become an indispensable part of life science over the past 2 decades. However, bioinformatics education is not well integrated at the undergraduate level, especially in liberal arts colleges and regional universities in the United States. One significant obstacle pointed out by the Network for Integrating Bioinformatics into Life Sciences Education is the lack of faculty in the bioinformatics area. Most current life science professors did not acquire bioinformatics analysis skills during their own training. Consequently, a great number of undergraduate and graduate students do not get the chance to learn bioinformatics or computational biology skills within a structured curriculum during their education. To address this gap, we developed a module-based, week-long short course to train small college and regional university professors with essential bioinformatics skills. The bioinformatics modules were built to be adapted by the professor-trainees afterward and used in their own classes. All the course materials can be accessed at https://github.com/TheJacksonLaboratory/JAXBD2K-ShortCourse.
Project description:BackgroundEating outside the home is challenging for consumers with food allergy (FA) and intolerance (FI) and lack of allergen information provision in eating out venues can lead to unnecessary restrictions. Following European legislation (2014) designed to improve allergen information provision, little is known about differences in information provision experienced by consumers seeking to avoid particular allergens, or how this impacts on their eating out experiences. This study compared the information provision that consumers with FA/FI to different allergens experience when eating out.MethodsUsing mixed methods, participants were recruited from across the UK and took part in self-report surveys or in-depth interviews. Surveys were completed by 232 participants avoiding either gluten (n = 66), nuts (peanuts/tree nuts) (n = 94), or milk (n = 74), and responses were subject to quantitative analyses. Interviews were carried out with 49 participants avoiding either gluten (n = 13), nuts (n = 14), milk (n = 13) or a combination of these allergens (n = 9), and analysed using the framework approach.ResultsAlthough general improvements in information provision following the legislation were reported, variations in provision between allergen groups led participants seeking to avoid milk to conclude that their dietary needs were less well-understood and seen as less important. These perceptions were reflected in a reluctance to involve eating out venue staff in deliberations about the potential for milk-free meal options.ConclusionsThe provision of visual indicators of the presence of milk and of staff trained in allergen-awareness would improve the eating out experiences of consumers seeking to avoid milk. Medical professions can play a key role in encouraging these patients to pursue their right to make enquiries about allergens in order to avoid accidental milk ingestion when eating out.
Project description:BackgroundYoung people in Uganda face challenges in achieving their sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), such as lack of information, limited access to services, teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections. To address this, their empowerment - including their ability to express themselves and make decisions, is a key strategy. This study assessed how young people's voice and choice concerning sex and relationships changed over the period of 3 years of implementation of the Get Up Speak Out! programme.MethodsData were collected through a household survey with young people (15-24 years) and through focus group discussions, in-depth interviews and key informant interviews with youth and community stakeholders in 2017 for the baseline and 2020 for the end-line. Using the difference-in-difference technique and thematic analysis, changes in key outcomes were assessed over time between intervention and control area.ResultsThere were limited changes over time in the intervention area, which did not differ from changes in the control area. Young people were able to express themselves and expand their decision-making space on sex and relationships, in particular if they were older, male and in a relationship. Young women negotiated their agency, often by engaging in transactional sex. However, youth were still restricted in their self-expression and their choices as speaking about sexuality was taboo, particularly with adults. This was influenced by the political and religious climate around SRHR in Uganda, which emphasised abstinence as the best option for young people to prevent SRHR-related problems.ConclusionsYoung people's SRHR remains a challenge in Uganda in the context of a conservative political and religious environment that reinforces social and gender norms around youth and young women's sexuality. The limited effect of the programme on increasing young people's voice and choice concerning relationships in Uganda can be understood in the context of a ban on comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) and the COVID-19 pandemic. These structural and emerging contextual factors enforce the taboo around youth sexuality and hinder their access to SRHR information and services. Multi-component and targeted programmes are needed to influence changes at the structural, community and individual level.
Project description:ObjectivePeople who experience marginalization, including Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Plus (ie, all other marginalized genders and sexual orientations) people (LGBTQ+) experience discrimination during healthcare interactions, which negatively impacts patient-provider communication and care. Yet, scarce research examines the lived experience of unfair treatment among patients from marginalized groups to guide patient-centered tools that improve healthcare equity.Materials and methodsWe interviewed 25 BIPOC and/or LGBTQ+ people about their experiences of unfair treatment and discrimination when visiting healthcare providers. Through thematic analysis, we describe participants' immediate reactions and longer-term consequences of those experiences.ResultsWe identified 4 ways that participants reacted to discrimination in the moment: Fighting, Fleeing, Excusing, and Working Around Bias. Long-term consequences reflect 6 ways they coped: Delaying or Avoiding Care, Changing Healthcare Providers, Self-prescribing, Covering Behaviors, Experiencing Health Complications, and Mistrusting Healthcare Institutions.DiscussionBy describing how patients react to experiences of unfair treatment and discrimination, our findings enhance the understanding of health disparities as patients cope and struggle to speak out.To combat these problems, we identify 3 future directions for informatics interventions that improve provider behavior, support patient advocacy, and address power dynamics in healthcare.ConclusionsBIPOC and LGBTQ+ patients' perspectives on navigating unfair treatment and discrimination in healthcare offers critical insight into their experiences and long-term consequences of those experiences. Understanding the circumstances and consequences of unfair treatment, discrimination, and the impact of bias through this patient-centered lens is crucial to inform informatics technologies that promote health equity.
Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to explore the barriers and facilitators to career progression for female medical clinical academics from the perspectives of female associate professors and professors, with a particular focus on women with caring responsibilities.DesignAn exploratory qualitative approach was adopted. Data from semistructured interviews conducted via video calls were analysed using thematic analysis.SettingTwo major universities in the East Midlands of England.ParticipantsThe sample consisted of 13 female medical clinical academic associate professors and professors representing a range of medical specialties.ResultsFemale medical clinical academics experienced barriers and facilitators to progress at individual, interpersonal, institutional/procedural and societal levels.ConclusionsMany barriers experienced at an individual level by female medical clinical academics are heavily influenced by their interpersonal relationships, the academic environment in which they work and broader institutional and procedural issues which, in turn, are influenced by stereotypical societal views on gender roles. Facilitating factors, including measures to increase the numbers of female leaders, may lead to a change of culture that is supportive to aspiring female clinical academics as well as enabling a healthy work/life balance for women and men with caring responsibilities.