Identity in multicultural societies: who do we think we are?

This paper examines identity issues in multicultural Australia. In its extreme, negative form, assumptions that certain characteristics apply to all members of an ethnic group can be attributed to racism. However, the belief that individuals who share the same ethnic background have similar needs, interests and perceptions is also reflected in business, government policy and academic research. Often, ethnic groupings used for research and policy formulation are very broad and fail to take into account within-group differences. The criteria used to assess an individuals membership of an ethnic group can be problematic. Criteria based purely on objective measures such as country of birth or ethnic ancestry do not take into account acculturation processes or the degree to which individuals consider themselves to be \u27ethnic \u27. These objective measures are complicated further as individuals may have ethnic roots from multiple countries depending on their family composition over several generations. This theory-focused paper proposes that ethnic identity should be viewed as a subjective phenomenon where individuals are likely to align themselves with the ethnic background to which they most identify. This has implications for research and policy making in multicultural societies.<br /

Arts marketing challenges in multicultural societies

With an increasingly diverse, multicultural society in many countries, it is timely to look more closely at the current literature on arts marketing, ethnic identity and segmentation issues. The growth of diverse, multicultural societies in many countries warrants a closer examination of arts marketing and the use of ethnicity as a basis for segmentation, as these issues have implications for attracting and retaining arts audiences and other consumers of arts related activities. Researchers in the arts industry have stressed the importance of understanding the fundamentals of audience development and the ability to focus on satisfying the needs and wants of their audiences. The focus on marketing activities comes at a time when there is greater pressure on arts organisations to move beyond their traditional role as subsidized non-profit organisations in order to become more self-supporting. Internationally, audience development in the arts industry has focused on segmentation dimensions such as youth, mature aged individuals, geographic location (rural), individuals with disabilities, low income earners, and individuals with culturally diverse backgrounds. Most of these potential segments are under represented in the population of arts consumers in Australia, the United Kingdom, Singapore, and North America. Of those dimensions, segmentation of arts markets by cultural differences such as ethnic identity appears to be a somewhat under researched area. Hofstede\u27s (1980) model of national cultural differences continues to be widely used as a basis for strategic and marketing decisions in international business. However, the cultural characteristics attributed to individuals in their country of birth are likely to change through immigration to another country. In this situation, the ability to predict the consumption behaviour of various ethnic groups is complicated by acculturation processes in which arrivals attempt to adapt to their new environment. Over time, this process has resulted in the emergence of bicultural individuals who are able to switch, at will, between their ethnic identity and an identity aligned with their host country, or a combination of both at any time. Ethnic identity and affiliation with ethnic groups can also change over time, suggesting challenges for arts marketing approaches, and the application of market segmentation theory in particular.<br /

Ethnic identity and subjective wellbeing: connections and possibilities

The benefits of multicultural societies, and the contributions made by immigrant populations to daily life in their adopted countries, have been discussed in the literature for many years. In some countries like Australia, first and second generation immigrants comprise a large proportion of the population, suggesting that ongoing research on issues of cultural diversity and psychological wellbeing in these countries are likely to benefit our understanding of multicultural societies in general. Recent developments in the understanding of subjective wellbeing encourages the use of this variable to inform the potential of ethnic identity to influence an individual&rsquo;s sense of personal wellbeing. Using the homeostatic model of subjective wellbeing as a foundation, this theory-based paper discusses relationships between ethnic identity and the homeostatic model, outlines some of the complexities involved in measuring these constructs, and suggests a way ahead for future research.<br /

Promoting patient engagement with self-management support information: a qualitative meta-synthesis of processes influencing uptake

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Patient information has been viewed as a key component of self-management. However, little attention has been given to methods of dissemination or implementation of effective information strategies. Previous problems identified with the use and implementation of patient information point to the need to explore the way in which patients engage with and use information to support self-management for chronic conditions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Four published qualitative studies from a programme of research about self-management were analysed as a group; these included studies of the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); self-help in anxiety and depression (SHADE); menorrhagia, treatment, information, and preference (MENTIP) study; and self-help for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). For the analysis, we used an adapted meta-ethnographic approach to the synthesis of qualitative data in order to develop an evidence base.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The ontological status and experience of the condition in everyday life was the most dominant theme to emerge from this synthesis. This, coupled with access to and experience of traditional health services responses, shaped the engagement with and use of information to support self-management. Five key elements were found which were likely to influence this: the perception and awareness of alternative self-management possibilities; the prior extent and nature of engagement with information; the extent of and ability to self-manage; opportunities for use of the information and the stage of the illness career; and congruence and synergy with the professional role.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>People with chronic conditions need support from providers in both supply and engagement with information, in a way which gives legitimacy to the person's own self-management strategies and possible alternatives. Thus, a link could usefully be made between information offered, as well as patients' past experiences of self-management and engagement with services for their condition. The timeliness of the information should be considered, both in terms of the illness career and the type of condition (<it>i.e</it>., before depression gets too bad or time to reflect on existing knowledge about a condition and how it is to be managed) and in terms of the pre-existing relationship with services (<it>i.e</it>., options explored and tried).</p> <p>More considered use of information (how it is provided, by whom, and at what point it should be introduced) is key to facilitating patients' engagement with and therefore use of information to support self-management.</p

Association Between Results of a Gene Expression Signature Assay and Recurrence-Free Interval in Patients With Stage II Colon Cancer in Cancer and Leukemia Group B 9581 (Alliance)

PURPOSE: Conventional staging methods are inadequate to identify patients with stage II colon cancer (CC) who are at high risk of recurrence after surgery with curative intent. ColDx is a gene expression, microarray-based assay shown to be independently prognostic for recurrence-free interval (RFI) and overall survival in CC. The objective of this study was to further validate ColDx using formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded specimens collected as part of the Alliance phase III trial, C9581. PATIENTS AND METHODS: C9581 evaluated edrecolomab versus observation in patients with stage II CC and reported no survival benefit. Under an initial case-cohort sampling design, a randomly selected subcohort (RS) comprised 514 patients from 901 eligible patients with available tissue. Forty-nine additional patients with recurrence events were included in the analysis. Final analysis comprised 393 patients: 360 RS (58 events) and 33 non-RS events. Risk status was determined for each patient by ColDx. The Self-Prentice method was used to test the association between the resulting ColDx risk score and RFI adjusting for standard prognostic variables. RESULTS: Fifty-five percent of patients (216 of 393) were classified as high risk. After adjustment for prognostic variables that included mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency, ColDx high-risk patients exhibited significantly worse RFI (multivariable hazard ratio, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.5; P < .01). Age and MMR status were marginally significant. RFI at 5 years for patients classified as high risk was 82% (95% CI, 79% to 85%), compared with 91% (95% CI, 89% to 93%) for patients classified as low risk. CONCLUSION: ColDx is associated with RFI in the C9581 subsample in the presence of other prognostic factors, including MMR deficiency. ColDx could be incorporated with the traditional clinical markers of risk to refine patient prognosis

Health Disparities Between Appalachian and Non-Appalachian Counties in Virginia USA

The examination of health disparities among people within Appalachian counties compared to people living in other counties is needed to find ways to strategically target improvements in community health in the United States of America (USA). Methods: A telephone survey of a random sample of adults living in households within communities of all counties of the state of Virginia (VA) in the USA was conducted. Findings: Health status was poorer among those in communities within Appalachian counties in VA and health insurance did not make a difference. Health perception was significantly worse in residents within communities in Appalachian counties compared to non-Appalachian community residents (30.5 vs. 17.4% rated their health status as poor/fair), and was worse even among those with no chronic diseases. Within communities in Appalachian counties, black residents report significantly better health perception than do white residents. Conclusion: Residents living in communities in Appalachian counties in VA are not receiving adequate health care, even among those with health insurance. More research with a larger ethnic minority sample is needed to investigate the racial/ethnic disparities in self-reported health and health care utilization within communities

Early experience of COVID-19 vaccination in adults with systemic rheumatic diseases : Results from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Vaccine Survey

Funding Information: Competing interests SES has received funding from the Vasculitis Foundation and the Vasculitis Clinical Research Consortium unrelated to this work. JL has received research grant funding from Pfizer unrelated to this work. ES is a Board Member of the Canadian Arthritis Patient Alliance, a patient run, volunteer-based organisation whose activities are primarily supported by independent grants from pharmaceutical companies. MP was supported by a Rheumatology Research Foundation Scientist Development grant. DA-R is a Scientific Advisor for GlaxoSmithKilne unrelated to this work. FB reports personal fees from Boehringer, Bone Therapeutics, Expanscience, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Merck Sereno, MSD, Nordic, Novartis, Pfizer, Regulaxis, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, Servier, UCB, Peptinov, TRB Chemedica and 4P Pharma outside of the submitted work. No funding relevant to this manuscript. RC: speakers bureau for Janssen, Roche, Sanofi, AbbVie. KD reports no COI-unpaid volunteer president of the Autoinflammatory Alliance. Any grants or funding from pharma is received by the non-profit organisation only. CLH received funding under a sponsored research agreement unrelated to the data in the paper from Vifor Pharmaceuticals. LeK has received a research grant from Lilly unrelated to this work. AHJK participated in consulting, advisory board or speaker's bureau for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Annexon Biosciences, Exagen Diagnostics and GlaxoSmithKilne and received funding under a sponsored research agreement unrelated to the data in the paper from GlaxoSmithKline. JSingh has received consultant fees from Crealta/ Horizon, Medisys, Fidia, PK Med, Two Labs, Adept Field Solutions, Clinical Care Options, Clearview Healthcare Partners, Putnam Associates, Focus Forward, Navigant Consulting, Spherix, MedIQ, Jupiter Life Science, UBM, Trio Health, Medscape, WebMD and Practice Point Communications; and the National Institutes of Health and the American College of Rheumatology. JSingh owns stock options in TPT Global Tech, Vaxart Pharmaceuticals and Charlotte’s Web Holdings. JSingh previously owned stock options in Amarin, Viking and Moderna Pharmaceuticals. JSingh is on the speaker’s bureau of Simply Speaking. JSingh is a member of the executive of Outcomes Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT), an organisation that develops outcome measures in rheumatology and receives arms-length funding from eight companies. JSingh serves on the FDA Arthritis Advisory Committee. JSingh is the chair of the Veterans Affairs Rheumatology Field Advisory Committee. JSingh is the editor and the Director of the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group Satellite Center on Network Meta-analysis. NSingh is supported by funding from the Rheumatology Research Foundation Investigator Award and the American Heart Association. MFU-G has received research support from Pfizer and Janssen, unrelated to this work. SB reports personal fees from Novartis, AbbVie, Pfizer and Horizon Pharma, outside the submitted work. RG reports personal fees from AbbVie New Zealand, Cornerstones, Janssen New Zealand and personal fees and non-financial support Pfizer New Zealand (all <US$10 000) outside the submitted work. PMM reports personal fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, grants and personal fees from Orphazyme, outside the submitted work. PCR reports personal fees from AbbVie, Gilead, Lilly and Roche, grants and personal fees from Novartis, UCB Pharma, Janssen and Pfizer and non-financial support from BMS, outside the submitted work. PS reports honoraria from Social media editor for @ACR_Journals, outside the submitted work. ZSW reports grants from NIH, BMS and Principia/ Sanofi and personal fees from Viela Bio and MedPace, outside the submitted work. JY reports personal fees from Pfizer and Eli Lilly, and grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. MJL reports grants from American College of Rheumatology, during the conduct of the study and consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Actelion, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Celgene, Gilead, J&J, Mallinckrodt, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, Sobi and UCB, outside the submitted work. LGR was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS; ZIAES101074) of the National Institutes of Health. JH reports grants from Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) and Rheumatology Research Alliance, and personal fees from Novartis, Pfizer and Biogen, outside the submitted work. JSimard received research grant funding from the National Institutes of Health unrelated to this work (NIAMS: R01 AR077103 and NIAID R01 AI154533). JSparks has performed consultancy for AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova Diagnostics, Optum and Pfizer unrelated to this work. Funding Information: Funding This study was supported by the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology and American College of Rheumatology Research and Education Foundation. Dr. Lisa Rider's involvement was supported in part by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Publisher Copyright: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Background. We describe the early experiences of adults with systemic rheumatic disease who received the COVID-19 vaccine. Methods From 2 April to 30 April 2021, we conducted an online, international survey of adults with systemic rheumatic disease who received COVID-19 vaccination. We collected patient-reported data on clinician communication, beliefs and intent about discontinuing disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) around the time of vaccination, and patient-reported adverse events after vaccination. Results We analysed 2860 adults with systemic rheumatic diseases who received COVID-19 vaccination (mean age 55.3 years, 86.7% female, 86.3% white). Types of COVID-19 vaccines were Pfizer-BioNTech (53.2%), Oxford/AstraZeneca (22.6%), Moderna (21.3%), Janssen/Johnson & Johnson (1.7%) and others (1.2%). The most common rheumatic disease was rheumatoid arthritis (42.3%), and 81.2% of respondents were on a DMARD. The majority (81.9%) reported communicating with clinicians about vaccination. Most (66.9%) were willing to temporarily discontinue DMARDs to improve vaccine efficacy, although many (44.3%) were concerned about rheumatic disease flares. After vaccination, the most reported patient-reported adverse events were fatigue/somnolence (33.4%), headache (27.7%), muscle/joint pains (22.8%) and fever/chills (19.9%). Rheumatic disease flares that required medication changes occurred in 4.6%. Conclusion. Among adults with systemic rheumatic disease who received COVID-19 vaccination, patient-reported adverse events were typical of those reported in the general population. Most patients were willing to temporarily discontinue DMARDs to improve vaccine efficacy. The relatively low frequency of rheumatic disease flare requiring medications was reassuring.publishersversionPeer reviewe