Building capacity for collaborative research between basic scientists and underrepresented communities in cancer research

Purpose: Basic science research is critical for understanding biological mechanisms essential to advances in cancer prevention, diagnoses and treatment. However, most of this research is conducted outside of the purview of community observation or input, leaving these research processes mysterious and subsequent findings disconnected from the communities they intend to benefit. This paper discusses strategies to build capacity for collaborations between basic scientists and Hispanic community members at the University of Arizona Cancer Center (UACC). Methods: Through partnership of the Cancer Biology Program and Office of Community Outreach and Engagement both at UACC, the Research Outreach for Southern Arizona (ROSA) program was developed as a way to forward the following strategies to build capacity for collaboration: forming a community working group, launching a community and student ambassador program, hosting scientific cafés and developing a community-based survey. Results: The strategies underpinning the ROSA program have been integral in bridging dialogue between basic scientists and the community and fostering bidirectional learning opportunities. Each of the strategies presented have documented successes and based on the lessons learned, they have evolved into productive and integral parts of UACC’s overall strategy of bridging scientific research and communities. Conclusion: While the strategies discussed are evolving, they help foster dialogue and exchange between basic scientists and community members that demystifies basic science research and facilitates culturally tailored approaches to address health disparities of vulnerable communities. These strategies also have the potential to shift cancer research into a paradigm that is more collaborative and transformative.12 month embargo; first published 03 June 2023This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]

The impact of COVID-19 on academic performance among college-level students

Objective: The objective of this study is to assess the impact of COVID-19 on university students’ academic performance. Participants: Our sample consisted of students 18 years old and above enrolled at least part-time during the Spring 2020 semester. Methods: This cross-sectional survey examined the individual, social, and economic impacts of COVID-19 on academic performance. We examined factors associated with a change in GPA between the two semesters. Results: Most students reported no change in GPA. Students of color had significantly increased odds of reporting a decrease in GPA than non-Hispanic White students (OR = 2.70, 95% CI: 1.01, 7.16). Students who had someone close to them test positive for COVID-19 had increased odds of reporting a decrease in GPA (OR = 1.85, 95% CI: 0.55, 5.93). Conclusion: Higher learning institutions may need to develop strategies to improve support for students that have been socio-economically impacted by COVID-19.12 month embargo; published online: 03 January 2023This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]

Racial/ethnic disparities in influenza risk perception and vaccination intention among Pima County residents in Arizona

While influenza cases in Arizona have nearly tripled since 2018, vaccination rates continue to lag. Statewide, Hispanics and African Americans had the lowest vaccination rates despite having higher influenza infection rates than Whites. Given Arizona’s racial influenza vaccination disparity and the general increase in vaccination hesitancy due to COVID-19, the purpose of this study was to better understand the influences of seasonal influenza vaccination in Arizona during the COVID-19 pandemic using qualitative methods. Findings from this study revealed that many participants were motivated to get the influenza vaccine to protect their family and close friends. The heightened concern for COVID-19 prompted some Hispanic/Latino focus group discussion participants to consider getting vaccinated. However, many Hispanic/Latino participants also expressed that they stopped getting influenza vaccine due to negative vaccination experiences or concern about sickness following immunization. African American participants primarily discussed receiving the vaccine as part of their routine health visit. Compared to other races, more White participants believed that vaccination was unimportant because they were healthy, and the people they interacted with never got sick. Distinct factors influence risk perception and vaccination intention across different racial/ethnic groups. Effective interventions can account for these factors and be tailored to the target population to maximize vaccination uptake.Open access articleThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]

The conceptual model for this review adapted from the Social Ecological Model.

The conceptual model for this review adapted from the Social Ecological Model.</p

PRISMA flow diagram for the screening process.

Recognizing challenges faced by people living with HIV is vital for improving their HIV treatment outcomes. While individual-level interventions play a crucial role, community factors can shape the impact of individual interventions on treatment outcomes. Understanding neighborhood characteristics’ association with HIV treatment outcomes is crucial for optimizing effectiveness. This review aims to summarize the research scope on the association between neighborhood characteristics and HIV treatment outcomes. The databases PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Embase (Elsevier), and PsychINFO (EBSCOhost) were searched from the start of each database to Nov 21, 2022. Screening was performed by three independent reviewers. Full-text publications of all study design meeting inclusion criteria were included in the review. There were no language or geographical limitations. Conference proceedings, abstract only, and opinion reports were excluded from the review. The search yielded 7,822 publications, 35 of which met the criteria for inclusion in the review. Studies assessed the relationship between neighborhood-level disadvantage (n = 24), composition and interaction (n = 17), social-economic status (n = 18), deprivation (n = 16), disorder (n = 8), and rural-urban status (n = 7) and HIV treatment outcomes. The relationship between all neighborhood characteristics and HIV treatment outcomes was not consistent across studies. Only 7 studies found deprivation had a negative association with HIV treatment outcomes; 6 found that areas with specific racial/ethnic densities were associated with poor HIV treatment outcomes, and 5 showed that disorder was associated with poor HIV treatment outcomes. Three studies showed that rural residence was associated with improved HIV treatment outcomes. There were inconsistent findings regarding the association between neighborhood characteristics and HIV treatment outcomes. While the impact of neighborhood characteristics on disease outcomes is highly recognized, there is a paucity of standardized definitions and metrics for community characteristics to support a robust assessment of this hypothesis. Comparative studies that define and assess how specific neighborhood indicators independently or jointly affect HIV treatment outcomes are highly needed.</div

Neighborhood characteristics definitions.

Recognizing challenges faced by people living with HIV is vital for improving their HIV treatment outcomes. While individual-level interventions play a crucial role, community factors can shape the impact of individual interventions on treatment outcomes. Understanding neighborhood characteristics’ association with HIV treatment outcomes is crucial for optimizing effectiveness. This review aims to summarize the research scope on the association between neighborhood characteristics and HIV treatment outcomes. The databases PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Embase (Elsevier), and PsychINFO (EBSCOhost) were searched from the start of each database to Nov 21, 2022. Screening was performed by three independent reviewers. Full-text publications of all study design meeting inclusion criteria were included in the review. There were no language or geographical limitations. Conference proceedings, abstract only, and opinion reports were excluded from the review. The search yielded 7,822 publications, 35 of which met the criteria for inclusion in the review. Studies assessed the relationship between neighborhood-level disadvantage (n = 24), composition and interaction (n = 17), social-economic status (n = 18), deprivation (n = 16), disorder (n = 8), and rural-urban status (n = 7) and HIV treatment outcomes. The relationship between all neighborhood characteristics and HIV treatment outcomes was not consistent across studies. Only 7 studies found deprivation had a negative association with HIV treatment outcomes; 6 found that areas with specific racial/ethnic densities were associated with poor HIV treatment outcomes, and 5 showed that disorder was associated with poor HIV treatment outcomes. Three studies showed that rural residence was associated with improved HIV treatment outcomes. There were inconsistent findings regarding the association between neighborhood characteristics and HIV treatment outcomes. While the impact of neighborhood characteristics on disease outcomes is highly recognized, there is a paucity of standardized definitions and metrics for community characteristics to support a robust assessment of this hypothesis. Comparative studies that define and assess how specific neighborhood indicators independently or jointly affect HIV treatment outcomes are highly needed.</div

Descriptive statistics of included studies.

Recognizing challenges faced by people living with HIV is vital for improving their HIV treatment outcomes. While individual-level interventions play a crucial role, community factors can shape the impact of individual interventions on treatment outcomes. Understanding neighborhood characteristics’ association with HIV treatment outcomes is crucial for optimizing effectiveness. This review aims to summarize the research scope on the association between neighborhood characteristics and HIV treatment outcomes. The databases PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Embase (Elsevier), and PsychINFO (EBSCOhost) were searched from the start of each database to Nov 21, 2022. Screening was performed by three independent reviewers. Full-text publications of all study design meeting inclusion criteria were included in the review. There were no language or geographical limitations. Conference proceedings, abstract only, and opinion reports were excluded from the review. The search yielded 7,822 publications, 35 of which met the criteria for inclusion in the review. Studies assessed the relationship between neighborhood-level disadvantage (n = 24), composition and interaction (n = 17), social-economic status (n = 18), deprivation (n = 16), disorder (n = 8), and rural-urban status (n = 7) and HIV treatment outcomes. The relationship between all neighborhood characteristics and HIV treatment outcomes was not consistent across studies. Only 7 studies found deprivation had a negative association with HIV treatment outcomes; 6 found that areas with specific racial/ethnic densities were associated with poor HIV treatment outcomes, and 5 showed that disorder was associated with poor HIV treatment outcomes. Three studies showed that rural residence was associated with improved HIV treatment outcomes. There were inconsistent findings regarding the association between neighborhood characteristics and HIV treatment outcomes. While the impact of neighborhood characteristics on disease outcomes is highly recognized, there is a paucity of standardized definitions and metrics for community characteristics to support a robust assessment of this hypothesis. Comparative studies that define and assess how specific neighborhood indicators independently or jointly affect HIV treatment outcomes are highly needed.</div

Studies description and reported relationships between neighborhood characteristics on HIV treatment outcomes.

Studies description and reported relationships between neighborhood characteristics on HIV treatment outcomes.</p

Lkimaru_PRISMA ScR checklist.

Recognizing challenges faced by people living with HIV is vital for improving their HIV treatment outcomes. While individual-level interventions play a crucial role, community factors can shape the impact of individual interventions on treatment outcomes. Understanding neighborhood characteristics’ association with HIV treatment outcomes is crucial for optimizing effectiveness. This review aims to summarize the research scope on the association between neighborhood characteristics and HIV treatment outcomes. The databases PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Embase (Elsevier), and PsychINFO (EBSCOhost) were searched from the start of each database to Nov 21, 2022. Screening was performed by three independent reviewers. Full-text publications of all study design meeting inclusion criteria were included in the review. There were no language or geographical limitations. Conference proceedings, abstract only, and opinion reports were excluded from the review. The search yielded 7,822 publications, 35 of which met the criteria for inclusion in the review. Studies assessed the relationship between neighborhood-level disadvantage (n = 24), composition and interaction (n = 17), social-economic status (n = 18), deprivation (n = 16), disorder (n = 8), and rural-urban status (n = 7) and HIV treatment outcomes. The relationship between all neighborhood characteristics and HIV treatment outcomes was not consistent across studies. Only 7 studies found deprivation had a negative association with HIV treatment outcomes; 6 found that areas with specific racial/ethnic densities were associated with poor HIV treatment outcomes, and 5 showed that disorder was associated with poor HIV treatment outcomes. Three studies showed that rural residence was associated with improved HIV treatment outcomes. There were inconsistent findings regarding the association between neighborhood characteristics and HIV treatment outcomes. While the impact of neighborhood characteristics on disease outcomes is highly recognized, there is a paucity of standardized definitions and metrics for community characteristics to support a robust assessment of this hypothesis. Comparative studies that define and assess how specific neighborhood indicators independently or jointly affect HIV treatment outcomes are highly needed.</div