9 research outputs found

    Family-based pediatric weight management interventions in US primary care settings targeting children ages 6-12 years old: A systematic review guided by the RE-AIM framework.

    Get PDF
    Obesity is a pandemic that disproportionately affects children from vulnerable populations in the USA. Current treatment approaches in primary care settings in the USA have been reported to be insufficient at managing pediatric obesity, primarily due to implementation challenges for healthcare systems and barriers for families. While the literature has examined the efficacy of pediatric obesity interventions focused on internal validity, it lacks sufficient reporting and analysis of external validity necessary for successful translation to primary care settings. We conducted a systematic review of the primary-care-setting literature from January 2007 to March 2020 on family-based pediatric weight management interventions in both English and/or Spanish for children ages 6-12 years in the USA using the Reach, Efficacy/Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. A literature search, using PRISMA guidelines, was conducted in January 2022 using the following electronic databases: Medline Ovid, Embase, and Cochrane Library. 22 270 records were screened, and 376 articles were reviewed in full. 184 studies were included. The most commonly reported dimensions of the RE-AIM framework were Reach (65%), Efficacy/Effectiveness (64%), and Adoption (64%), while Implementation (47%) and Maintenance (42%) were less often reported. The prevalence of reporting RE-AIM construct indicators ranged greatly, from 1% to 100%. This systematic review underscores the need for more focus on external validity to guide the development, implementation, and dissemination of future pediatric obesity interventions based in primary care settings. It also suggests conducting additional research on sustainable financing for pediatric obesity interventions

    Use of electronic health records to develop a more robust phenotype of pediatric overweight and obesity

    No full text
    Clinical EHR data can be used to better develop a more robust phenotype of pediatric overweight and obesity

    Contemporary Political and Social Issues

    No full text
    Hoyoon Jung, Pukyong National University, “Latin America-EU Relations in the Twenty-First Century. Cruz Bonlarron Martínez, Fulbright Colombia, “A Review of Literature on la Reforma Rural Integral (Comprehensive Rural Reform). Joshua S. Yudkin, The University of Texas Health Science at Houston (UTHealth), “Locating and Evaluating La ciencia de la complejidad as a Public Health Approach in and for Colombia. Emily Fitzgerald, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville,”Indigenous Women in Guatemala Organizing for Better Lives. Carolina Rocha, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, “An Incarcerated Latina Mother and the War on Drugs: Yraida’s Story. Moderator: Patrick G. Anderson Avilés, University of Illinois Springfiel

    Evaluation of Harms Reporting in U.S. Cancer Screening Guidelines

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Cancer screening should be recommended only when the balance between benefits and harms is favorable. This review evaluated how U.S. cancer screening guidelines reported harms, within and across organ-specific processes to screen for cancer. OBJECTIVE: To describe current reporting practices and identify opportunities for improvement. DESIGN: Review of guidelines. SETTING: United States. PATIENTS: Patients eligible for screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer according to U.S. guidelines. MEASUREMENTS: Information was abstracted on reporting of patient-level harms associated with screening, diagnostic follow-up, and treatment. The authors classified harms reporting as not mentioned, conceptual, qualitative, or quantitative and noted whether literature was cited when harms were described. Frequency of harms reporting was summarized by organ type. RESULTS: Harms reporting was inconsistent across organ types and at each step of the cancer screening process. Guidelines did not report all harms for any specific organ type or for any category of harm across organ types. The most complete harms reporting was for prostate cancer screening guidelines and the least complete for colorectal cancer screening guidelines. Conceptualization of harms and use of quantitative evidence also differed by organ type. LIMITATIONS: This review considers only patient-level harms. The authors did not verify accuracy of harms information presented in the guidelines. CONCLUSION: The review identified opportunities for improving conceptualization, assessment, and reporting of screening process-related harms in guidelines. Future work should consider nuances associated with each organ-specific process to screen for cancer, including which harms are most salient and where evidence gaps exist, and explicitly explore how to optimally weigh available evidence in determining net screening benefit. Improved harms reporting could aid informed decision making, ultimately improving cancer screening delivery. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute
    corecore