Inclusionary Trials: A Review of Lessons Not Learned

Enhancing Impact: A Call to Action for Equitable Implementation Science

Despite investments in evidence-based interventions and Implementation Science, most evidence-based interventions are not widely or routinely adopted, delivered, or sustained in many real-world community and healthcare settings. This gap is even greater in settings and populations experiencing numerous social and structural barriers to health, with important implications for persistent patterns in health inequities. In this Viewpoint, as part of a Special Issue on Advancing the Adaptability of Chronic Disease Prevention and Management through Implementation Science, we outline seven calls to action for the field of Implementation Science, with the goal of encouraging researchers, practitioners, and funders to be more intentional and accountable in applying Implementation Science to have greater impact on promoting health equity. Calls to action include (1) enhance public health, community, and multi-sectoral partnerships to promote health equity and equitable implementation; (2) revisit and build the evidence base needed to promote health equity and impact at multiple levels; (3) prioritize focus on policy development, dissemination, and implementation; (4) be agile and responsive in application of Implementation Science frameworks, processes, and methods; (5) identify and redefine meaningful metrics for equity and impact; (6) disseminate scientific evidence and research to a diverse range of partners and potential beneficiaries; and (7) extend focus on de-implementation, mis-implementation, and sustainability which are central to enhancing health equity. Additionally, we outline why a focus on prevention and public health is essential to making progress towards health equity in Implementation Science, summarize important advancements that the field has made towards making equity more foundational, and pose important research questions to enhance equitable impact of work in this area.

Community Engagement in Behavioral Medicine: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Behavioral medicine has made key contributions toward improving health outcomes. Engaging community partners in research is critical to addressing persistent health inequities. The aim of this scoping review was to explore how researchers engaged community partners within the field of behavioral medicine research from 2005 to 2023.

METHOD

Publication databases and gray literature were searched for research that engaged community partners to address questions relevant to behavioral medicine. Articles were screened by title and abstract, and then by full text. Articles meeting the inclusion criteria were coded using the framework provided by the Engagement Navigator to identify engagement approaches, methods, and tools and when they were used during the research.

RESULTS

Of 1486 articles initially identified, 58 met the inclusion criteria. Most articles used well-known approaches (e.g., community-based participatory research; 67%), methods (e.g., advisory committees; 59%), and tools (e.g., interviews; 41%), and engaged with healthcare service providers (62%) and/or patients (53%). Community partners were most often included in research planning and design (79%), and less often in dissemination (45%).

CONCLUSION

Community engagement has considerable potential to address health inequities. Our assessment of the approaches, methods, and tools used by behavioral medicine researchers to engage with a diverse range of community partners points toward promising strategies for enhancing the impact of community engagement. Researchers should incorporate explicit descriptions of community engagement strategies in publications, an outcome that could be facilitated by clear publishing guidelines, structured reporting tools, and clear messaging from funders about the value of community engagement in behavioral medicine research.

The structural and social determinants of Alzheimer's disease related dementias

INTRODUCTION

The projected growth of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and AD-related dementia (ADRD) cases by midcentury has expanded the research field and impelled new lines of inquiry into structural and social determinants of health (S/SDOH) as fundamental drivers of disparities in AD/ADRD.

METHODS

In this review, we employ Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory as a framework to posit how S/SDOH impact AD/ADRD risk and outcomes.

RESULTS

Bronfenbrenner defined the "macrosystem" as the realm of power (structural) systems that drive S/SDOH and that are the root cause of health disparities. These root causes have been discussed little to date in relation to AD/ADRD, and thus, macrosystem influences, such as racism, classism, sexism, and homophobia, are the emphasis in this paper.

DISCUSSION

Under Bronfenbrenner's macrosystem framework, we highlight key quantitative and qualitative studies linking S/SDOH with AD/ADRD, identify scientific gaps in the literature, and propose guidance for future research.

HIGHLIGHTS

Ecological systems theory links structural/social determinants to AD/ADRD. Structural/social determinants accrue and interact over the life course to impact AD/ADRD. Macrosystem is made up of societal norms, beliefs, values, and practices (e.g., laws). Most macro-level determinants have been understudied in the AD/ADRD literature.

The Role of Anti-Racist Community-Partnered Praxis in Implementing Restorative Circles Within Marginalized Communities in Southern California During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the adverse influence of structural racism and discrimination experienced by historically marginalized communities (e.g., Black, Latino/a/x, Indigenous, and transgender people). Structural racism contributes to trauma-induced health behaviors, increasing exposure to COVID-19 and restricting access to testing and vaccination. This intersection of multiple disadvantages has a negative impact on the mental health of these communities, and interventions addressing collective healing are needed in general and in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Share, Trust, Organize, and Partner COVID-19 California Alliance (STOP COVID-19 CA), a statewide collaborative of 11 universities and 75 community partners, includes several workgroups to address gaps in COVID-19 information, vaccine trial participation, and access. One of these workgroups, the Vaccine Hesitancy Workgroup, adopted an anti-racist community-partnered praxis to implement restorative circles in historically marginalized communities to facilitate collective healing due to structural racism and the COVID-19 pandemic. The project resulted in the development of a multilevel pre-intervention restorative process to build or strengthen community-institutional partnerships when procurement of funds has been sought prior to community partnership. This article discusses this workgroup's role in advancing health justice by providing a community-based mental health intervention to marginalized communities in Southern California while using an antiracist praxis tool to develop a successful community-institutional partnership and to live up to the vision of community-based participatory research.