Engaging veteran stakeholders to identify patient-centred research priorities for optimizing implementation of lung cancer screening

Lifetime prevalence and correlates of colorectal cancer screening among low-income U.S. Veterans

PURPOSE

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is the largest integrated healthcare system in the U.S. While preventive healthcare services are high priority in the VHA, low-income U.S. Veterans experience adverse life circumstances that may negatively impact their access to these services. This study examined lifetime prevalence as well as demographic, socioeconomic, military-specific, and clinical correlates of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among low-income U.S. Veterans ≥ 50 years of age.

METHODS

Cross-sectional data on 862 participants were analyzed from the 2021-2022 National Veteran Homeless and Other Poverty Experiences study.

RESULTS

Overall, 55.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 51.3-59.3%) reported ever-receiving CRC-screening services. In a multivariable logistic regression model, never-receivers of CRC screening were twice as likely to reside outside of the Northeast, and more likely to be married (odds ratio [OR] = 1.86, 95% CI 1.02, 3.37), have BMI < 25 kg/m2 [vs. 25- < 30 kg/m2] (OR = 1.75, 95% CI 1.19, 2.58), or ≥ 1 chronic condition (OR = 1.46, 95% CI 1.06, 2.02). Never-receivers of CRC screening were less likely to be female (OR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.29, 0.96), aged 65-79y [vs. ≥ 80y] (OR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.40, 0.92), live in 5 + member households (OR = 0.33, 95% CI 0.13, 0.86), disabled (OR = 0.45, 0.22, 0.92), with purchased health insurance (OR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.33, 0.98), or report alcohol-use disorder (OR = 0.10, 95% CI 0.02, 0.49) and/or HIV/AIDS (OR = 0.28, 95% CI 0.12, 0.68).

CONCLUSION

Nearly 55% of low-income U.S. Veterans reported ever screening for CRC. Variations in CRC-screening behaviors according to veteran characteristics highlight potential disparities as well as opportunities for targeted behavioral interventions.

Patient and public involvement in cancer research: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research emphasizes the importance of doing research with, rather than for people with lived health/illness experience(s). The purpose of this scoping review is to investigate the breadth and depth of scientific literature on PPI in cancer research and to identify how is PPI applied and reported in cancer research.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycInfo up to March 2022. All titles/abstracts and full-text results were screened by two reviewers. Data were analyzed and are presented in both narrative and tabular format.

RESULTS

We screened 22,009 titles/abstract, reviewed 375 full-text articles, of which 101 studies were included in this review. 66 papers applied PPI; 35 used co-design methodologies. PPI in cancer research in published research has increased steadily since 2015 and often includes those with a past diagnosis of cancer or relatives/informal caregivers. The most common applied methods were workshops or interviews. PPI was generally used at the level of consultation/advisor and occurred mainly in early stages of research. Costs related to PPI were mentioned in 25 papers and four papers described training provided for PPI.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of our review demonstrate the nature and extent of PPI expansion in cancer research. Researchers and research organizations entering the fray of PPI should consider planning and reporting elements such as the stage, level, and role type of PPI, as well as methods and strategies put in place to assure diversity. Furthermore, a thorough evaluation of whether all these elements meet the stated PPI purpose will help to grasp its impact on research outcomes.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Two patients participated in the stakeholder consultation as part of the scoping review methodology, contributed to the discussion on refining the results, and critically reviewed the manuscript. Both are co-authors of this manuscript.

Engaging veterans in the research process: a practical guide

Aims: Provide guidance for engaging military veterans in various research teams to help overcome veterans' lack of trust in research. Methods: We draw from our combined experience to present four case studies of veteran research on sensitive topics to illustrate successful engagement with veterans. Results: For each case example, we describe veterans' contributions at different phases of research. We then share practical guidance for realizing benefits and overcoming challenges of engaging veterans in research at each phase. In our experience, successful engagement has built trust by aligning research with participants' own experience as veterans. Conclusion: Investigators wishing to engage veterans in research may benefit from the lessons presented through these case studies.