Place-based strengths and vulnerabilities for mental wellness among rural minority older adults: an intervention development study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Severe inequities in depression and its diagnosis and treatment among rural-dwelling, racial-minority and ethnic-minority older adults compared with their urban white counterparts result in cognitive impairment, comorbidities and increased mortality, presenting a growing public health concern as the United States (US) population ages. These inequities are often attributable to social and environmental factors, including economic insecurity, histories of trauma, gaps in transportation and safety-net services, and disparities in access to policy-making processes rooted in colonialism. This constellation of factors renders racial-minority and ethnic-minority older adults 'structurally vulnerable' to mental ill health. Fewer data exist on protective factors associated with social and environmental contexts, such as social support, community attachment and a meaningful sense of place. Scholarship on the social determinants of health widely recognises the importance of such place-based factors. However, little research has examined how they shape disparities in depression and treatment specifically, limiting the development of practical approaches addressing these factors and their effects on mental well-being for rural minority populations.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This community-driven mixed-method study uses quantitative surveys, qualitative interviews and ecological network research with 125 rural American Indian and Latinx older adults in New Mexico and 28 professional and non-professional social supporters to elucidate how place-based vulnerabilities and protective factors shape experiences of depression among older adults. Data will serve as the foundation of a community-driven plan for a multisystem intervention focused on the place-based causes of disparities in depression. Intervention Mapping will guide the intervention development process.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been reviewed and approved by the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center Institutional Review Board. All participants will provide informed consent. Study results will be disseminated within the community of study through community meetings and presentations, as well as broadly via peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations and social media.

Wellbeing-responsive community: a growth target for intentional mental health promotion

With mental illness remaining a significant burden of disease, there is an ongoing need for community-based health promotion, prevention, and responses (or "mental health promotion activities"). The health promotion, community development, and positive psychology literature identifies significant heterogeneity in the design and delivery of these activities. This variability spans: (1) individual vs. group outcomes, (2) psychological vs. sociological determinants of change, (3) promoting wellbeing vs. reducing mental health symptoms, and (4) the degree activities are contextualized vs. standardized in design and delivery. Mental health promotion activities do not easily accomplish this level of complexity within design and implementation. This has led to the emergence of the complexity-informed health promotion literature and the need for innovative tools, methods, and theories to drive this endeavor. This article directly responds to this call. It introduces "wellbeing-responsive community": a vision and outcome hierarchy (or growth target) for intentionally delivered mental health promotion. The construct enables the design and implementation of interventions that intentionally respond to complexity and contextualization through the drivers of co-creation, intentionality, and local empowerment. It represents a community (support team, programme, agency, network, school, or region) that has the shared language, knowledge, methods, and skills to work together in shared intent. In other words, to integrate best-practice science with their local knowledge systems and existing strengths, and intentionally co-create and deliver contextualized wellbeing solutions at both the individual and community levels that span the "system" (e.g., whole-of-community) to the "moment" (e.g., intentional support and care). Co-creation, as applied through a transdisciplinary lens, is emerging as an evidence-based method to respond to complexity. This article describes the rationale and evidence underpinning the conceptualization of a wellbeing-responsive community through the integration of three key disciplines: (1) positive psychology, (2) ecological or systems approaches, and (3) intentional practice (implementation science). A definitional, contextual, and applied overview of the wellbeing-responsive community is provided, including a hierarchy of outcomes and associated definitions. Its purported application across education, mental health, community service, and organizational settings is discussed, including its potential role in making complexity-informed health promotion practical for all knowledge users.

Similar skills, different frames: a thematic analysis exploring conceptualizations held by community-based organization practitioners and academics regarding skills to use evidence-based interventions to address cancer inequities

BACKGROUND

Community-based organizations (CBOs) are critical partners in delivering evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to address cancer inequities. However, CBO practitioners do not typically have access to opportunities to build the necessary capacity (skills, knowledge, motivation, and resources) for using EBIs. Although capacity-building interventions can offer a solution, inconsistent definitions and measurements of capacity limit the ability to develop and evaluate such efforts. We explored how and why conceptualizations of core skills for EBI use differ between practitioners and academics addressing cancer and other health inequities. We anchored the inquiry with a commonly used set of target skills for EBI capacity-building efforts.

METHODS

The study was conducted by an interdisciplinary team of academic researchers and CBO practitioners. We gathered data through semi-structured, hour-long interviews with practitioners and academics working to address cancer and other health inequities (n = 19). After hearing a brief vignette about a CBO addressing cervical cancer inequities, participants considered a widely accepted list of skills for EBI use that included assessing needs, engaging stakeholders, and selecting, adapting, implementing, evaluating, and sustaining the EBI. We used a team-based, reflexive thematic analysis approach grounded in critical and constructivist perspectives.

RESULTS

Overall, the original list resonated with practitioners and academics and they added new skills to the list (cultural humility and systems change). Practitioners' responses described skills from the reference point of addressing broader community needs and context and achieving change over the long term, emphasizing aspects of health promotion in their descriptions. Academics offered a mix of perspectives, with some focused on addressing community needs (and related flexibility regarding EBIs) but more emphasized skills needed to deliver a specific EBI to achieve a focused set of health and equity outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a significant opportunity to leverage complementary expertise and perspectives held by practitioners and academics addressing cancer inequities. However, the different frames utilized suggest proactive efforts will be required to find alignment across groups, particularly in valuing diverse contributions and identifying relevant outcomes of interest for each group. Such alignment is critical to designing effective capacity-building interventions and supporting the routine utilization of EBIs to address cancer inequities.

Toward a community psychology transformative praxis: A descriptive review

In this paper, we present a descriptive review of the foundational components of transformation-the starting places and gaps-in a move toward synthesizing current works into a Community Psychology Transformative Praxis. This review focuses on published work identified in North American Community Psychology journals (namely two United States based journals)-a review from the belly of the neoliberal and imperial beast. We reviewed and categorized seven foundational dimensions for beginning and sustaining transformative praxis and which represent how Community Psychology (CP), in the United States publishing context, is engaging in transformative efforts. In Part 1, we present three dimensions of transformative process, focused on early and iterative practices that develop and enact shared (1) values, (2) visions of a just world, and (3) critical problem frames. In part 2 we present four additional dimensions of transformative action; the considerations that inform action in a given transformative process or intervention including (4) planning for the long-term nature of transformation, (5) targeting multiple levels of analysis, (6) engaging in solidarity with those most impacted by injustice, and (7) identifying and resisting power holders and/or power structures that prevent transformation and maintain the status quo. In Part 3, we review the relationship between process and action, where processes can be understood as driving, directing, and bounding the types of actions or interventions taken or imagined in a particular transformative intervention. We close the paper with critical reflections and calls to action to further develop the transformative potential of CP praxis and name the tendency of settling for ameliorative solutions to problems needing transformative solutions.

Our Healthy Community Conceptual Framework and Intervention Model for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention in Municipalities

This paper introduces the conceptual framework and intervention model of Our Healthy Community (OHC), a new, coordinated, and integrated approach towards health promotion and disease prevention in municipalities. The model is inspired by systems-based approaches and employs a supersetting approach for engaging stakeholders across sectors in the development and implementation of interventions to increase health and well-being among citizens. The conceptual model includes a combination of a bottom-up approach emphasizing involvement of citizens and other community-based stakeholders combined with a top-down approach emphasizing political, legal, administrative, and technical support from a variety of councils and departments in local municipality government. The model operates bidirectionally: (1) by pushing political and administrative processes to promote the establishment of conducive structural environments for making healthy choices, and (2) by involving citizens and professional stakeholders at all levels in co-creating processes of shaping their own community and municipality. An operational intervention model was further developed by the OHC project while working with the OHC in two Danish municipalities. The operational intervention model of OHC comprises three main phases and key actions to be implemented at the levels of local government and community: (1) Local government: Situational analysis, dialogue, and political priorities; (2) Community: Thematic co-creation among professional stakeholders; and (3) Target area: Intervention development and implementation. The OHC model will provide municipalities with new tools to improve the citizens' health and well-being with available resources. Health promotion and disease prevention interventions are developed, implemented, and anchored in the local community by citizens and local stakeholders at municipal and local community levels using collaboration and partnerships as leverage points.

A Case Study of Community-Academic Partnership in Improving the Quality of Life for Asthmatic Urban Minority Children in Low-Income Households

Community–academic partnerships (CAPs) are being increasingly used to study and address health disparity issues. CAPs help to create new bodies of knowledge and innovative solutions to community problems, which benefits the community and academia. Supported by a grant, a partnership was formed between an academic research team and a community health organization to analyze and interpret data collected from the caregivers of asthmatic African American children living in urban low-income households. Using a case study approach, we discuss how we built a healthy CAP and the lessons learned from the process. Our analysis was guided by the six main factors that facilitate success in developing collaborative relationships, including (1) environment; (2) membership; (3) process and structure; (4) communication; (5) purpose; and (6) resources. Based on these six factors, we describe our collaboration process, challenges, and areas for improvement. We aimed to provide a “points-to-consider” roadmap for academic and community partners to establish and maintain a mutually beneficial and satisfactory relationship. Collaborating with community members and organizations provides unique opportunities for researchers and students to apply their skills and knowledge from textbooks and the classroom, engage with community members, and improve real-life community needs. Building a constructive CAP involves efforts, energy, and resources from both parties. The six major themes derived from our project offer suggestions for building a healthy, collaborative, and productive relationship that best serves communities in the future.

Citizen science in monitoring food environments: a qualitative collective case study of stakeholders' experiences during the Local Environment Action on Food project in Alberta, Canada

BACKGROUND

Citizen science bears potential to build a comprehensive view of global food environments and create a broader discussion about how to improve them. Despite its potential, citizen science has not been fully utilised in food environment research. Thus, we sought to explore stakeholders' experiences of the Local Environment Action on Food (LEAF) project, a community-based intervention that employs a citizen science approach to monitoring food environments.

METHODS

We used a qualitative collective case study design to explore citizen science through the LEAF process in seven communities in Alberta, Canada. Data generating strategies included semi-structured interviews with citizen scientists (n = 26), document review of communities' Mini Nutrition Report Cards (n = 7), and researcher observation. Data were analyzed in a multi-phase process, using Charmaz's constant comparison analysis strategy.

RESULTS

Analysis revealed two main themes: relationship building and process factors. Communities used three interconnected strategies, engaging the right people, treading lightly, and reaching a consensus, to navigate the vital but challenging relationship building process. Process factors, which were influences on the LEAF process and relationship building, included the local context, flexibility in the LEAF process, and turnover among LEAF community groups.

CONCLUSION

Citizen science through the LEAF project supported the creation and application of food environment evidence: it enabled residents to collect and interpret local food environment data, develop realistic recommendations for change, and provided them with an evidence-based advocacy tool to support the implementation of these recommendations. We recommend a web application that enables independent community food environment assessments. Such a tool could stimulate and sustain citizen involvement in food environment efforts, helping to build the necessary evidence base and promote the creation of healthy food environments.

Measuring capacity to use evidence-based interventions in community-based organizations: A comprehensive, scoping review

Introduction:

Community-based organizations (CBOs) are well-positioned to incorporate research evidence, local expertise, and contextual factors to address health inequities. However, insufficient capacity limits use of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) in these settings. Capacity-building implementation strategies are popular, but a lack of standard models and validated measures hinders progress in the field. To advance the literature, we conducted a comprehensive scoping review.

Methods:

With a reference librarian, we executed a comprehensive search strategy of PubMed/Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, and EBSCO Global Health. We included articles that addressed implementation science, capacity-building, and CBOs. Of 5527 articles, 99 met our inclusion criteria, and we extracted data using a double-coding process

Results:

Of the 99 articles, 47% defined capacity explicitly, 31% defined it indirectly, and 21% did not define it. Common concepts in definitions were skills, knowledge/expertise, and resources. Of the 57 articles with quantitative analysis, 48 (82%) measured capacity, and 11 (23%) offered psychometric data for the capacity measures. Of the 99 studies, 40% focused exclusively on populations experiencing inequities and 22% included those populations to some extent. The bulk of the studies came from high-income countries.

Conclusions:

Implementation scientists should 1) be explicit about models and definitions of capacity and strategies for building capacity, 2) specify expected multi-level implementation outcomes, 3) develop and use validated measures for quantitative work, and 4) integrate equity considerations into the conceptualization and measurement of capacity-building efforts. With these refinements, we can ensure that the necessary supports reach CBO practitioners and critical partners for addressing health inequities.

CBPR Implementation Framework for Community-Academic Partnerships

The Engage for Equity (E2) study is an intervention trial for community-academic research partnerships that seeks to improve partnering practices and health equity outcomes by providing community and academic partners with tools to enhance and advance power sharing and health equity. Twenty-five community/academic research teams completed a two-day training intervention where they were introduced to the CBPR Conceptual Model and corresponding applied tools to their partnerships. We report on team interviews conducted immediately after the training, where teams discussed opportunities and challenges using the CBPR Model as an implementation framework as they considered their own contexts, their partnering processes/practices, actions, and their desired outcomes. We applied Diffusion of Innovation theory to guide data collection and analysis; augmented by intent to use and collective reflection. Results pointed to the flexibility of the CBPR model, concrete use of tools (e.g., planning/evaluation), and broader use in inspiring collective reflection to improve partnering practices and inform equity values. As an implementation framework, the CBPR model incorporates collaborative processes and strategies to mitigate power differentials into key phases of implementation studies, adding factors central to health equity work, not existing in previous implementation frameworks.