The Minority Training Program in Cancer Control Research (MTPCCR) encourages underrepresented master's level students and professionals in the social, behavioral, and public health sciences to pursue doctoral training and careers in cancer disparities research. This paper reports new data on the program outcome after 12 years. A web-based survey was sent to all 462 program alumni. The questions addressed current academic status and plans, job status and plans, research focus, and influence of the MTPCCR. The survey response rate was 79 %. Overall, 30 % of alumni are enrolled in or have completed doctoral programs; 88 % of whom report involvement in research related to cancer. Scaled and open-ended responses indicate a strong influence of the program on doctoral program enrollment and cancer focus. The MTPCCR model is successful because it targets underrepresented minorities who are capable of doctoral studies but have not yet chosen that path.

As genetics and genomics become part of mainstream medicine, these advances have the potential to either reduce or exacerbate health disparities. Relatively, little research has explored the quality of genetic counseling communication experienced by limited English proficiency patients, especially Chinese Americans. We observed and audio recorded genetic counseling appointments (n = 40) of low-income, limited English-proficient Chinese patients (n = 25) and conducted post-visit interviews (n = 17) using stimulated recall to examine patient understanding of the communication. Standard techniques based in grounded theory, including iterative data review and multiple coders, were used to analyze observation fieldnotes and interview transcripts and to identify these themes: (1) strong beliefs in environmental causes of cancer and skepticism about genetic causes, (2) willingness to undergo genetic testing despite skepticism of hereditary cause of cancer, (3) misunderstanding of key information needed to make informed decisions about testing and screening/prevention options, (4) variable quality of medical interpretation, and (5) selective family communication about cancer and genetic counseling and testing. Together, these themes describe substantial gaps in communication and identify the need for genetic counseling techniques and skills that enable counselors to communicate more effectively across language, literacy, and culture. Understanding the mechanisms of inheritance and the implications of genetic test results can be challenging for anyone, and it is exceptionally daunting for those who have limited English proficiency and/or low literacy. For Chinese immigrant patients to reap the full benefits of genetic counseling and testing, effective communication is essential. Research on interventions to improve communication is needed to ensure that disparities do not widen as genomic medicine reaches a more diverse population.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are low among Latinos. To identify factors associated with CRC screening, we conducted a telephone survey of Latino primary care patients aged 50–79 years. Among 1,013 participants, 38% were up-to-date (UTD) with fecal occult blood test (FOBT); 66% were UTD with any CRC screening (FOBT, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy). Individuals less than 65, females, those less acculturated, and patients of female physicians were more likely to be UTD with FOBT. CRC screening among Latinos is low. Younger patients, women, and patients of female physicians receive more screening.

The original version of this article unfortunately contained an error. The correction is shown below. In Table 4, the title of the first column reads, “Information Provided to Counselors.” This should read, “Information Provided by Counselors.”.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are low among Latinos. To identify factors associated with CRC screening, we conducted a telephone survey of Latino primary care patients aged 50-79 years. Among 1,013 participants, 38% were up-to-date (UTD) with fecal occult blood test (FOBT); 66% were UTD with any CRC screening (FOBT, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy). Individuals less than 65, females, those less acculturated, and patients of female physicians were more likely to be UTD with FOBT. CRC screening among Latinos is low. Younger patients, women, and patients of female physicians receive more screening.

As genetics and genomics become part of mainstream Medicine, these advances have the potential to reduce or exacerbate health disparities. Gaps in effective communication (where all parties share the same meaning) are widely recognized as a major contributor to health disparities. The purpose of this study was to examine GC-patient communication in real time, to assess its effectiveness from the patient perspective, and then to pilot intervention strategies to improve the communication. We observed 64 English-, 35 Spanish- and 25 Chinese-speaking (n = 124) public hospital patients and 10 GCs in 170 GC appointments, and interviewed 49 patients who were offered testing using the audio recordings to stimulate recall and probe specific aspects of the communication. Data analyses were conducted using grounded theory methods and revealed a fundamental mismatch between the information provided by GCs and the information desired and meaningful to patients. Several components of the communication that contributed to this mismatch and often resulted in ineffective communication included: (1) too much information; (2) complex terminology and conceptually difficult presentation of information; (3) information perceived as not relevant by the patient; (4) unintentional inhibition of patient engagement and question-asking; (5) vague discussions of screening and prevention recommendations. Our findings indicate a need to transform the standard model of genetic counseling communication using evidence-based principles and strategies from other fields of Medicine. The high rates of limited health literacy in the US, increasing access of diverse populations to genetic services, and growing complexity of genetic information have created a perfect storm. If not directly addressed, this convergence is likely to exacerbate health disparities in the genomic age.

Effective communication, where all parties share a common understanding, is necessary to realize the promise of Genomic Medicine. It is especially salient given the imperative to increase the participation of diverse populations in genomics research and to expand the reach of clinical genomics. We have previously shown that cancer genetic counseling is suboptimal for patients with limited health literacy. To address this finding, we implemented a pilot study to improve verbal communication between genetic counselors and their patients of limited health literacy that consisted of: i) curriculum development and delivery of a Genetic Counselors (GC) communication workshop; ii) two-month post-workshop interviews with GC participants (n = 9); iii) observations/audio recordings of counseling sessions involving 24 patients and two GC workshop participants; iv) post-counseling interviews with patients (n = 9). The 4.5-h workshop presented evidenced-based principles and strategies for effective communication with limited health literacy patients (e.g. use of plain language and teach-back), and offered specific techniques and exercises to practice adoption of such practices in the genetic counseling context. GCs expressed appreciation for the opportunity to refine their skills; however, they reported that some strategies were challenging given their professional training and communication habits. For example, GCs were concerned that use of plain language could undermine efforts to obtain informed consent and provide scientifically accurate information. Observations and patient interviews after the workshop revealed that GCs were able to employ the communication strategies with positive effects, with patients indicating sufficient understanding of the genetic test and its implications as well as satisfaction with the counselors' communication. While derived from research on communication with those of limited health literacy, the communication approaches taught in the GC workshop could benefit most patients, given the high rates of low health literacy in many countries, and the many factors beyond health literacy that can contribute to reduced comprehension in health care environments.

Introduction

Follow-up among women who have had an abnormal Papanicolaou (Pap) smear is often poor in public hospitals that serve women at increased risk for cervical cancer. This randomized controlled trial evaluated and compared the total cost and cost per follow-up of a tailored outreach intervention plus usual care with the total cost and cost per follow-up of usual care alone.

Methods

Women with an abnormal Pap smear (n = 348) receiving care at Alameda County Medical Center (Alameda County, California) were randomized to intervention or usual care. The intervention used trained community health advisors to complement the clinic's protocol for usual care. We assessed the costs of the intervention and the cost per follow-up within 6 months of the abnormal Pap smear test result.

Results

The intervention increased the rate of 6-month follow-up by 29 percentage points, and the incremental cost per follow-up was 959 dollars (2005 dollars). The cost per follow-up varied by the severity of the abnormality. The cost per follow-up for the most severe abnormality (high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) was 681 dollars, while the cost per follow-up for less severe abnormalities was higher.

Conclusion

In a health care system in which many women fail to get follow-up care for an abnormal Pap smear, outreach workers were more effective than usual care (mail or telephone reminders) at increasing follow-up rates. The results suggest that outreach workers should manage their effort based on the degree of abnormality; most effort should be placed on women with the most severe abnormality (high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion).

Background

Delays in abnormal mammogram follow-up contribute to poor outcomes. In the current study, the authors examined differences in abnormal screening mammogram follow-up between non-Hispanic white (NHW) and Asian women.

Methods

The authors used a prospective cohort of NHW and Asian women with a Breast Imaging, Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) abnormal result of category 0 or 3-plus in the San Francisco Mammography Registry between 2000 and 2010. Kaplan-Meier estimation for the median number of days to follow-up with a diagnostic radiologic test was performed, and the authors compared the percentage of women with follow-up at 30 days, 60 days, and 90 days and no follow-up at 1 year for Asian women overall (and Asian ethnic groups) and NHW women. In addition, the authors assessed the relationship between race/ethnicity and time to follow-up with adjusted Cox proportional hazards models.

Results

Among Asian women, Vietnamese and Filipina women had the longest, and Japanese women the shortest, median follow-up (32 days, 28 days, and 19 days, respectively) compared with NHW women (15 days). The percentage of women receiving follow-up at 30 days was lower for Asians versus NHWs (57% vs 77%; P<.0001), and these disparities persisted at 60 days and 90 days for all Asian ethnic groups except Japanese. Asian women had a reduced hazard of follow-up compared with NHW women (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.72). Asian women also had a higher rate of receiving no follow-up compared with NHW women (15% vs 10%; P<.001); among Asian ethnic groups, Filipinas were found to have the highest percentage of women with no follow-up (18.1%).

Conclusions

Asian women, particularly Filipina and Vietnamese women, were less likely than NHW women to receive timely follow-up after an abnormal screening mammogram. Research should disaggregate Asian ethnicity to better understand and address barriers to effective cancer prevention. Cancer 2017;123:3468-75. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

INTRODUCTION:In the USA, African American men bear a disproportionate burden of prostate cancer (PCa) compared with all other groups, having a higher incidence and mortality, poorer quality of life and higher dissatisfaction with care. They are also less likely to receive guideline-concordant treatment (eg, undertreatment of aggressive disease). Inadequate patient-provider communication contributes to suboptimal care, which can be exacerbated by patients' limited health literacy, providers' lack of communication skills and time constraints in low-resource, safety net settings. This study is designed to examine the communication experiences of African American patients with PCa as they undertake treatment decision-making. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:Using an ethnographic approach, we will follow 25 African American men newly diagnosed with PCa at two public hospitals, from diagnosis through treatment decision. Data sources include: (1) audio-recorded clinic observations during urology, radiation oncology, medical oncology and primary care visits, (2) field notes from clinic observations, (3) patient surveys after clinic visits, (4) two in-depth patient interviews, (5) a provider survey, and (6) in-depth interviews with providers. We will explore patients' understanding of their diagnoses and treatment options, sources of support in decision-making, patient-provider communication and treatment decision-making processes. Audio-recorded observations and interviews will be transcribed verbatim. An iterative process of coding and team discussions will be used to thematically analyse patients' experiences and providers' perspectives, and to refine codes and identify key themes. Descriptive statistics will summarise survey data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine in-depth patient-provider communication among African American patients with PCa. For a population as marginalised as African American men, an ethnographic approach allows for explication of complex sociocultural and contextual influences on healthcare processes and outcomes. Study findings will inform the development of interventions and initiatives that promote patient-centred communication, shared decision-making and guideline-concordant care. This study was approved by the University of California San Francisco and the Alameda Health System Institutional Review Boards.