We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
A Health Equity Task Force (HETF) of members from seven Centers funded by the National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) Implementation Science in Cancer Control Centers (ISC3) network sought to identify case examples of how Centers were applying a focus on health equity in implementation science to inform future research and capacity-building efforts.
Methods:
HETF members at each ISC3 collected information on how health equity was conceptualized, operationalized, and addressed in initial research and capacity-building efforts across the seven ISC3 Centers funded in 2019–2020. Each Center completed a questionnaire assessing five health equity domains central to implementation science (e.g., community engagement; implementation science theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs); and engaging underrepresented scholars). Data generated illustrative examples from these five domains.
Results:
Centers reported a range of approaches focusing on health equity in implementation research and capacity-building efforts, including (1) engaging diverse community partners/settings in making decisions about research priorities and projects; (2) applying health equity within a single TMF applied across projects or various TMFs used in specific projects; (3) evaluating health equity in operationalizing and measuring health and implementation outcomes; (4) building capacity for health equity-focused implementation science among trainees, early career scholars, and partnering organizations; and (5) leveraging varying levels of institutional resources and efforts to engage, include, and support underrepresented scholars.
Conclusions:
Examples of approaches to integrating health equity across the ISC3 network can inform other investigators and centers’ efforts to build capacity and infrastructure to support growth and expansion of health equity-focused implementation science.
The present study aimed to examine the correlates of fruit and vegetable intake (FVI) separately among parents and their adolescents.
Design
Cross-sectional surveys.
Setting
Online survey.
Subjects
Parents and adolescents completed the Family Life, Activity, Sun, Health, and Eating (FLASHE) survey through the National Cancer Institute. The survey assessed daily intake frequencies of food/beverage groups, psychosocial, parenting and sociodemographic factors. Generalized linear models were run for both parents and adolescents, for a total of six models (three each): (i) sociodemographic characteristics; (ii) psychosocial factors; (iii) parent/caregiver factors.
Results
Parent participants (n 1542) were predominantly 35–59 years old (86 %), female (73 %), non-Hispanic White (71 %) or non-Hispanic Black (17 %), with household income <$US 100 000 (79 %). Adolescents (n 805) were aged 12–14 years (50 %), non-Hispanic White (66 %) and non-Hispanic Black (15 %). Parents consumed 2·9 cups fruits and vegetables (F&V) daily, while adolescents consumed 2·2 cups daily. Educational attainment (higher education had greater FVI) and sex (men consumed more than women; all P<0·001) were significant FVI predictors. Parents with greater autonomous and controlled motivation, self-efficacy and preferences for fruit reported higher FVI (all P<0·001). Similarly, adolescents with greater autonomous and controlled motivation, self-efficacy and knowledge reported higher FVI (all P<0·001). Parenting factors of importance were co-deciding how many F&V teens should have, rules, having F&V in the home and cooking meals from scratch (all P<0·05).
Conclusions
Findings suggest factors that impact FVI among parents and their adolescent(s), which highlight the importance of the role of parent behaviour and can inform tailored approaches for increasing FVI in various settings.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.