7 results
Evaluation of an online research best practices training for community health workers and promotoras
- Susan L. Murphy, Gina M. Jay, Elias M. Samuels, Brenda L. Eakin, Alexandra E. Harper, Gretchen A. Piatt, Vanessa I. Trujillo, Kristen L. Weeks-Norton, Catherine W. Striley, Catina O’Leary, Jordan Hahn, Daphne C. Watkins, Linda B. Cottler, Sergio Aguilar Gaxiola
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 7 / Issue 1 / 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 05 September 2023, e195
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Introduction:
Community health workers and promotoras (CHW/Ps) have a fundamental role in facilitating research with communities. However, no national standard training exists as part of the CHW/P job role. We developed and evaluated a culturally- and linguistically tailored online research best practices course for CHW/Ps to meet this gap.
Methods:After the research best practices course was developed, we advertised the opportunity to CHW/Ps nationwide to complete the training online in English or Spanish. Following course completion, CHW/Ps received an online survey to rate their skills in community-engaged research and their perceptions of the course using Likert scales of agreement. A qualitative content analysis was conducted on open-ended response data.
Results:104 CHW/Ps completed the English or Spanish course (n = 52 for each language; mean age 42 years SD ± 12); 88% of individuals identified as female and 56% identified as Hispanic, Latino, or Spaniard. 96%–100% of respondents reported improvement in various skills. Nearly all CHW/Ps (97%) agreed the course was relevant to their work, and 96% felt the training was useful. Qualitative themes related to working more effectively as a result of training included enhanced skills, increased resources, and building bridges between communities and researchers.
Discussion:The CHW/P research best practices course was rated as useful and relevant by CHW/Ps, particularly for communicating about research with community members. This course can be a professional development resource for CHW/Ps and could serve as the foundation for a national standardized training on their role related to research best practices.
182 Addressing Health Disparities through an Innovative University-Community Vaccination and Food Access Model
- Carlyn Kimiecik, Elizabeth Crawford, Jasmine D. Gonzalvo, Megan Conklin, Susie Crowe, Kathy Hahn Keiner, Sandra Dugan, Jordan Smith, Erik Barnett, Sarah Estell, Bob Williams, Peter Zubler, Omolola A, Sonak Pastakia
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 6 / Issue s1 / April 2022
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 April 2022, p. 24
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To describe and evaluate an innovative university-community vaccination and food access model for minority, immigrant, and underserved individuals experiencing food insecurity during a global pandemic. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The Purdue University Center for Health Equity and Innovation (CHEqI) partnered with the two largest food banks in the Midwest and Walgreens to offer free COVID-19 and Flu vaccinations alongside food distribution. Goals included addressing food insecurity, increasing vaccine access, and decreasing vaccine hesitancy. CHEqI acquired funding, recruited volunteers and interpreters, assessed interest and addressed vaccine hesitancy. Food bank/pantry partners distributed food and provided access to clientele and marketing assistance. Walgreens procured, administered, and documented vaccinations. The Model accommodated drive-through and indoor processes. Unidentifiable observational and self-report data were collected. Descriptive statistics were computed to characterize program outcomes. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: A total of 11 vaccination events occurred between June and October 2021 at three food bank/pantry locations. Of these 11 events, nine (82%) were drive-through and two (18%) took place indoors, eight (72%) offered COVID-19 vaccinations only, and three (27%) offered both COVID-19 and Flu vaccinations. Food was distributed to a total of 5,108 families and 416 vaccines (314 COVID, 102 Flu) were administered. Of the 396 individuals who received at least one vaccine, 20 (5%) received both a COVID and Flu vaccine. Of the 386 individuals who received at least one vaccine and reported their sex, 194 (50%) identified as female and the average age of those who received at least one vaccine was 45 years old. Of those who reported race (N = 228) or ethnicity (N = 253), 43% identified as Black or African American and 53% identified as LatinX. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Findings offer an innovative vaccination and food access model for diverse individuals experiencing food insecurity during a global pandemic. By drawing on cost effective, accessible, and culturally contextualized practices to optimize the reach and quality of vaccination services we can improve access barriers and mitigate health disparities.
Characterisation of age and polarity at onset in bipolar disorder
- Janos L. Kalman, Loes M. Olde Loohuis, Annabel Vreeker, Andrew McQuillin, Eli A. Stahl, Douglas Ruderfer, Maria Grigoroiu-Serbanescu, Georgia Panagiotaropoulou, Stephan Ripke, Tim B. Bigdeli, Frederike Stein, Tina Meller, Susanne Meinert, Helena Pelin, Fabian Streit, Sergi Papiol, Mark J. Adams, Rolf Adolfsson, Kristina Adorjan, Ingrid Agartz, Sofie R. Aminoff, Heike Anderson-Schmidt, Ole A. Andreassen, Raffaella Ardau, Jean-Michel Aubry, Ceylan Balaban, Nicholas Bass, Bernhard T. Baune, Frank Bellivier, Antoni Benabarre, Susanne Bengesser, Wade H Berrettini, Marco P. Boks, Evelyn J. Bromet, Katharina Brosch, Monika Budde, William Byerley, Pablo Cervantes, Catina Chillotti, Sven Cichon, Scott R. Clark, Ashley L. Comes, Aiden Corvin, William Coryell, Nick Craddock, David W. Craig, Paul E. Croarkin, Cristiana Cruceanu, Piotr M. Czerski, Nina Dalkner, Udo Dannlowski, Franziska Degenhardt, Maria Del Zompo, J. Raymond DePaulo, Srdjan Djurovic, Howard J. Edenberg, Mariam Al Eissa, Torbjørn Elvsåshagen, Bruno Etain, Ayman H. Fanous, Frederike Fellendorf, Alessia Fiorentino, Andreas J. Forstner, Mark A. Frye, Janice M. Fullerton, Katrin Gade, Julie Garnham, Elliot Gershon, Michael Gill, Fernando S. Goes, Katherine Gordon-Smith, Paul Grof, Jose Guzman-Parra, Tim Hahn, Roland Hasler, Maria Heilbronner, Urs Heilbronner, Stephane Jamain, Esther Jimenez, Ian Jones, Lisa Jones, Lina Jonsson, Rene S. Kahn, John R. Kelsoe, James L. Kennedy, Tilo Kircher, George Kirov, Sarah Kittel-Schneider, Farah Klöhn-Saghatolislam, James A. Knowles, Thorsten M. Kranz, Trine Vik Lagerberg, Mikael Landen, William B. Lawson, Marion Leboyer, Qingqin S. Li, Mario Maj, Dolores Malaspina, Mirko Manchia, Fermin Mayoral, Susan L. McElroy, Melvin G. McInnis, Andrew M. McIntosh, Helena Medeiros, Ingrid Melle, Vihra Milanova, Philip B. Mitchell, Palmiero Monteleone, Alessio Maria Monteleone, Markus M. Nöthen, Tomas Novak, John I. Nurnberger, Niamh O'Brien, Kevin S. O'Connell, Claire O'Donovan, Michael C. O'Donovan, Nils Opel, Abigail Ortiz, Michael J. Owen, Erik Pålsson, Carlos Pato, Michele T. Pato, Joanna Pawlak, Julia-Katharina Pfarr, Claudia Pisanu, James B. Potash, Mark H Rapaport, Daniela Reich-Erkelenz, Andreas Reif, Eva Reininghaus, Jonathan Repple, Hélène Richard-Lepouriel, Marcella Rietschel, Kai Ringwald, Gloria Roberts, Guy Rouleau, Sabrina Schaupp, William A Scheftner, Simon Schmitt, Peter R. Schofield, K. Oliver Schubert, Eva C. Schulte, Barbara Schweizer, Fanny Senner, Giovanni Severino, Sally Sharp, Claire Slaney, Olav B. Smeland, Janet L. Sobell, Alessio Squassina, Pavla Stopkova, John Strauss, Alfonso Tortorella, Gustavo Turecki, Joanna Twarowska-Hauser, Marin Veldic, Eduard Vieta, John B. Vincent, Wei Xu, Clement C. Zai, Peter P. Zandi, Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (PGC) Bipolar Disorder Working Group, International Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen), Colombia-US Cross Disorder Collaboration in Psychiatric Genetics, Arianna Di Florio, Jordan W. Smoller, Joanna M. Biernacka, Francis J. McMahon, Martin Alda, Bertram Müller-Myhsok, Nikolaos Koutsouleris, Peter Falkai, Nelson B. Freimer, Till F.M. Andlauer, Thomas G. Schulze, Roel A. Ophoff
-
- Journal:
- The British Journal of Psychiatry / Volume 219 / Issue 6 / December 2021
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 25 August 2021, pp. 659-669
- Print publication:
- December 2021
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Background
Studying phenotypic and genetic characteristics of age at onset (AAO) and polarity at onset (PAO) in bipolar disorder can provide new insights into disease pathology and facilitate the development of screening tools.
AimsTo examine the genetic architecture of AAO and PAO and their association with bipolar disorder disease characteristics.
MethodGenome-wide association studies (GWASs) and polygenic score (PGS) analyses of AAO (n = 12 977) and PAO (n = 6773) were conducted in patients with bipolar disorder from 34 cohorts and a replication sample (n = 2237). The association of onset with disease characteristics was investigated in two of these cohorts.
ResultsEarlier AAO was associated with a higher probability of psychotic symptoms, suicidality, lower educational attainment, not living together and fewer episodes. Depressive onset correlated with suicidality and manic onset correlated with delusions and manic episodes. Systematic differences in AAO between cohorts and continents of origin were observed. This was also reflected in single-nucleotide variant-based heritability estimates, with higher heritabilities for stricter onset definitions. Increased PGS for autism spectrum disorder (β = −0.34 years, s.e. = 0.08), major depression (β = −0.34 years, s.e. = 0.08), schizophrenia (β = −0.39 years, s.e. = 0.08), and educational attainment (β = −0.31 years, s.e. = 0.08) were associated with an earlier AAO. The AAO GWAS identified one significant locus, but this finding did not replicate. Neither GWAS nor PGS analyses yielded significant associations with PAO.
ConclusionsAAO and PAO are associated with indicators of bipolar disorder severity. Individuals with an earlier onset show an increased polygenic liability for a broad spectrum of psychiatric traits. Systematic differences in AAO across cohorts, continents and phenotype definitions introduce significant heterogeneity, affecting analyses.
2526 E-learning for best practices in social and behavioral research: A multisite pilot evaluation
- Susan L. Murphy, Elias M. Samuels, Christine Byks-Jazayeri, Ellen Champagne, Jordan Hahn, Brenda Eakin, Robert Kolb, Linda S. Behar-Horenstein, Susan Gardner, Fanny Ennever, Mary-Tara Roth, Margarita L. Dubocovich
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 2 / Issue S1 / June 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 November 2018, p. 55
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: To evaluate the NIH-sponsored Best Practices for Social and Behavioral Research e-learning course. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Four universities partnered in a pilot study to evaluate this new course. Outcomes from 294 participants completing the course included efficient progress through the training, perceived relevance of the course to current work, level of engagement with the course material, intent to work differently as a result of the course, and downloading digital resources. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Participants rated the course as relevant and engaging (6.4 and 5.8 on a 7-point Likert scale) and 96% of respondents said they would recommend the course to colleagues. Qualitative analysis of participant testimonials suggested that most respondents had a readiness to change in the way they worked as a result of the course. Overall, results suggest participants completed the course efficiently, perceived outcomes positively and worked differently after the training. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: These results will inform new guidelines for future participants (e.g., average time to complete, expectations for knowledge checks in the training). Future studies should include larger samples and closer coordination and communication between study sites.
Best Practices in Social and Behavioral Research: A multisite pilot evaluation of the good clinical practice online training course
- Susan L. Murphy, Elias M. Samuels, H. Robert Kolb, Linda S. Behar-Horenstein, Ellen Champagne, Christine Byks-Jazayeri, Jordan Hahn, Mary-Tara Roth, Fanny Ennever, Wajeeh Bajwa, Meher Singh, Gregory G. Homish, Margarita L. Dubocovich
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 2 / Issue 2 / April 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 08 August 2018, pp. 95-102
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Introduction
The Best Practices in Social and Behavioral Research Course was developed to provide instruction on good clinical practice for social and behavioral trials. This study evaluated the new course.
MethodsParticipants across 4 universities took the course (n=294) and were sent surveys following course completion and 2 months later. Outcomes included relevance, how engaging the course was, and working differently because of the course. Open-ended questions were posed to understand how work was impacted.
ResultsParticipants rated the course as relevant and engaging (6.4 and 5.8/7 points) and reported working differently (4.7/7 points). Participants with less experience in social and behavioral trials were most likely to report working differently 2 months later.
DiscussionThe course was perceived as relevant and engaging. Participants described actions taken to improve rigor in implementing trials. Future studies with a larger sample and additional participating sites are recommended.
2376: Best practices for social and behavioral research: Developing a competency-based elearning course in good clinical practice
- Susan Lynn Murphy, Christy Byks-Jazayeri, Elizabeth Anderson, Angela Lyden, Jennifer Miner, Jordan Hahn, Brandon Lynn
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 1 / Issue S1 / September 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 10 May 2018, pp. 48-49
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Existing GCP training is geared primarily towards researchers conducting drug, device, or biologic clinical trials, and largely ignores the unique needs of researchers conducting social and behavioral clinical trials. The purpose of this project was to develop a comprehensive, relevant, interactive, and easy to administer GCP eLearning course for social and behavioral researchers. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: As part of the ECRPTQ project funded by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), a Social and Behavioral Work Group of ~30 experienced social and behavioral investigators and study coordinators was formed to develop GCP training for social and behavioral researchers. Existing GCP training programs were reviewed to identify relevant content that should be included as well as gaps specific to social and behavioral clinical trials where new content would need to be developed. In total, 9 specific modules—Introduction, Research Protocol, Roles and Responsibilities, Informed Consent Communication, Confidentiality/Privacy, Recruitment/Retention, Participant Safety/Adverse Event Reporting, Quality Control/Assurance, and Research Misconduct—were identified by the work group and the content was mapped to competency domains defined by the ECRPTQ project, as well as International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) GCP principles. Several investigators and study coordinators were identified as content experts for each module topic. Working with an instructional designer, these experts defined learning objectives and outlined content relevant for both study coordinators and investigators for inclusion in the modules. The curriculum was developed using Articulate Storyline that is SCORM 1.2 compliant making the course usable to the widest audience. The course was designed to be administered on laptop or desktop computers and is accessible for individuals with hearing or viewing impairments. To maximize learning, instructional designers used creative treatments including: narration to guide learners or offer tips; short video scenarios to introduce topics; interactive activities, such as drag and drop games and “click to learn more information”; knowledge checks with feedback; resources, including downloadable job aids; end of module quizzes, and documentation of course completion. The full curriculum takes 2–4 hours to complete, with individual modules taking 30 minutes to complete. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Pilot testing to evaluate the effectiveness of the eLearning course is underway at 5 sites: University of Michigan, Boston University, University of Rochester, University of Florida, and SUNY Buffalo. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This eLearning course provides relevant, comprehensive GCP training specifically for social and behavioral researchers. Unlike existing GCP training that is geared towards drug and device researchers, this course includes scenarios and examples that are relevant to social and behavioral researchers. The engaging, interactive nature of this course is designed to improve learning and retention, resulting in improved job performance. In addition, the modules are designed for both investigators and clinical research coordinators, thus eliminating the need for different training modules for different study team members.
2200: Best practices for social and behavioral research: A new course to address good clinical practice and preliminary course evaluation
- Susan Lynn Murphy, Christy Byks-Jazayeri, Brenda Eakin, Jordan Hahn, Brandon Lynn, Elias M. Samuels, Fanny Ennever, Sarah Peyre, Margarita L. Dubocovich, Wajeeh Bajwa
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 1 / Issue S1 / September 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 10 May 2018, p. 45
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: To conduct a preliminary evaluation of the Social and Behavioral Research Best Practices Course. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Learners are sampled from 5 institutions: University of Michigan, University of Rochester, University of Florida, Boston University, and University of Buffalo. Learners who take the course and consent to be in the study receive a web link to a survey immediately after course completion and at 2–3 months follow up. In addition to demographic information, learners will report their perceptions of usefulness and relevance of the course to their job, their satisfaction with the course and associated job aids, and at follow-up, if and how the course impacted their work. Additional information will be collected from the learning management systems which host the course at each institution. The data collected will include the number of participants who take the course, the number who complete, how many times the course was attempted, and pass rates. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We anticipate that several hundred learners will take the course by the end of our project. Of learners who agree to participate in the survey, we anticipate that they will find the course useful and relevant to social and behavioral clinical trials and will be satisfied with the course. Information including suggestions about missing content, items or content that were not extremely clear, or any other comments will be collected to iterate and expand the course. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This course was developed to fill a gap in training in good clinical practice for social and behavioral research. An evaluation of how the training provided in the course impacts the jobs of learners is needed both to ensure that the most relevant information is included in the course as well as to identify ways that the training may contribute to the quality and safety of social and behavioral clinical trials.