"It depends:" a qualitative study on digital health academic-industry collaboration.

BACKGROUND: Academic-industry collaborations (AICs) are endorsed to alleviate challenges in digital health, but partnership experiences remain understudied. The qualitative study's objective investigated collaboration experiences between academic institutions and digital health companies. METHODS: A phenomenology methodology captured experiences of AICs, eliciting perspectives from academic researchers and industry affiliates (e.g., leadership, company investigators). Semi-structured interviews probed eligible collaborators about their experiences in digital health. Analysts coded and organized data into significant statements reaching thematic saturation. RESULTS: Participants (N=20) were interviewed from 6 academic institutions and 14 unique industry partners. Seven themes emerged: (I) Collaboration evolves with time, relationships, funding, and evidence; (II) Collaboration demands strong relationships and interpersonal dynamics; (III) Operational processes vary across collaborations; (IV) Collaboration climate and context matters; (V) Shared expectations lead to a better understanding of success; (VI) Overcoming challenges with recommendations; (VII) Collaboration may help navigate the global pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Digital health academic industry collaboration demands strong relationships, requiring flexible mechanisms of collaboration and cultural fit. Diverse models of collaboration exist and remain dependent on contextual factors. While no collaboration conquers all challenges in digital health, AICs may serve as a facilitator for improved digital health products, thus advancing science, promoting public health, and benefiting the economy.

Exploring Predictors of Social Distancing Compliance in the United States during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Through the application of the Health Belief Model, this study sought to explore how relationships between perceived susceptibility, severity, and benefits of social distancing recommendations, as well as psychological factors, may impact compliance with COVID-19 social distancing recommendations in the United States. METHODS: Between October and November 2020, a convenience sample of English-speaking adults in the United States completed an online, cross-sectional survey which included items assessing beliefs around threats (e.g., perceived susceptibility and severity), response efficacy (e.g., perceived benefits), psychological factors (e.g., stress and COVID-specific anxiety), and compliance with social distancing measures (e.g., avoiding social gatherings). RESULTS: Social distancing compliance was positively associated with perceived susceptibility of COVID-19 (b = 0.42, P < 0.05) and perceived benefits of social distancing recommendations (b = 0.81, P < 0.01). No significant associations were found between perceived severity of COVID-19 (P = 0.38), general stress (P = 0.28), COVID-19-related anxiety (P = 0.12), and compliance. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 and perceived benefits of social distancing measures significantly increased compliance with social distancing recommendations in this convenience sample of U.S. adults.

Effects of a community gardening intervention on diet, physical activity, and anthropometry outcomes in the USA (CAPS): an observer-blind, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Unhealthy diet, physical inactivity, and social disconnection are important modifiable risk factors for non-communicable and other chronic diseases, which might be alleviated through nature-based community interventions. We tested whether a community gardening intervention could reduce these common health risks in an adult population that is diverse in terms of age, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. METHODS: In this observer-blind, randomised, controlled trial, we recruited individuals who were on Denver Urban Garden waiting lists for community gardens in Denver and Aurora (CO, USA), aged 18 years or older, and had not gardened in the past 2 years. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), using a randomised block design in block sizes of two, four, or six, to receive a community garden plot (intervention group) or remain on a waiting list and not garden (control group). Researchers were masked to group allocation. Primary outcomes were diet, physical activity, and anthropometry; secondary outcomes were perceived stress and anxiety. During spring (April to early June, before randomisation; timepoint 1 [T1]), autumn (late August to October; timepoint 2 [T2]), and winter (January to March, after the intervention; timepoint 3 [T3]), participants completed three diet recalls, 7-day accelerometry, surveys, and anthropometry. Analyses were done using the intention-to-treat principle (ie, including all participants randomly assigned to groups, and assessed as randomised). We used mixed models to test time-by-intervention hypotheses at an α level of 0·04, with T2 and T3 intervention effects at an α level of 0·005 (99·5% CI). Due to potential effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on outcomes, we excluded all participant data collected after Feb 1, 2020. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03089177, and data collection is now complete. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2017, and June 15, 2019, 493 adults were screened and 291 completed baseline measures and were randomly assigned to the intervention (n=145) or control (n=146) groups. Mean age was 41·5 years (SD 13·5), 238 (82%) of 291 participants were female, 52 (18%) were male, 99 (34%) identified as Hispanic, and 191 (66%) identified as non-Hispanic. 237 (81%) completed measurements before the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. One (<1%) participant in the intervention group had an adverse allergic event in the garden. Significant time-by-intervention effects were observed for fibre intake (p=0·034), with mean between-group difference (intervention minus control) at T2 of 1·41 g per day (99·5% CI -2·09 to 4·92), and for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (p=0·012), with mean between-group difference of 5·80 min per day (99·5% CI -4·44 to 16·05). We found no significant time-by-intervention interactions for combined fruit and vegetable intake, Healthy Eating Index (measured using Healthy Eating Index-2010), sedentary time, BMI, and waist circumference (all p>0·04). Difference score models showed greater reductions between T1 and T2 in perceived stress and anxiety among participants in the intervention group than among those in the control group. INTERPRETATION: Community gardening can provide a nature-based solution, accessible to a diverse population including new gardeners, to improve wellbeing and important behavioural risk factors for non-communicable and chronic diseases. FUNDING: American Cancer Society, University of Colorado Cancer Centre, University of Colorado Boulder, National Institutes of Health, US Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Michigan AgBioResearch Hatch projects.

Rural parents' attitudes and beliefs on the COVID-19 pediatric vaccine: An explanatory study.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) first came to the Unites States in January 2020. Though adult and pediatric vaccines became available to the public, vaccine uptake among youth and particularly younger children has been gradual. This explanatory study aimed to better understand parents' attitudes and beliefs of the pediatric COVID-19 vaccine and the barriers and facilitators to vaccine uptake in a rural community through a brief, online demographic survey, and in-depth qualitative interviews. Forty-one in depth interviews were conducted with parents (31-English and 10-Spanish-speaking) residing in rural and frontier counties in Colorado between September 2021 and February 2022. Six emergent themes related to COVID-19 pediatric vaccine uptake were identified among the population. These themes spanned the three levels of influence in the Social Ecological Model (individual, interpersonal, and community levels). The six themes were identified as such; 1) Vaccine accessibility was associated with pediatric COVID vaccine uptake in rural communities, 2) Previous pediatric vaccine behaviors were not associated with COVID-19 pediatric vaccine uptake, 3) Perceived health status of a child or family member influenced pediatric COVID-19 vaccine uptake, 4) COVID-19 health seeking behaviors, like COVID pediatric vaccine uptake, are influenced by an individual's prosocial or individualistic perspectives, 5) Child autonomy and "age of consent" frames vaccine decision making behaviors in parents, and lastly 6) Social networks impacted COVID-19 pediatric vaccine decision making. These findings inform next steps for COVID-19 pediatric vaccine uptake including targeted and tailored messaging for communities (cues to actions), engaging youth stakeholders, and identifying trusted sources to build rapport and trust between health professionals and community members. The growing vaccine hesitancy among parents has serious implications for disease eradication and future viral outbreaks. Understanding the perceived barriers and facilitators to pediatric vaccine uptake is important to maintain the health of our youth and communities.

Mental Health During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States: Online Survey.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had numerous worldwide effects. In the United States, there have been 8.3 million cases and nearly 222,000 deaths as of October 21, 2020. Based on previous studies of mental health during outbreaks, the mental health of the population will be negatively affected in the aftermath of this pandemic. The long-term nature of this pandemic may lead to unforeseen mental health outcomes and/or unexpected relationships between demographic factors and mental health outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This research focused on assessing the mental health status of adults in the United States during the early weeks of an unfolding pandemic. METHODS: Data was collected from English-speaking adults from early April to early June 2020 using an online survey. The final convenience sample included 1083 US residents. The 71-item survey consisted of demographic questions, mental health and well-being measures, a coping mechanisms checklist, and questions about COVID-19-specific concerns. Hierarchical multivariable logistic regression was used to explore associations among demographic variables and mental health outcomes. Hierarchical linear regression was conducted to examine associations among demographic variables, COVID-19-specific concerns, and mental health and well-being outcomes. RESULTS: Approximately 50% (536/1076) of the US sample was aged ≥45 years. Most of the sample was White (1013/1054, 96%), non-Hispanic (985/1058, 93%), and female (884/1073, 82%). Participants reported high rates of depression (295/1034, 29%), anxiety (342/1007, 34%), and stress (773/1058, 73%). Older individuals were less likely to report depressive symptomology (OR 0.78, P<.001) and anxiety symptomology (OR 0.72, P<.001); in addition, they had lower stress scores (-0.15 points, SE 0.01, P<.001) and increased well-being scores (1.86 points, SE 0.22, P<.001). Individuals who were no longer working due to COVID-19 were 2.25 times more likely to report symptoms of depression (P=.02), had a 0.51-point increase in stress (SE 0.17, P=.02), and a 3.9-point decrease in well-being scores (SE 1.49, P=.009) compared to individuals who were working remotely before and after COVID-19. Individuals who had partial or no insurance coverage were 2-3 times more likely to report depressive symptomology compared to individuals with full coverage (P=.02 and P=.01, respectively). Individuals who were on Medicare/Medicaid and individuals with no coverage were 1.97 and 4.48 times more likely to report moderate or severe anxiety, respectively (P=.03 and P=.01, respectively). Financial and food access concerns were significantly and positively related to depression, anxiety, and stress (all P<.05), and significantly negatively related to well-being (both P<.001). Economy, illness, and death concerns were significantly positively related to overall stress scores (all P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that many US residents are experiencing high stress, depressive, and anxiety symptomatology, especially those who are underinsured, uninsured, or unemployed. Longitudinal investigation of these variables is recommended. Health practitioners may provide opportunities to allay concerns or offer coping techniques to individuals in need of mental health care. These messages should be shared in person and through practice websites and social media.

Spanish Translation of StartSmartTM using the Beaton Process to Ensure Tech Equity

Objective. Perinatal outcomes in the United States are poor among Hispanics, the country's fastest-growing population. Hispanics experience higher rates of obesity, diabetes, gestational diabetes, preterm birth, and pregnancy-related hypertension, as well as 20% of infant deaths. StartSmarttm, an mHealth app, screens for risk and protective factors. This project translated and culturally adapted StartSmarttm for Spanish-speaking pregnant women. Methods. Using the Beaton process for translation and cultural adaptation, we completed a six-stage process. Stage I: Translation into Spanish, Stage II: Synthesis of the translations, Stage III: Back-translation, Stage IV: Expert committee review, Stage V: Pretesting with Spanish-speaking pregnant women, Stage VI: Appraisal of process. Results. StartSmarttm was acceptable and feasible for use during prenatal visits. Participants reported ease of use and understanding the material. No issues regarding literacy were identified, and participants provided helpful feedback for refining StartSmarttm for Spanish-speaking women. Conclusions. The Beaton process ensures culturally appropriate translation.

A Mixed-Methods Pilot Study of Perinatal Risk and Resilience During COVID-19.

Introduction/Objectives: National guidelines underscore the need for improvement in the detection and treatment of mood disorders in the perinatal period. Exposure to disasters can amplify perinatal mood disorders and even have intergenerational impacts. The primary aim of this pilot study was to use mixed-methods to better understand the mental health and well-being effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, as well as sources of resilience, among women during the perinatal period. Methods: The study team used a simultaneous exploratory mixed-methods design to investigate the primary objective. Thirty-one pregnant and postpartum women participated in phone interviews and were invited to complete an online survey which included validated mental health and well-being measures. Results: Approximately 12% of the sample reported high depressive symptomatology and 60% reported moderate or severe anxiety. Forty percent of the sample reported being lonely. The primary themes related to stress were uncertainty surrounding perinatal care, exposure risk for both mother and baby, inconsistent messaging from information sources and lack of support networks. Participants identified various sources of resilience, including the use of virtual communication platforms, engaging in self-care behaviors (eg, adequate sleep, physical activity, and healthy eating), partner emotional support, being outdoors, gratitude, and adhering to structures and routines. Conclusions: Since the onset of COVID-19, many pregnant and postpartum women report struggling with stress, depression, and anxiety symptomatology. Findings from this pilot study begin to inform future intervention work to best support this highly vulnerable population.