Watching the fall of Roe v. Wade: Media exposure relates to U.S. women's alcohol use intentions.

OBJECTIVE: The Supreme Court of the United States' decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization in June 2022 overturned Roe v. Wade and ended federal protection of abortion rights. Given the drastic policy changes as a result of the ruling and high exposure to media related to abortion, women opposed to the decision may have experienced distress, which could trigger maladaptive coping strategies, such as alcohol use. The present research examined how consuming abortion-related media in the weeks following the Dobbs decision impacted alcohol use intentions among women of reproductive age residing in the 13 "trigger law" states that immediately restricted abortion access. METHOD: A sample of 196 women (Mage = 30.52, SD = 6.9) residing in trigger law states answered questions about abortion-related media consumption, views toward the Dobbs ruling, negative affect, and alcohol use intentions. RESULTS: Consuming more abortion-related media predicted higher alcohol use intentions for women who opposed the ruling, but not those who were in favor of abortion restrictions. CONCLUSIONS: This timely study provides evidence of how the Dobbs ruling is associated with health ramifications beyond reproduction, yielding insights about how high media exposure to large-scale, distressing events may put those most affected-women of reproductive age in states that enacted new policies restricting abortion access-at risk for alcohol use. Findings highlight an imperative direction for future research as abortion restrictions continue to be spotlighted in U.S. media and state legislatures. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Rare exemplars and missed opportunities: Intersectionality within current sexual and gender diversity research and scholarship in psychology.

Using intersectionality as our critical analytical framework, we examined 22 articles on sexual and gender diversity (SGD) published in peer-reviewed psychology journals between January and June 2022 to: (1) identify their engagement with intersectionality's core themes; and (2) highlight key findings and directions for future intersectional SGD research. Our review includes 12 theoretical and empirical articles that addressed a breadth of topics such as intersectional stigma/discrimination, gendered racism, minority stress, and intersectional ableism. This review highlights opportunities within intersectional SGD research in psychology to provide a needed corrective to the discipline's tradition of individualistic, single-axis research focused on predominantly White, cisgender and heterosexual people, and attend to intersectionality's focus on intersecting power relations and commitments to social justice.

Ending the HIV epidemic for all, not just some: structural racism as a fundamental but overlooked social-structural determinant of the US HIV epidemic.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We review the recent theoretical and empirical literature on structural racism, social determinants of health frameworks within the context of HIV prevention and treatment, and criticism of the national responses to the US epidemic. RECENT FINDINGS: In line with growing mainstream attention to the role of structural racism and health inequities, recent editorials and studies cite ending structural racism as an essential step to ending the US HIV epidemic. Recent studies demonstrate that barriers rooted in structural racism such as incarceration, housing instability, police discrimination, neighborhood disadvantage, health service utilization and community violence, and poor or no access to social services, transportation, and childcare, are barriers to HIV prevention. Recent articles also criticize national responses to HIV such as the ending the HIV epidemic (EHE) and National HIV/AIDS Strategy plans for failing to address structural racism and prioritize community engagement in EHE efforts. SUMMARY: Collectively, the articles in this review highlight a growing consensus that the US has no real chance of EHE for all, absent a meaningful and measurable commitment to addressing structural racism and intersectional discrimination as core determinants of HIV, and without more equitable engagement with community-based organizations and communities disproportionately affected by HIV.

HIV-Related Stigma Research as a Priority at the National Institutes of Health.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) recognizes that, despite HIV scientific advances, stigma and discrimination continue to be critical barriers to the uptake of evidence-based HIV interventions. Achieving the Ending the HIV Epidemic: A Plan for America (EHE) goals will require eliminating HIV-related stigma. NIH has a significant history of supporting HIV stigma research across its Institutes, Centers, and Offices (ICOs) as a research priority. This article provides an overview of NIH HIV stigma research efforts. Each ICO articulates how their mission shapes their interest in HIV stigma research and provides a summary of ICO-relevant scientific findings. Research gaps and/or future opportunities are identified throughout, with key research themes and approaches noted. Taken together, the collective actions on the part of the NIH, in tandem with a whole of government and whole of society approach, will contribute to achieving EHE's milestones.

RESUMEN: Los Institutos de Salud Nacional (NIH, siglas en inglés) reconocen que, a pesar de los avances en la prevención y el tratamiento, el estigma y la discriminación continúan siendo barreras críticas a la adopción de la prevención y el cuido basados en la evidencia. Las metas de Logrando el Fin de la Epidemia de VIH: Plan para América (EHE, siglas en inglés) requerirán la eliminación del estigma relacionado al VIH. Los NIH tienen una historia significativa apoyando la investigación del estigma relacionado al VIH a través de sus Institutos, Centros, y Oficinas (ICOs, siglas en inglés). Esta investigación es una prioridad fundamental y entrelazada para los ICOs. En este artículo, los autores de los NIH proveen una reseña sobre la investigación del estigma relacionado al VIH a través de los ICOs selectos. Cada ICO articula como su misión y prioridad dan forma a su interés en la investigación del estigma al VIH y provee una breve reseña de los hallazgos científicos pertinentes al ICO. Lagunas en la investigación relacionada a la misión, prioridades, y/o áreas de investigación futuras se identifican a través del artículo. También se apuntan en el resumen los temas de investigación claves y sus estrategias. En conjunto, las acciones colectivas de parte de los NIH, junto a la estrategia necesaria de parte del gobierno en su totalidad y de la sociedad en su totalidad, contribuirán al logro de las metas del EHE.

Strengthening research capacity in LMICs to address the global NCD burden.

The burden of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) continues to rise across the globe, and the risk of dying prematurely from an NCD in a low- and middle-income country (LMIC) is almost double that in a high-income country. Confronting this crisis requires a critical mass of scientists who are well versed in regional health problems and understand the cultural, social, economic, and political contexts that influence the effectiveness of interventions to address NCDs. Investing in research capacity strengthening in LMICs is critical to effectively combating disease, and local researchers are best poised to address the health challenges in their home countries given their understanding of the unique culture and context in which they are working. The Fogarty International Center of the U.S. National Institutes of Health has a set of programs focused on building individual and institutional NCD research capacity in LMICs. The Programs provide models for sustainable scientific research capacity strengthening, innovative funding mechanisms and partnership-building approaches. Investing in the training and scientific capacity of LMIC individuals and institutions not only helps foster a research culture and solidify local ownership of research, but it also ensures that the most appropriate solutions are developed, increasing the likelihood that those solutions will sustain over time. In addition, the Programs' investigators have advanced the science across a range of NCDs and associated risk factors. This article describes key lessons and compelling cases from the Programs that can be harnessed by other health researchers and funders to further the global response to the NCD burden.

Ethical challenges in global health-related stigma research.

BACKGROUND: It is critically important to conduct research on stigmatized conditions, to include marginalized groups that experience stigma, and to develop interventions to reduce stigma. However, such research is ethically challenging. Though superficial reference is frequently made to these widely acknowledged challenges, few publications have focused on ethical issues in research on stigmatized groups or conditions. In fact, a brief literature review found only two such publications. MAIN TEXT: At a recent Science of Stigma Reduction workshop comprising 60 stigma researchers from the USA and low and middle-income countries, the need for more robust and critical discussion of the ethics of the research was highlighted. In this paper we describe, illustrate through cases, and critically examine key ethical challenges that are more likely to arise because a research study focuses on health-related stigma or involves stigmatized groups or conditions. We examine the ethics of this research from two perspectives. First, through the lens of overprotection, where we discuss how the perception of stigma can impede ethical research, disrespect research participants, and narrow the research questions. Second, through the lens of research risks, where we consider how research with stigmatized populations can unintentionally result in harms. Research-related harms to participants include potential breaches of confidentiality and the exacerbation of stigma. Potential harms also extend to third parties, including families and populations who may be affected by the dissemination of research results. CONCLUSIONS: Research with stigmatized populations and on stigmatized conditions should not be impeded by unnecessary or inappropriate protective measures. Nevertheless, it may entail different and greater risks than other health research. Investigators and research ethics committees must be particularly attentive to these risks and how to manage them.