Sex differences in Medicare beneficiaries' experiences by low-income status.

OBJECTIVES: Medicare beneficiaries dually eligible for Medicaid are a low-income group who are often in poor health. Little research has examined sex differences in patient experience by dual/low-income subsidy (LIS) status. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional comparison by sex and low-income status. METHODS: We used linear regression to compare 6 case mix-adjusted patient experience measures (on a 0-100 scale) by sex within non-dual/LIS and dual/LIS beneficiary groups among 549,603 respondents 65 years and older to the 2016-2017 Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems surveys of beneficiary experience with Medicare (mail with telephone follow-up of nonrespondents, 42% response rate). RESULTS: Dual/LIS male beneficiaries reported worse patient experiences on all 6 measures than female beneficiaries, with scores 1 to 2 percentage points lower for 3 measures and less than 1 percentage point lower for the other 3 measures. For 4 of the 6 measures, sex differences among dual/LIS beneficiaries were significantly larger than those among non-dual/LIS beneficiaries. In all 4 instances, the gaps between men and women among dual/LIS beneficiaries favored women; P < .05 for all differences discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Low-income male Medicare beneficiaries are more likely to report poor patient experiences, possibly because of lower health literacy, less patient activation, and smaller social networks, along with provider responses to these characteristics. Efforts to address these patient-level factors should happen in parallel with structural-level approaches to train and prepare providers to ensure attentive, respectful patient-centered care for all patients. Additionally, targeted use of ombudsmen and interventions may help reduce inequities.

Primary Care Providers' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Beliefs About HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP): Informing Network-Based Interventions.

Increasing access to pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in primary care settings for patients who may be at risk for HIV could help to increase PrEP uptake, which has remained low among certain key risk populations. The current study conducted interviews with primary care providers identified from national claims data as having either high or low likelihood of serving PrEP-eligible patients based on their prescribing practices for other sexually transmitted infections. The study yielded important information about primary care providers' knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about PrEP, as well as the barriers and facilitators to prescribing PrEP. Key recommendations for a provider-focused intervention to increase PrEP prescribing among primary care providers, including increasing patient education to increase demand from providers, enhancing provider education, leveraging technology, and instituting standardized sexual health checks, are provided with the goal of informing network-based interventions.

What I'd Tell My 16-Year-Old Self: Criminal Desistance, Young Adults, and Psychosocial Maturation.

This study qualitatively explored how young adult men on probation or parole view the components of psychosocial maturation that contribute to criminal desistance. The authors conducted nine focus groups with 40 men on probation or parole, including seven groups with men aged 18 to 25 years. Two additional focus groups were conducted with older men (ages 29-60 years) to refine our evolving understanding. According to the participants, psychosocial maturation processes of personal growth, learning from mistakes, considering consequences before acting, developing and executing long-range plans, improving peer associations, and recognizing and responding to a motivating event all contributed to their desire to change their course of criminal offending. These components map well onto existing theories of psychosocial maturation and criminal desistance and lend further insight into how young adult men perceive the psychological, emotional, and cognitive factors that can support their desistance goals.

To Educate or To Incarcerate: Factors in Disproportionality in School Discipline.

The school-to-prison pipeline describes the process by which school suspension/expulsion may push adolescents into the justice system disproportionately based on race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and gender. The current study moves the field forward by analyzing a survey of a diverse sample of 2,539 students in 10th to 12th grade in Southern California to examine how demographic, individual, and family factors contribute to disparities in office referral and suspension/expulsion. African Americans, boys, and students whose parents had less education were more likely to be suspended/expelled. Higher levels of student academic preparation for class, hours spent on homework, and academic aspiration were associated with less school discipline. Findings suggest that helping students engage in school may be protective against disproportionate school discipline.

Juvenile reentry and aftercare interventions: is mentoring a promising direction?

This study uses systematic review methods to investigate the use of mentoring programs to assist young people in successfully transitioning back into their communities following a juvenile correctional placement. Few studies were found that used comparison or control groups and measured recidivism outcomes. The results of the studies were mixed, with one study finding no differences between groups, and the other two studies finding some recidivism reductions among youth who received the intervention. However, the absence of detailed information on the interventions, weak research designs, and the diversity of the mentoring programs contributed to an overall dearth of knowledge about the effectiveness of these interventions in reducing recidivism.