Background Considering many patients receive care from general hospitals, these healthcare institutions are uniquely situated to address mental and physical health needs. Little is documented, however, on the common current mental disorders diagnosed in patients receiving care in general hospital settings, especially in Puerto Rico. The objective of this study was to characterize the five most common current DSM-5 mental disorder diagnoses made in patients receiving non-psychiatric medical and surgical care from a general hospital system in southern Puerto Rico between January 2015 and December 2019. Methods Our clinical health psychology team provides integrated psychology consultation-liaison services to select clinical units in general hospitals across the southwestern region of Puerto Rico. The clinical team conducted routine standardized psychological evaluations at patients' bedside, arrived at a current DSM-5 diagnosis if warranted, and documented the diagnosis and other select variables. A retrospective study of cross-sectional data generated from the clinical team’s standardized evaluations of 5494 medical patients was implemented. Multinomial logistic regression analyses were used to assess the odds of being diagnosed with a current DSM-5 mental disorder during hospitalization. Results Overall, 53% of the entire sample was diagnosed with a mental disorder during hospitalization. Major depressive, neurocognitive, anxiety, substance-related and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders were the most frequently diagnosed. Interestingly, females were 23% less likely to have been diagnosed with major depressive disorder than males (aOR: 0.769, CI [0.650, 0.909], p = 0.002). This is to say males evidenced 1.30 higher odds of being diagnosed with depression compared to their female counterpart. Age, biological sex, civil status, employment status, monthly household income, previous mental disorder and history substance use/abuse history was differentially associated with receiving a current DSM-5 disorder. Conclusion The integration of clinical health psychology services within a general hospital facilitated our team’s work of identifying and treating co-occurring mental disorders among hospitalized patients receiving medical and surgical care. Future studies examining the opportunities and barriers of integrating clinical health psychology services within a general hospital’s administrative and clinical infrastructure for rapid identification and treatment of co-occurring mental disorders among medical patients is encouraged.

Purpose: The community-based participatory research approach has been identified as a great asset in reducing health disparities through the integration of community members in all phases of the research process. It is essential to provide skills to community members to achieve successful research partnerships. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of the community-based participatory research training curriculum for community members.Methods: Using mixed-methods, noncomparative design, eight workshops were developed and tested. Workshops covered topics such as community-based participatory research principles, health disparities, ethics in community-based participatory research, and fundamentals of research methodology. A total of 25 community leaders were trained. Pre-/post-test knowledge (unpaired t-test), retention rate, workshop satisfaction, and cognitive debriefing sessions were used to assess knowledge gained and acceptability and feasibility of the curriculum.Results: A retention rate of 100% and an average satisfaction of 92.68% were obtained. Preliminary effectiveness results indicate that there was an overall significant change in participant's knowledge before and after the curriculum (p<0.001). In the cognitive debriefing, participants were satisfied with the organization and structure and found the curriculum feasible. Furthermore, participants identified the skills acquired to aid in being more effective in their communities and work with academic researchers. The following changes were recommended: workshops' order, time, practical activities, and level of language.Discussion: Findings from this study suggest that the curriculum was acceptable and feasible to community leaders and that it might provide skills to actively incorporate community members in research activities. A large randomized clinical trial (RCT) study to evaluate curriculum effectiveness is recommended.

No abstract

This paper details U.S. Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI) Community Engagement Cores (CECs): (1) unique and cross-cutting components, focus areas, specific aims, and target populations; and (2) approaches utilized to build or sustain trust towards community participation in research. A mixed-method data collection approach was employed for this cross-sectional study of current or previously funded RCMIs. A total of 18 of the 25 institutions spanning 13 U.S. states and territories participated. CEC specific aims were to support community engaged research (94%); to translate and disseminate research findings (88%); to develop partnerships (82%); and to build capacity around community research (71%). Four open-ended questions, qualitative analysis, and comparison of the categories led to the emergence of two supporting themes: (1) establishing trust between the community-academic collaborators and within the community and (2) building collaborative relationships. An overarching theme, building community together through trust and meaningful collaborations, emerged from the supporting themes and subthemes. The RCMI institutions and their CECs serve as models to circumvent the historical and current challenges to research in communities disproportionately affected by health disparities. Lessons learned from these cores may help other institutions who want to build community trust in and capacities for research that addresses community-related health concerns.