No abstract

No abstract

Background: Traditional hierarchical approaches to research give privilege to small groups with decision-making power, without direct input from those with lived experience of illness who bear the burden of disease. A Research Justice framework values the expertise of patients and communities as well as their power in creating knowledge and in decisions about what research is conducted. Preterm birth has persisted at epidemic levels in the United States for decades and disproportionately affects women of color, especially Black women. Women of color have not been included in setting the agenda regarding preterm birth research. Methods: We used the Research Priorities of Affected Communities protocol to elicit and prioritize potential research questions and topics directly from women of color living in three communities that experience disproportionately high rates of preterm birth. Women participated in two focus group sessions, first describing their healthcare experiences and generating lists of uncertainties about their health and/or healthcare during pregnancy. Women then participated in consensus activities to achieve 'top-priority' research questions and topic lists. The priority research questions and topics produced by each group were examined within and across the three regions for similarities and differences.Results: Fifty-four women participated in seven groups (14 sessions) and generated 375 researchable questions, clustered within 22 topics and four overarching themes: Maternal Health and Care Before, During, and After Pregnancy; Newborn Health and Care of the Preterm Baby; Understanding Stress and Interventions to Prevent or Reduce Stress; and Interpersonal and Structural Health Inequities. The questions and topics represent a wide range of research domains, from basic science, translational, clinical, health and social care delivery to policy and economic research. There were many similarities and some unique differences in the questions, topics and priorities across the regions.Conclusions: These findings can be used to design and fund research addressing unanswered questions that matter most to women at high risk for preterm birth. Investigators and funders are strongly encouraged to incorporate women at the front lines of the preterm birth epidemic in research design and funding decisions, and more broadly, to advance methods to deepen healthcare research partnerships with affected communities.

BackgroundDespite recent improvements in malaria prevention strategies, malaria case management remains a weakness in Northern Nigeria, which is underserved and suffers the country’s highest rates of under-five child mortality. Understanding malaria care-seeking patterns and comparing case management outcomes to World Health Organization (WHO) and Nigeria’s National Malaria Control Programme (NMCP) guidelines are necessary to identify where policy and programmatic strategies should focus to prevent malaria mortality and morbidity.MethodsA cross-sectional survey based on lot quality assurance sampling was used to collect data on malaria care-seeking for children under five with fever in the last two weeks throughout Sokoto and Bauchi States. The survey assessed if the child received NMCP/WHO recommended case management: prompt treatment, a diagnostic blood test, and artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT). Deviations from this pathway and location of treatment were also assessed. Lastly, logistic regression was used to assess predictors of seeking treatment.ResultsOverall, 76.7% of children were brought to treatment—45.5% to a patent medicine vendor and 43.8% to a health facility. Of children brought to treatment, 61.5% sought treatment promptly, but only 9.8% received a diagnostic blood test and 7.2% received a prompt ACT. When assessing adherence to the complete case management pathway, only 1.0% of children received NMCP/WHO recommended treatment. When compared to other treatment locations, health facilities provided the greatest proportion of children with NMCP/WHO recommended treatment. Lastly, children 7–59 months old were at 1.74 (p = 0.003) greater odds of receiving treatment than children ≤6 months.ConclusionsNorthern Nigeria’s coverage rates of NMCP/WHO standard malaria case management for children under five with fever fall short of the NMCP goal of 80% coverage by 2010 and universal coverage thereafter. Given the ability to treat a child with malaria differs greatly between treatment locations, policy and logistics planning should address the shortages of essential malaria supplies in recommended and frequently accessed treatment locations. Particular emphasis should be placed on integrating the private sector into standardized care and educating caregivers on the necessity for testing before treatment and the availability of free ACT in public health facilities for uncomplicated malaria.

The use of mailed family history questionnaires (FHQs) has previously been established to be an effective method for obtaining family history information for the triage of patients for genetic counseling and genetic testing of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome; yet only 53% of patients complete their FHQ within 6 months from the date of mailing (Armel et al. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 18(4):366-378, 2009). Although literature exists evaluating why women may not attend genetic counseling, no data are currently available examining genetic risk or genetic testing eligibility in the population of patients not returning their FHQ (non-responders). Concern exists that if non-responders are not followed-up for the purpose of triage for genetic counseling, individuals at high-risk for a hereditary cancer syndrome may be missed. This article explores the demographics of the non-responder population to assess genetic risk estimates for mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes and genetic testing eligibility as compared to a responder population of patients who completed a mailed FHQ. A total of 430 pedigrees were obtained, 215 from non-responders and 215 from responders. Results of this study indicate that 69% of non-responders were either unreachable by telephone (42%), declined an appointment (19%), or were previously seen in another center for a genetic counseling visit (8%). Additionally, results indicate that non-responders are less likely to be eligible for genetic testing (40%) as compared to responders (57%) (p = 0.0004). Together these data shed light on a population of patients for which limited information exists and suggest that we question how and to what extent clinics should pursue non-responders, particularly in light of global reductions in health care funding.