Purpose The purpose of this study is to qualitatively explore and describe the social environment of CrossFit®. Design/methodology/approach A total of 6 focus groups (n = 48) and 16 interviews were held with CrossFit® participants, coaches and owners. Each focus group or interview was facilitated by trained members of the research team. After data collection was complete, four trained researchers analyzed transcriptions using an open coding method to derive themes from responses, followed by inter-rater reliability checks to ensure consistency in data analysis. Findings Five themes emerged including: support (the social capital community members received from others through CrossFit®, including encouragement, coaching and accountability); culture (describes how CrossFit® as a community embraces a variety of skill levels and members experience a sense of camaraderie, acceptance and shared goals); social aspect (ways CrossFit® incorporates and extends community through a welcoming environment and fostering relationships building); competition (competing with others and oneself at CrossFit® is key to motivation and success at the gym); and barriers to community (ways CrossFit® can at times be intimidating). Practical implications Although exploratory, this study suggests the importance of CrossFit®’s social environment for a participant’s experience. Future research could determine how relationships within CrossFit® relate to health outcomes. Originality/value This research is original and important to the field of mental health as it explores how CrossFit® can be leveraged as a strategy to promote social inclusion. CrossFit® provides an environment that promotes healthy habits such as community involvement and exercise.

No abstract

Prolonged social isolation during the COVID-19 lockdown has adversely impacted the mental, social, and physical wellbeing of the global populace. Coping with mental and physical stressors amidst the global lockdown is especially strenuous for the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and more (LGBT+) community, who are frequently subjected to social stigma and minority stress. Systematic stigma and discrimination place LGBT+ individuals at higher risk for deleterious behaviors, such as substance abuse (e.g., injection drug use, smoking, alcohol) and risky sexual practices (e.g., anal/vaginal/oral sex). Maladaptive coping behaviors consequently increase the chances of HIV/AIDS risk among LGBT+ individuals, compared to heterosexual individuals. LGBT+ individuals Living with HIV/AIDS perpetually face higher rates of unemployment, income disparity, and intimate partner violence. Prolonged home confinement, and impaired accessibility to healthcare, legal, and criminal justice services during lockdown may deplete the quality of life of LGBT+ individuals Living with HIV/AIDS. Therefore, it is critical that multidisciplinary service providers, including health professionals, employers, social services providers, educational institutions and community organizations, move toward online service delivery, so that homebound HIV-positive LGBT+ individuals are secured with a wide range of care options. Non-judgemental, tele-counseling may bridge the gap to mental health services. Community clinics catering to HIV-positive and/or LGBT+ clients may consider precociously supplying essential amenities, such as Preexposure (PrEP)/postexposure prophylaxis (PEP), condoms, emergency contraception, and sterile needles. Lastly, efforts directed at the sustenance of at-risk/HIV-positive LGBT+ health should persevere, even after the pandemic.

This manuscript introduces a new framework for creating innovations in public health—the Framework for Public Health Innovation. The framework was developed through a longitudinal qualitative research study that investigated the process of creating innovative adolescent health programs. Interviews were conducted with a national sample of 26 organizations over two time points. Data collection focused on the process of innovative program development; organizational capacity; training; and technical assistance needs, successes, and barriers. The framework was developed and modified based on interview findings and expert advice; then, the final framework was validated with content experts. The framework illustrates a dynamic process of innovation that begins with dissatisfaction with the status quo, and then, illustrates three necessary components for innovation—space, process, and partnerships. Four categories of innovation, which range in complexity, are proposed: (1) creating a new component to an existing program, (2) adapting an existing program to meet new needs, (3) taking an alternative approach to addressing an existing program, and (4) reframing a health problem from a new perspective. As illustrated by a feedback loop, the resulting innovations disrupt the status quo. This model can be applied to any content area in public health and is useful for both research and practitioners.

No abstract