HPV vaccination series completion rates have increased steadily in the USA, yet specific areas continue to be burdened by HPV-related cancers, including rural areas of Virginia. The primary purpose of this study is to compare the impact of an community driven educational film about HPV on intention to vaccinate and knowledge gained in urban and rural areas of Virginia. From October 2016 to September 2019, the CDC-approved documentary “Someone You Love: The HPV Epidemic” was screened and followed by a Q&A session. Intention to vaccinate and knowledge gained after seeing the DVD intervention were measured through a pre-post-survey and analyzed data using chi-squared tests. The sample included males and females of all races and ages 18+ that identified as either student, parent/guardian, and/or healthcare provider from rural and urban geographical areas. Changes in knowledge about HPV were statistically significant in two out of seven questions (p < 0.05). Changes in attitude were statistically significant in every attitude-based question about HPV (p < 0.05). There were significant differences in knowledge gained and attitudes towards the HPV vaccine when comparing urban and rural locations as well. More research is needed to explore the efficacy of community-based interventions to increase uptake and series completion of HPV vaccination, particularly in rural areas most impacted by HPV-associated cancers.

Background The objectives are to: 1) describe engagement processes used to prioritize and address regional comprehensive cancer control needs among a Community-Academic Advisory Board (CAB) in the medically-underserved, rural Appalachian region, and 2) detail longitudinal CAB evaluation findings. Methods This three-year case study (2017–2020) used a convergent parallel, mixed-methods design. The approach was guided by community-based participatory research (CBPR) principles, the Comprehensive Participatory Planning and Evaluation process, and Nine Habits of Successful Comprehensive Cancer Control Coalitions. Meeting artifacts were tracked and evaluated. CAB members completed quantitative surveys at three time points and semi-structured interviews at two time points. Quantitative data were analyzed using analysis of variance tests. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed via an inductive-deductive process. Results Through 13 meetings, Prevention and Early Detection Action Teams created causal models and prioritized four cancer control needs: human papillomavirus vaccination, tobacco control, colorectal cancer screening, and lung cancer screening. These sub-groups also began advancing into planning and intervention proposal development phases. As rated by 49 involved CAB members, all habits significantly improved from Time 1 to Time 2 (i.e., communication, priority work plans, roles/accountability, shared decision making, value-added collaboration, empowered leadership, diversified funding, trust, satisfaction; all p < .05), and most remained significantly higher at Time 3. CAB members also identified specific challenges (e.g., fully utilizing member expertise), strengths (e.g., diverse membership), and recommendations across habits. Conclusion This project’s equity-based CBPR approach used a CPPE process in conjunction with internal evaluation of cancer coalition best practices to advance CAB efforts to address cancer disparities in rural Appalachia. This approach encouraged CAB buy-in and identified key strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities that will lay the foundation for continued involvement in cancer control projects. These engagement processes may serve as a template for similar coalitions in rural, underserved areas.

Purpose: Rural residents are less likely to engage in cancer risk-reduction behaviors than their urban counterparts. Rural cancer disparities may be related to limited access to and comprehension of cancer-related health information. The object of this study was to identify how rural residents access and understand cancer health promotion and prevention information. Sample: Twenty-seven residents of Central Virginia Methods: We used a qualitative design with semi-structured interviews and a focus group (n=27) with rural and non-rural residents living in Central Virginia to accomplish the study aim. Findings: Four themes were identified from the data: 1) non-rural Central Virginia residents seek health information from a variety of electronic sources, 2) rural Central Virginia residents typically seek health care information directly from health care professionals, 3) residents throughout Central Virginia encounter confusing health care information, and 4) rural residents report incorrect cancer-related information. Conclusions: Lack of internet access coupled with healthcare shortages may limit the ability of rural residents to contextualize and verify inaccurate health information. Nurses serving a rural population should consider assessing each rural patient’s internet access and disseminating printed cancer health promotion materials to rural clients without internet access. Keywords: rural health; healthcare disparities; access to care; cancer health promotion; health literacy; cancer DOI:  https://doi.org/10.14574/ojrnhc.v21i1.663