Annual Review of Public Health最新文献

Difference-in-difference (DID) estimators are a valuable method for identifying causal effects in the public health researcher's toolkit. A growing methods literature points out potential problems with DID estimators when treatment is staggered in adoption and varies with time. Despite this, no practical guide exists for addressing these new critiques in public health research. We illustrate these new DID concepts with step-by-step examples, code, and a checklist. We draw insights by comparing the simple 2 × 2 DID design (single treatment group, single control group, two time periods) with more complex cases: additional treated groups, additional time periods of treatment, and treatment effects possibly varying over time. We outline newly uncovered threats to causal interpretation of DID estimates and the solutions the literature has proposed, relying on a decomposition that shows how the more complex DIDs are an average of simpler 2 × 2 DID subexperiments.

The monolithic misrepresentation of Asian American (AsAm) populations has maintained assumptions that AsAm people are not burdened by health disparities and social and economic inequities. However, the story is more nuanced. We critically review AsAm health research to present knowledge of AsAm health profiles from the past two decades and present findings and opportunities across three topical domains: (a) general descriptive knowledge, (b) factors affecting health care uptake, and (c) effective interventions. Much of the literature emphasized underutilization of health care services; low knowledge and awareness among AsAms about health-related risk factors, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment; inadequate efforts by health systems to improve language access, provider-patient communication, and trust; and the critical roles of community- and faith-based organizations and leaders in health promotion initiatives. Future opportunities for AsAm health research will require adoption of and significant investment in community-engaged research infrastructure to increase representation, funding, and research innovation for AsAm communities.

There has been an increasing focus on making health equity a more explicit and foundational aspect of the research being conducted in public health and implementation science. This commentary provides an overview of five reviews in this Annual Review of Public Health symposium on Implementation Science and Health Equity. These articles reflect on and advance the application of core implementation science principles and concepts, with a focus on promoting health equity across a diverse range of public health and health care settings. Taken together, the symposium articles highlight critical conceptual, methodological, and empirical advances in the study designs, frameworks, and approaches that can help address equity considerations in the use of implementation science in both domestic and global contexts. Finally, this commentary highlights how work featured in this symposium can help inform future directions for rapidly taking public health to scale, particularly among systemically marginalized populations and communities.

The concept of workplace safety and health has focused largely on preventing accidents and on minimizing hazardous exposures. However, because workers spend a substantial part of their waking hours at the workplace, the potential to influence the health of a large proportion of the world's population through the workplace is enormous. The opportunities to carry out health promotion and chronic disease prevention activities at the workplace are countless, including (a) health screening; (b) tobacco cessation activities; (c) the promotion of healthy food choices and weight loss; (d) active breaks with physical exercise in terms of microexercise, enhancement of infrastructure to stimulate physical activity, and organization of work tasks to facilitate incidental physical activity; and (e) routine vaccinations. This review discusses the key factors necessary to implement health promotion and chronic disease prevention programs at the workplace (SWOLE model) and discusses the different foci and possibilities with respect to the differing nature of work for the blue- versus white-collar workforce.

Conducting real-world public health experiments is often costly, time-consuming, and ethically challenging, so mathematical models have a long-standing history of being used to inform policy. Applications include estimating disease burden, performing economic evaluation of interventions, and responding to health emergencies such as pandemics. Models played a pivotal role during the COVID-19 pandemic, providing early detection of SARS-CoV-2's pandemic potential and informing subsequent public health measures. While models offer valuable policy insights, they often carry limitations, especially when they depend on assumptions and incomplete data. Striking a balance between accuracy and timely decision-making in rapidly evolving situations such as disease outbreaks is challenging. Modelers need to explore the extent to which their models deviate from representing the real world. The uncertainties inherent in models must be effectively communicated to policy makers and the public. As the field becomes increasingly influential, it needs to develop reporting standards that enable rigorous external scrutiny.

The future of plant-based diets is a complex public health issue inextricably linked to planetary health. Shifting the world's population to consume nutrient-rich, plant-based diets is among the most impactful strategies to transition to sustainable food systems to feed 10 billion people by 2050. This review summarizes how international expert bodies define sustainable diets and food systems and describes types of sustainable dietary patterns. It also explores how the type and proportion of plant- versus animal-source foods and alternative proteins relate to sustainable diets to reduce diet-related morbidity and mortality. Thereafter, we synthesize evidence for current challenges and actions needed to achieve plant-based sustainable dietary patterns using a conceptual framework with principles to promote human health, ecological health, social equity, and economic prosperity. We recommend strategies for governments, businesses, and civil society to encourage marketplace choices that lead to plant-rich sustainable diets within healthy, equitable, and resilient agroecological food systems.

In this article, we examine progress and challenges in designing, implementing, and evaluating culturally sensitive behavioral interventions by tailoring health communication to groups or individuals. After defining common tailoring constructs (i.e., culture, race, and ethnicity), cultural sensitivity, and cultural tailoring, we examine when it is useful to culturally tailor and address cultural sensitivity in health communication by group tailoring or individual tailoring and when tailoring health communication may not be necessary or appropriate for achieving behavior change. After reviewing selected approaches to cultural tailoring, we critique the quality of research in this domain with a focus on the internal validity of empirical findings. Then we explore the ways in which cultural sensitivity, group targeting, and individual tailoring have incorporated culture in health promotion and health communication. We conclude by articulating yet unanswered questions and suggesting future directions to move the field forward.

The promise of adaptation and adaptive designs in implementation science has been hindered by the lack of clarity and precision in defining what it means to adapt, especially regarding the distinction between adaptive study designs and adaptive implementation strategies. To ensure a common language for science and practice, authors reviewed the implementation science literature and found that the term adaptive was used to describe interventions, implementation strategies, and trial designs. To provide clarity and offer recommendations for reporting and strengthening study design, we propose a taxonomy that describes fixed versus adaptive implementation strategies and implementation trial designs. To improve impact, (a) futureimplementation studies should prespecify implementation strategy core functions that in turn can be taught to and replicated by health system/community partners, (b) funders should support exploratory studies that refine and specify implementation strategies, and (c) investigators should systematically address design requirements and ethical considerations (e.g., randomization, blinding/masking) with health system/community partners.

Several factors motivate the need for innovation to improve the delivery of behavioral health services, including increased rates of mental health and substance use disorders, limited access to services, inconsistent use of evidence-based practices, and persistent racial and ethnic disparities. This narrative review identifies promising innovations that address these challenges, assesses empirical evidence for the effectiveness of these innovations and the extent to which they have been adopted and implemented, and suggests next steps for research. We review five categories of innovations: organizational models, including a range of novel locations for providing services and new ways of organizing services within and across sites; information and communication technologies; workforce; treatment technologies; and policy and regulatory changes. We conclude by discussing the need to strengthen and accelerate the contributions of implementation science to close the gap between the launch of innovative behavioral health services and their widespread use.