‘Harder to reach’ versus reaching harder: Exploring preferred dissemination pathways to a digital binge-eating intervention for adults with or at risk of food insecurity

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Isabel R. Rooper , Chidiebere Azubuike , Adrian Ortega , Graham C. Miller , Leah M. Parsons , Lindsay D. Lipman , Macarena Kruger , Rebecca L. Flynn , Basia Silverberg , Jennifer E. Wildes , Andrea K. Graham
{"title":"‘Harder to reach’ versus reaching harder: Exploring preferred dissemination pathways to a digital binge-eating intervention for adults with or at risk of food insecurity","authors":"Isabel R. Rooper ,&nbsp;Chidiebere Azubuike ,&nbsp;Adrian Ortega ,&nbsp;Graham C. Miller ,&nbsp;Leah M. Parsons ,&nbsp;Lindsay D. Lipman ,&nbsp;Macarena Kruger ,&nbsp;Rebecca L. Flynn ,&nbsp;Basia Silverberg ,&nbsp;Jennifer E. Wildes ,&nbsp;Andrea K. Graham","doi":"10.1016/j.eatbeh.2025.101970","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Individuals from minoritized and under-resourced subpopulations, such as individuals with food insecurity, are sometimes considered “harder to reach.” Instead, tailored dissemination pathways may be required to reach them. We sought to learn how best to reach individuals with food insecurity seeking digital intervention for binge eating.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>As part of continued design work in two ongoing trials testing a digital intervention for binge eating, we conducted a secondary exploratory analysis of individuals' preferred dissemination channels, modes, and materials. We assessed individuals' preferences at baseline via a pre-intervention questionnaire. Adults (<em>n</em> = 90) with binge eating and food insecurity or at risk of food insecurity completed the questionnaire. We also compared their preferences to adults (<em>n</em> = 106) with binge eating and without food insecurity, and highlighted differences of <em>p</em> &lt; 0.10.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Individuals with or at risk of food insecurity preferred dissemination via community organizations and events, healthcare centers, fitness centers, and online sources, more than trusted sources (e.g., clinicians). They preferred websites over other dissemination modes (e.g., videos). They were most interested in useful promotional materials (e.g., grocery bags). Compared to those without food insecurity, individuals with or at risk of food insecurity were more interested in dissemination via community organizations and events, and less interested in dissemination through doctors.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>Findings indicate tailored dissemination strategies could improve reach to individuals with or at risk of food insecurity. This study is a first step toward better engaging this subpopulation. Future work should disseminate through the preferred channels, assess their reach, and iterate as needed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11476,"journal":{"name":"Eating behaviors","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 101970"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eating behaviors","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1471015325000303","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Individuals from minoritized and under-resourced subpopulations, such as individuals with food insecurity, are sometimes considered “harder to reach.” Instead, tailored dissemination pathways may be required to reach them. We sought to learn how best to reach individuals with food insecurity seeking digital intervention for binge eating.

Method

As part of continued design work in two ongoing trials testing a digital intervention for binge eating, we conducted a secondary exploratory analysis of individuals' preferred dissemination channels, modes, and materials. We assessed individuals' preferences at baseline via a pre-intervention questionnaire. Adults (n = 90) with binge eating and food insecurity or at risk of food insecurity completed the questionnaire. We also compared their preferences to adults (n = 106) with binge eating and without food insecurity, and highlighted differences of p < 0.10.

Results

Individuals with or at risk of food insecurity preferred dissemination via community organizations and events, healthcare centers, fitness centers, and online sources, more than trusted sources (e.g., clinicians). They preferred websites over other dissemination modes (e.g., videos). They were most interested in useful promotional materials (e.g., grocery bags). Compared to those without food insecurity, individuals with or at risk of food insecurity were more interested in dissemination via community organizations and events, and less interested in dissemination through doctors.

Discussion

Findings indicate tailored dissemination strategies could improve reach to individuals with or at risk of food insecurity. This study is a first step toward better engaging this subpopulation. Future work should disseminate through the preferred channels, assess their reach, and iterate as needed.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Eating behaviors
Eating behaviors Multiple-
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
3.60%
发文量
65
审稿时长
60 days
期刊介绍: Eating Behaviors is an international peer-reviewed scientific journal publishing human research on the etiology, prevention, and treatment of obesity, binge eating, and eating disorders in adults and children. Studies related to the promotion of healthy eating patterns to treat or prevent medical conditions (e.g., hypertension, diabetes mellitus, cancer) are also acceptable. Two types of manuscripts are encouraged: (1) Descriptive studies establishing functional relationships between eating behaviors and social, cognitive, environmental, attitudinal, emotional or biochemical factors; (2) Clinical outcome research evaluating the efficacy of prevention or treatment protocols.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信