An Analysis of Grants Focused on Health Disparities Held by the National Cancer Institute's Health Communication and Informatics Research Branch, 2010-2024.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Nicole Senft Everson, Amanda M Acevedo, Anna Gaysynsky, Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou, Heather D'Angelo, Robin C Vanderpool
{"title":"An Analysis of Grants Focused on Health Disparities Held by the National Cancer Institute's Health Communication and Informatics Research Branch, 2010-2024.","authors":"Nicole Senft Everson, Amanda M Acevedo, Anna Gaysynsky, Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou, Heather D'Angelo, Robin C Vanderpool","doi":"10.1080/10410236.2025.2567513","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Health communication can both reinforce and reduce adverse differences in cancer outcomes between groups. However, characteristics of cancer communication research aiming to reduce these health disparities have not been systematically assessed. Awarded research project grants in the National Cancer Institute's Health Communication and Informatics Research Branch (NCI-HCIRB) portfolio (2010-2024; <i>n</i> = 159) were coded to identify disparities focus and population(s) of interest. Disparities-focused grants were subsequently coded for cancer topic areas (e.g. cancer type) and research approach (i.e. methods, measures, analysis plan). Out of 159 grants, 64 (40%) had a health disparities focus. Of these, 78% developed or tested an intervention and 86% included a sample entirely comprised of populations known to experience health disparities. The most common populations of interest were racial or ethnic minority groups (55%), populations with lower socioeconomic status (20%), and rural residents (19%). Disparities-focused grants spanned varying cancer topics, including cancer prevention (53%) and breast cancer (27%). Nearly three-quarters of grants used both qualitative and quantitative research methods, and over one-third included community or participant engagement strategies. Drivers of health disparities were rarely measured beyond the individual level. Research may further prioritize engagement with affected communities and efforts to understand and address interpersonal and environmental factors influencing adverse differences in cancer outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":12889,"journal":{"name":"Health Communication","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Communication","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2025.2567513","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Health communication can both reinforce and reduce adverse differences in cancer outcomes between groups. However, characteristics of cancer communication research aiming to reduce these health disparities have not been systematically assessed. Awarded research project grants in the National Cancer Institute's Health Communication and Informatics Research Branch (NCI-HCIRB) portfolio (2010-2024; n = 159) were coded to identify disparities focus and population(s) of interest. Disparities-focused grants were subsequently coded for cancer topic areas (e.g. cancer type) and research approach (i.e. methods, measures, analysis plan). Out of 159 grants, 64 (40%) had a health disparities focus. Of these, 78% developed or tested an intervention and 86% included a sample entirely comprised of populations known to experience health disparities. The most common populations of interest were racial or ethnic minority groups (55%), populations with lower socioeconomic status (20%), and rural residents (19%). Disparities-focused grants spanned varying cancer topics, including cancer prevention (53%) and breast cancer (27%). Nearly three-quarters of grants used both qualitative and quantitative research methods, and over one-third included community or participant engagement strategies. Drivers of health disparities were rarely measured beyond the individual level. Research may further prioritize engagement with affected communities and efforts to understand and address interpersonal and environmental factors influencing adverse differences in cancer outcomes.

2010-2024年国家癌症研究所健康传播与信息学研究处对健康差异的资助分析。
健康交流可以加强和减少群体之间癌症结局的不利差异。然而,旨在减少这些健康差异的癌症传播研究的特点尚未得到系统评估。国家癌症研究所健康传播与信息学研究分支(NCI-HCIRB)投资组合(2010-2024;n = 159)中获得的研究项目资助被编码,以确定差异焦点和感兴趣的人群。以差异为重点的拨款随后根据癌症主题领域(如癌症类型)和研究方法(即方法、措施、分析计划)进行编码。在159项赠款中,64项(40%)的重点是健康差异。其中,78%开发或测试了干预措施,86%的样本完全由已知存在健康差异的人群组成。最常见的关注人群是种族或少数民族群体(55%),社会经济地位较低的人群(20%)和农村居民(19%)。以差异为重点的拨款涵盖了不同的癌症主题,包括癌症预防(53%)和乳腺癌(27%)。近四分之三的资助同时使用了定性和定量研究方法,超过三分之一的资助包括社区或参与者参与策略。健康差异的驱动因素很少在个人层面之外进行测量。研究可能会进一步优先考虑受影响社区的参与,并努力了解和解决影响癌症结果不利差异的人际和环境因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
10.30%
发文量
184
期刊介绍: As an outlet for scholarly intercourse between medical and social sciences, this noteworthy journal seeks to improve practical communication between caregivers and patients and between institutions and the public. Outstanding editorial board members and contributors from both medical and social science arenas collaborate to meet the challenges inherent in this goal. Although most inclusions are data-based, the journal also publishes pedagogical, methodological, theoretical, and applied articles using both quantitative or qualitative methods.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信