Search

Background: Digital contact tracing (DCT) was a central component of the global response to containing COVID‐19. Research has raised concerns that DCT could exacerbate inequities, yet the experiences of diverse communities at greater risk from COVID‐19 are typically underrepresented. Methods: The present study aimed to understand the perceived barriers to the adoption of the app amongst Māori, Pasifika, and disabled people. Focus groups and interviews were undertaken with Māori, Pasifika, and disability sector stakeholders and community participants. Results: Participants (n = 34) generally expressed willingness to utilise DCT and support its adoption within the communities. Simultaneously, participants revealed how the app could marginalise community members who struggled with the usability and those distrusting of the government's COVID‐19 interventions. Conclusions: The findings highlight how addressing communication inequality can assist in the development of contact‐tracing responses that are both effective and equitable. The study provides insights about the role of information and communication technologies as health resources. Patient or Public Contribution: Consulting with members of the target communities was central throughout the present study, including recommendations for potential participants, participation in interviews and sharing early findings for feedback. This study reports on focus groups and interviews with individuals from Māori and disability sectors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective This paper examines how negative experiences with the health-care system create a lack of confidence in receiving medical care in seven countries: Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Methods The empirical analysis is based on data from the Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey 2007, with nationally representative samples of adults aged 18 and over. For the analysis of the experience of cost barriers and confidence in receiving medical care, we conducted pairwise comparisons of group percentages as well as country-wise multivariate logistic regression models. Results Individuals who have experienced cost barriers show a significantly lower level of confidence in receiving safe and quality medical care than those who have not. This effect is most pronounced in the United States, where people who have foregone necessary treatment because of costs are four times as likely to lack confidence as individuals without the experience of cost barriers (adjusted odds ratio 4.00). In New Zealand, Germany, and Canada, individuals with the experience of cost barriers are twice as likely to report low confidence compared with those without this experience (adjusted odds ratios of 1.95, 2.19 and 2.24, respectively). In the Netherlands and UK, cost barriers are only a marginal phenomenon. Conclusions The fact that the experience of financial barriers considerably lowers confidence indicates that financial incentives, such as private co-payments, have a negative effect on overall public support and therefore on the legitimacy of health-care systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Māori, Pasifika and Asian women are less likely to attend cervical screening and Māori and Pasifika women are more likely to be diagnosed with later‐stage cervical cancer than other women in Aotearoa New Zealand. This study—with under‐screened women taking part in a randomized‐controlled trial comparing self‐testing and standard screening—explored the acceptability of a human papillomavirus (HPV) self‐test kit and the preferred method for receiving it. Methods: Māori, Pasifika and Asian women (N= 376) completed a cross‐sectional postal questionnaire. Twenty‐six women who had not accepted the trial invitation were interviewed to understand their reasons for nonparticipation. Results: Most women found the self‐test kit easy and convenient to use and reported that they did not find it painful, uncomfortable or embarrassing. This was reflected in the preference for a self‐test over a future smear test on the same grounds. Most women preferred to receive the kit by mail and take the test themselves, rather than having it done by a doctor or nurse. There was a range of preferences relating to how to return the kit. Phone calls with nonresponders revealed that, although most had received the test kit, the reasons for not choosing to be involved included not wanting to, being too busy or forgetting. Conclusion: HPV self‐testing was acceptable for Māori, Pasifika and Asian women in Aotearoa New Zealand. HPV self‐testing has considerable potential to reduce the inequities in the current screening programme and should be made available with appropriate delivery options as soon as possible. Patient or Public Contribution: This study explored the acceptability of HPV self‐testing and their preferences for engaging with it among Māori, Pasifika and Asian women. Thus, women from these underserved communities were the participants and focus of this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research and clinical outcomes that matter to people with lived experience can significantly differ from those outcomes studied by researchers. To inform a future Cochrane review of suicide and self‐harm prevention interventions, we aimed to work with young people with relevant lived experience to agree on priority outcomes. Design: Four participatory codesign workshops were completed across two sites (New Zealand, United Kingdom) with 28 young people in total. We iteratively adapted the methods over the course of the study. Results: 'Improved coping' and 'safer/more accepting environment to disclose' were the final top‐rated outcomes. 'Reduction of self‐harm' was considered a low priority as it could be misleading, stigmatizing and was considered a secondary consequence of other improvements. In contrast to typical research outcomes, young people emphasized the diversity of experience, the dynamic nature of improvement and holistic and asset‐based framing. Methodologically, dialogue using design materials (personas) to thematically explore outcomes was effective in overcoming the initial challenge of disparate quantitative ratings. Discussion: The results will directly inform the development of a Cochrane review, enabling identification of whether and how outcomes of most importance to young people are measured in trials. Rather than producing discrete measurable outcomes that could be easily added to the systematic review, the young people challenged the academic conceptualization of outcomes, with implications for future evidence synthesis and intervention research, and for future codesign. Patient or Public Contribution: Young people with lived experience were codesigners of the outcomes, and their feedback informed iterative changes to the study methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]