Search

The authors investigate the effects of centering meditation on state hope among college and graduate students through a randomized controlled trial. Participants (n = 150; 65% white, 84% female) were randomized to either a centering meditation group or a waitlist control group. Time‐series analyses indicated that centering meditation significantly improved hope, suggesting long‐term dynamic adjustment, compared to a control group. Specifically, the autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) procedures indicated that the treatment group exhibited a statistically significant upward trend in hope, ARIMA (1, 1, 0). As expected, the control group's levels of hope were stationary, ARIMA (1, 0, 1). The study highlights the potential benefits of centering meditation as an evidence‐based counseling intervention for improving hope in the college population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Prostate cancer is the third most prevalent cancer in the American population. Furthermore, the prognosis is worse in African American as there is increased morbidity and mortality associated with it.Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a new online method to educate the patient population regarding prostate cancer risk, diagnosis, treatments, and their decisions about whether to be screened for the early detection of prostate cancer.Methods: Two hundred Black male patients are recruited from different clinical sites and randomized to either the control arm (usual care) or the intervention arm (educational program). We will compare the effectiveness of the intervention to see if patients are discussing the need of getting a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test, and the possible benefits and harms that may result of having or not having the test, with their primary care providers.Discussion: Shared decision-making (SDM) is the current standard in most cancer-screening guidelines and also a standard of person-centered care. However, there is a lack of evidence-based approaches to improve decision quality in clinical settings and an increased ambiguity of applying SDM for PSA-based screening among Black men in primary care. Our proposal to evaluate a decisional-aid intervention and measure the actual application of SDM during clinical encounters has a high potential to advance the translation path of implementing shared decision-making in clinical settings and provide evidence of the applicability of the guideline in general.Innovation and Overall Impact: Given the 2018 USPSTF updated guidelines recommending shared decision-making about PSA-based screening, the increased risk of prostate cancer mortality in Black men, the challenges of evidence-based decision-making due to the underrepresentation of Blacks in major randomized clinical trials, and implicit racial bias among primary care providers, the time is ripe for interventions to improve shared decision-making about prostate cancer screening in Black men. In this study, we address communication and knowledge gaps between Black men and their primary care providers. The intervention, if proven effective, can be readily scaled across primary care practices across the U.S. and may be adapted to other types of cancer where guidelines have included shared decision-making as well. Early detection of prostate cancer may decrease mortality and morbidity in the long term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the largest disparities in cancer mortality in the United States occurs with colorectal cancer (CRC). The objectives of this multilevel two-arm intervention trial were to compare the efficacy of two interventions to promote CRC screening (CRCS) with fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and examine sociodemographic and psychosocial predictors of FIT screening. Individuals ages 50-75 (n = 326) who were not up-to-date with CRCS, could understand English or Spanish, and were at average CRC risk were recruited from two federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Florida. Prior to intervention, CRCS rates in the FQHCs were 27.1% and 32.9%, respectively. Study enrollment occurred April 2018-November 2019. System-level intervention components included leveraging electronic medical record (EMR) systems and delivering patient reminders. Participants were randomized to C-CARES (education+FIT) or C-CARES Plus (C-CARES+personalized coaching [for those not completing FIT within 90 days]). Primary outcome was completed FIT returned <1 year. Primary outcome analyses were performed using logistic regression. 225 participants completed FIT (69.0% [95% CI: 64.0-74.0%]), with no significant difference in FIT uptake by intervention arm (67.3% C-CARES Plus vs. 70.8% C-CARES; p = .49). FIT uptake was significantly higher among patients who received intervention materials in Spanish (77.2%) compared to those who received materials in English (63.2%, p < .01). The personalized coaching in the C-CARES Plus arm did not appear to provide added benefit beyond the C-CARES intervention. Multilevel approaches that include EMR prompts, reminders, FIT access, and provision of low-literacy, language-concordant education can support efforts to improved community clinics' CRCS rates. Future efforts should focus on repeat FIT screening. Trial registration: The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03906110). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]