Search

Purpose: This study examines the rates and trends of faculty promotions within the field of ophthalmology, with comparative emphasis on the rates of promotion among underrepresented in medicine (URiM) faculty., Design: A retrospective panel study was conducted using the Association of American Medical Colleges Faculty Roster database., Methods: We used the Association of American Medical Colleges Faculty Roster data to assess trends in academic faculty promotions within U.S. ophthalmology departments. Full-time assistant and associate professors appointed between 2000 and 2010 were included in the analysis, and tracked until November 2021 to determine promotion rates. Pearson χ 2 and Fisher exact tests were used to evaluate differences in promotion and retention rates based on gender, race and ethnicity, advanced degree, and tenure status., Results: The demographics of 1436 assistant and 680 associate faculty members were obtained for analysis through the Association of American Medical Colleges. Black faculty had lower promotion rates when compared with White faculty (20% vs 37%, P < .001). Faculty with MD and PhD degrees demonstrated higher promotion rates than faculty with MD degrees alone (59% vs 36%, P < .001). In addition, faculty not on tenure track had lower rates of promotion than those on tenure track (35% vs 48%, P < .001). With respect to faculty retention, among assistant and associate professors combined, Black faculty and faculty without tenure track appointments were more likely to leave academic medicine (46% vs 33%, P < .001) and (36% vs 27%, P < .001), respectively., Conclusion: In this study, promotion rates varied significantly by race/ethnicity. Specifically, Black faculty had lower rates of promotion and retention in academic medicine. These findings underscore the need to explore and implement strategies and policies to address equity in promotion rates and retention of URiM faculty within academic ophthalmology., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted sexual health services among those most vulnerable to HIV acquisition, such as adolescent men who have sex with men (AMSM). We sought to characterize the changes in sexual-risk behaviors, HIV and other STI testing, and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use among a longitudinal cohort of AMSM aged 13 to 18 years before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We observed a significant decline in HIV testing and a marginal decrease in other STI testing since the pandemic began in March 2020. Outreach efforts and innovative remote delivery of sexual health services are needed to support access to healthcare services among AMSM as the pandemic persists., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

African American women experience higher rates of HIV than other women in the United States, and stigma has been identified as an important determinant of engagement in HIV care. Our study examined whether key variables moderated the effect of an anti-stigma intervention on outcomes among African American women receiving treatment for HIV. Twelve potential moderators included: age, years lived with HIV, marital status, employment status, education level, PTSD diagnosis, alcohol use, social support, baseline CD4 count, baseline viral load, and number of children. Outcomes included changes in: HIV-related stigma, social support, depressive symptoms, PTSD symptoms, alcohol use, viral load, and engagement in HIV care. Results suggest that the intervention is associated with greater improvement in engagement in care among participants with PTSD or depression at baseline, and may help maintain engagement in care among participants experiencing certain mental health conditions. This provides opportunities to address discriminatory structural barriers that lead to stigma and drop-offs in HIV care.

In medication adherence-promotion trials, participants in the intervention arm are often cognizant of the researcher's aim to improve adherence; this may lead to their inflating reports of their own adherence compared to control arm participants. Using data from 1,247 HIV-positive participants across eight U.S. Studies in the Multi-site Adherence Collaboration on HIV (MACH14) collaboration, we evaluated the validity of self-reported adherence by examining whether its association with two more objective outcomes [1], electronically monitored adherence and [2] viral load, varied by study arm. After adjusting for potential confounders, there was no evidence of greater overestimation of self-reported adherence among intervention arm participants, supporting its potential as a trial outcome indicator.

We conducted a preliminary RCT among 40 HIV-positive Latinos of Mexican descent on the U.S.-Mexico border who indicated imperfect adherence and depressive symptomatology. Participants were randomly assigned to culturally adapted cognitive-behavioral therapy for adherence and depression with an alarmed pillbox or usual care. Outcomes were depressive symptoms (self-report and blind clinician ratings), adherence (self-report and electronic pillbox), and biological markers. The intervention, delivered in English and Spanish, proved feasible and acceptable. Generalized estimating equations in intent-to-treat analyses showed some effects of "moderate" to "large" size, with maintenance over time. For example, intervention (vs. control) participants demonstrated at post-intervention a greater drop in BDI scores (OR = -3.64, p = 0.05) and greater adherence according to the electronic pillbox (OR = 3.78, p = 0.03). Biological markers indicated some relative improvement for CD4 count but not VL. The promising results suggest a larger trial to determine efficacy is warranted.

Background: Minority race/ethnicity is generally associated with antiretroviral therapy nonadherence in US-based studies. Limitations of the existing literature include small samples, subjective adherence measures, and inadequate control for potential confounders such as mental health and substance use, which have been consistently associated with poorer adherence., Methods: Individual-level data were pooled from 13 US-based studies employing electronic drug monitoring to assess adherence. Adherence was operationalized as percent of prescribed doses taken from the first 12 (monthly) waves of data in each study. Depression symptoms were aggregated from several widely used assessments, and substance use was operationalized as any use of cocaine/stimulants, heroin/opiates, ecstasy, hallucinogens, or sedatives in the 30-365 days preceding baseline., Results: The final analytic sample of 1809 participants ranged in age from 18 to 72 years and was 67% male. Participants were 53% African American, 14% Latino, and 34% White. In a logistic regression adjusting for age, gender, income, education, and site, race/ethnicity was significantly associated with adherence (P < 0.001) and persisted in a model that also controlled for depression and substance use (P < 0.001), with African Americans having significantly lower adherence than Latinos [odds ratio (OR) = 0.72, P = 0.04] and whites (OR = 0.60, P < 0.001). Adherence did not differ between whites and Latinos (OR = 0.84, P = 0.27)., Conclusions: Racial/ethnic differences in demographics, depression, and substance abuse do not explain the lower level of antiretroviral therapy adherence in African Americans observed in our sample. Further research is needed to explain the persistent disparity and might examine factors such as mistrust of providers, health literacy, and inequities in the health care system.