Search

Aphasia is an acquired neurogenic language disorder that is often caused by stroke in adulthood. However, how does aphasia present, and how can it be effectively treated, in a neurodivergent adult with pre-existing differences in language or cognition? To confirm our intuitions that there are few published cases of aphasia resulting from stroke in adults with either Williams syndrome or autism, we searched for articles from 1990 to 2022 across multiple publication databases. For Williams syndrome, the search revealed two cases of aphasia, but few details were provided. No clear adult cases of autism with aphasia were found, though two potential cases were discovered. Despite the paucity of cases, we discuss how researchers and clinicians might meet the specific needs of these populations in relation to the assessment and treatment of aphasia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Community health workers (CHWs) bridge the gap in health and social services delivery for marginalized communities, providing critical health information to those with limited access to health resources. Objectives: The purpose of our study was to understand CHWs' approaches to identifying salient and credible health information for migrant and seasonal farmworkers in rural North Carolina (NC). Methods: Two focus group discussions were held with CHWs in eastern NC and one in western NC in February 2020. Results: CHWs seek health information on chronic health conditions disproportionately experienced by farmworkers such as diabetes and high blood pressure. They search for information from existing resources in their possession, via the internet, and through consultation with health professionals. CHWs also verify the information and transform the content into resources that are accessible to farmworkers. Discussion: Our findings suggest that CHWs possess a strong set of information literacy skills that could be enhanced through additional training in crediting sources, creating new materials, and organization and storage. Conclusion: This study adds to the very limited body of knowledge about how CHWs seek and transmit information to their communities and sheds light on their information need and literacy abilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Health sciences librarians frequently engage in scholarly publication, both with other librarians undertaking intradisciplinary scholarship, and increasingly as members of research teams centered in other disciplines. We sought to assess the emotional and institutional context of authorship among health sciences librarians, including emotions experienced during authorship negotiation, the frequency with which authorship is denied, and the correlation of perceived support from supervisors and the research community with the number of publications produced. Methods: 342 medical and health sciences librarians took an online survey of 47 questions regarding emotions experienced when asking for authorship, denial of authorship, if they have been given authorship without asking, and the extent to which they felt supported to conduct research in their current job. Results: Authorship negotiation creates varied and complex emotions among librarians. The emotions reported differed when negotiating authorship with librarian colleagues and when negotiating authorship with professionals in another field. Negative emotions were reported when asking either type of colleague for authorship. Respondents reported feeling mostly supported and encouraged by their supervisors, research communities, and workplaces. Nearly one quarter (24.4%) of respondents reported being denied authorship by colleagues outside of their departments. Perceived research appreciation and support by the research community is correlated with the total number of articles or publications produced by librarians. Conclusion: Authorship negotiation among health sciences librarians involves complex and frequently negative emotions. Denial of authorship is frequently reported. Institutional and professional support appear to be critical to publication among health sciences librarians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are profound health inequities for agricultural workers. We sought to assess the literature on migrant and seasonal farmworker health with an eye toward health promotion interventions, special populations, use of community health workers (CHWs), and technology. We conducted a systematic mapping review by searching five databases in March 2021. Using quantitative content analysis after establishing interrater reliability, we coded titles and abstracts to assess 13 topics and six characteristics of the research such as its focus on health promotion, use of technology, and inclusion of CHWs. We identified 1,083 records. Just 8.2% of records described or evaluated a health promotion effort to intervene in farmworker well-being and even fewer (4.2%) examined unique populations of farmworkers such as indigenous farmworkers (n = 11) or sexual minority farmworkers (n = 1). A small body of literature focused on the role of CHWs or promotores most frequently described their role in implementing health interventions. The literature on farmworker health has gaps regarding health promotion interventions, special populations, and integration of CHWs into research projects. We offer suggestions to fill in identified gaps in the literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]