Search

Purpose: Buprenorphine is a highly effective medication for opioid use disorder (OUD) that remains substantially underutilized by primary care professionals (PCPs). This is particularly true in rural communities, which have fewer prescribers and significant access disparities. The Drug Enforcement Administration removed the X‐waiver requirement in December 2022, yet many rural clinicians still report barriers to prescribing buprenorphine. In this study, we examined rural PCPs' experiences with buprenorphine to identify tailored training strategies for rural practice. Methods: Physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician associates practicing in rural Ohio counties were recruited through contacts at statewide health associations and health professions training programs. Twenty‐three PCPs were interviewed about their perspectives on prescribing buprenorphine, including their training history. Findings: PCPs self‐reported being motivated to respond to OUD. However, they also reported that current training efforts failed to equip them with the knowledge and resources needed to prescribe effectively, and that urban‐focused training often alienated rural clinicians. Participants suggested tailoring training content to rural settings, using rural trainers, and bolstering confidence in navigating rural‐specific barriers, such as resource deficits and acute opioid fatigue. Conclusion: Our study found that current training on buprenorphine prescribing is inadequate for meeting the needs of rural PCPs. Tailored buprenorphine training is needed to improve accessibility and acceptability, and to better support the clinical workforce in communities disproportionately impacted by the opioid epidemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A significant challenge in the United States' response to COVID-19 continues to be wide variation in the extent to which individuals believe the virus is a credible health threat and are willing to undertake measures to protect personal and public health. In this study, data were collected from a national sample of 1141 participants from the United States to examine how beliefs and behavioral responses to COVID-19 have been shaped by sociopolitical characteristics. The relationships between social predictors; perceived severity, knowledge, and fear of the virus; and health behaviors were tested using path analysis. Social characteristics significantly predicted perceived severity, knowledge, and fear, as well as health behaviors, even after controlling for an objective indicator of the risk of contracting the virus. Our findings suggest that perceptions and knowledge of the virus, especially believing that the virus poses a serious threat to one's individual health, are important determinants of behavior, but also that perceptions and knowledge are strongly driven by social and cultural factors above and beyond political affiliation., Author(s): Berkeley Franz [sup.1] , Lindsay Y. Dhanani [sup.2] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.20627.31, 0000 0001 0668 7841, Department of Social Medicine, Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, Ohio University, , Grosvenor [...]

The current study examines the predictors and consequences of the ways coworkers react following sexual identity disclosure. We propose that employees may experience different reactions following disclosure depending on their social and sexual identities and that such reactions will impact their job attitudes, well‐being, and subsequent identity concealment. Data were collected from 308 lesbian, gay, bisexual, and pansexual employees using a two‐wave field survey design. Results for the predictors of coworker reactions indicate that employees who identified as Black, transgender/genderqueer, or bisexual/pansexual reported they experienced more unsupportive reactions from their coworkers following the disclosure of their sexual identity as compared to White, cisgender, and gay/lesbian employees. Supplemental analyses further indicate that Black bisexual/pansexual employees experienced the least positive reactions from coworkers as compared to the other referent groups. Results examining the outcomes of coworker reactions demonstrate that positive disclosure reactions are associated with decreased job satisfaction and increased turnover intentions, emotional exhaustion, and subsequent identity concealment, whereas negative disclosure reactions are associated with increased depressive symptoms and emotional exhaustion. Findings demonstrate a need to expand on conceptual and empirical work on identity disclosure to consider coworker reactions and underscore that the disclosure experiences of sexual minority employees are not uniform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As organizations have increasingly prioritized the inclusion of sexual minorities, there has been a proliferation of studies examining the ways by which organizations can foster environments that enable sexual minorities to express themselves authentically at work. Yet, extant research has predominantly ignored the role of other social identities in shaping the experiences of sexual minority employees, their decisions regarding the ways they express their sexual identities at work, and the consequences of those decisions. The current study correspondingly draws on theorizing on intersectionality to propose that workplace experiences related to race, a visible identity, may alter the decisions employees make about the expression of their invisible sexual identities. We additionally extend current conceptualizations of identity management to consider the ways employees may manage the presentation of their more visible racial identities at work. Results indicated that harassment experienced on the basis of sexual orientation and race combined to influence identity management strategies related to sexual and racial identities. Furthermore, concealing one's sexual orientation and suppressing one's racial identity uniquely contributed to decrements in employee well-being and interacted to predict employee outcomes. Yet, the nature of the interactions varied by employee race. Findings from this study support the need to adopt an intersectional approach to understanding invisible inequalities at work and inform future theoretical and practical efforts aimed at fostering workplace inclusion. Keywords: identity management; sexual orientation; race; employee well-being [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current study utilizes five decades of data to demonstrate cohort differences in gender representation in governance, speaking at conferences, serving on editorial boards, and in scholarly productivity in clinical neuropsychology. Broadly examining gender disparities across domains of professional attainment helps illuminate the areas in which inequity in clinical neuropsychology is most pronounced and in need of ameliorative resources. Data from 1967 to 2017 were coded from publicly available information from the four major professional associations for clinical neuropsychology in the U.S. (i.e. INS, AACN, NAN, & SCN). Gender differences were examined in (1) speaking at a national conference, (2) holding an office in a professional organization, (3) serving on the editorial team for a journal affiliated with a professional organization, and (4) scholarly activity as coded from Google Scholar. The percentage of men in the field significantly declined across time, whereas the percentage of women significantly increased; the number of women exceeded the number of men in approximately 1992. Gender differences in conference speakers, editorial board members, and research citations were greater in the earlier than in more recent cohorts of clinical neuropsychologists but gender inequity in conference speaking and editorial activities is evident in the most recent cohorts. Gender differences in conference speakers, editorial board members, and in earning research citations have diminished over time, but early career women still face disadvantages in speaking at conferences and serving on editorial boards. We provide strategies to increase and sustain women's participation in leadership in neuropsychology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: The current meta‐analysis sought to evaluate the empirical evidence for the victim precipitation model, which has become an increasingly popular yet controversial theory in the organizational sciences. We did so by testing the prediction that some victim dispositional traits contribute to or provoke experiences of mistreatment. We additionally provided preliminary examinations of two distinct conceptual explanations underlying the empirical relationships between victim personality and mistreatment. Finally, we examined the support for the situational antecedents of experienced mistreatment to compare the relative evidence for each of these dominant theoretical explanations. Results for the tests of the victim precipitation model showed that only victim negative affectivity was consistently related to experienced mistreatment. Examinations of the explanations for the relationships between victim personality and victimization showed relatively weak support for the notion that certain employees are more likely to perceive mistreatment and for the proposition that certain employees are mistreated because they are also more likely to engage in mistreatment. Finally, the situational predictors of mistreatment were all supported, and a test of relative importance revealed that the situational antecedents accounted for more variance in mistreatment than the victim dispositional traits. Implications for the theoretical understanding of the origins of mistreatment are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent advancements in the area of workplace mistreatment have begun to challenge our view of who is affected by this phenomenon. Whereas it was initially assumed that mistreatment affected a small subset of employees who were directly targeted by negative treatment, empirical work has documented that employees who observe or become aware of others being mistreated are also adversely affected. However, the extant literature examining vicarious mistreatment has developed in silos centered around individual mistreatment constructs and individual outcome domains, and there is currently little integration among these bodies of work. As such, this paper draws on a systematic review of empirical studies examining vicarious mistreatment to summarize its antecedents and outcomes. The review further enumerates the mechanisms that transmit the effects of vicarious mistreatment to third-party outcomes and the moderating variables that may mitigate or amplify the impact of vicarious mistreatment. The culmination of this review is the development of a dual process model of vicarious mistreatment that integrates prior theoretical perspectives into an overarching framework to guide subsequent research. The authors then conclude by providing a road map for future theoretical and empirical work on vicarious mistreatment. Included within the future research agenda is a constructive critique of current research designs and methodological approaches that may undermine the field's understanding of how vicarious mistreatment operates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]