Faculty Bibliography

Importance:Advancing the health equity agenda for Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AA/NHPI) individuals has become an intersecting priority for federal agencies. However, the impact of federal investments and legislation to ensure systematic processes and resources to eliminate health disparities in AA/NHPI populations is unclear. Objective:To perform a portfolio review of clinical research funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for AA/NHPI populations and determine the level of NIH investment in serving these populations. Design, Setting, and Participants:Cross-sectional study in which the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results system was queried for extramural AA/NHPI-focused clinical research projects conducted in the United States from January 1, 1992, to December 31, 2018. Clinical research funded under research project grants, centers, cooperative awards, research career awards, training grants, and fellowships was included, with an advanced text search for AA/NHPI countries and cultures of origin. Project titles and terms were screened for inclusion and project abstracts were reviewed to verify eligibility. Descriptive analyses were completed. Main Outcomes and Measures:Outcomes included NIH funding trends and characteristics of funded projects and organizations. The proportions of AA/NHPI-related funding trends were calculated using 2 denominators, total NIH expenditures and clinical research expenditures. Results:There were 5460 records identified, of which 891 studies were reviewed for eligibility. Of these, 529 clinical research studies focused on AA/NHPI participants composed 0.17% of the total NIH budget over 26 years. Projects studying AA/NHPI individuals in addition to other populations were funded across 17 NIH institutes and centers. The top 5 funders collectively contributed almost 60% of the total funding dollars for AA/NHPI projects and were the National Cancer Institute ($231 584 664), National Institute on Aging ($108 365 124), National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute ($67 232 910), National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities ($62 982 901), and National Institute on Mental Health ($60 072 779). Funding of these projects ($775 536 121) made up 0.17% of the overall NIH expenditures ($451 284 075 000) between 1992 and 2018, and 0.18% ($677 479 468) of the NIH research budget after 2000. Funding for AA/NHPI projects significantly increased over time, but the proportion of the total NIH budget has only increased from 0.12% before 2000 to 0.18% after 2000. Of total funding, 60.8% was awarded to research project grants compared with only 5.1% allocated to research career awards, training grants, and fellowships. Conclusions and Relevance:Increases in research dollars for AA/NHPI clinical research were not associated with increases in the overall NIH research budget, and underrepresentation of AA/NHPI subgroups still remains. Without overt direction from federal entities and dedicated funds for health disparities research, as well as parallel efforts to increase diversity in the biomedical workforce, investments may continue to languish for AA/NHPI populations.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the many broken fragments of US health care and social service systems, reinforcing extant health and socioeconomic inequities faced by structurally marginalized immigrant communities. Throughout the pandemic, even during the most critical period of rising cases in different epicenters, immigrants continued to work in high-risk-exposure environments while simultaneously having less access to health care and economic relief and facing discrimination. We describe systemic factors that have adversely affected low-income immigrants, including limiting their work opportunities to essential jobs, living in substandard housing conditions that do not allow for social distancing or space to safely isolate from others in the household, and policies that discourage access to public resources that are available to them or that make resources completely inaccessible. We demonstrate that the current public health infrastructure has not improved health care access or linkages to necessary services, treatments, or culturally competent health care providers, and we provide suggestions for how the Public Health 3.0 framework could advance this. We recommend the following strategies to improve the Public Health 3.0 public health infrastructure and mitigate widening disparities: (1) address the social determinants of health, (2) broaden engagement with stakeholders across multiple sectors, and (3) develop appropriate tools and technologies. (Am J Public Health. 2021;111(S3):S224-S231. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306433).

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To apply principles of group model building (GMB), a participatory systems science approach, to identify barriers and opportunities for collective impact around nutrition programming to reduce cancer risk for immigrant communities in an urban environment. METHODS:We convened four in-person workshops applying GMB with nine community partners to generate causal loop diagrams (CLDs)-a visual representation of hypothesized causal relationships between variables and feedback structures within a system. GMB workshops prompted participants to collaboratively identify programmatic goals and challenges related to (1) community gardening, (2) nutrition education, (3) food assistance programs, and (4) community-supported agriculture. Participants then attended a plenary session to integrate findings from all workshops and identify cross-cutting ideas for collective action. RESULTS:Several multilevel barriers to nutrition programming emerged: (1) food policies center the diets and practices of White Americans and inhibit culturally tailored food guidelines and funding for culturally appropriate nutrition education; (2) the lack of culturally tailored nutrition education in communities is a missed opportunity for fostering pride in immigrant food culture and sustainment of traditional food practices; and (3) the limited availability of traditional ethnic produce in food assistance programs serving historically marginalized immigrant communities increases food waste and worsens food insecurity. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Emergent themes coalesced around the need to embed cultural tailoring into all levels of the food system, while also considering other characteristics of communities being reached (e.g., language needs). These efforts require coordinated actions related to food policy and advocacy, to better institutionalize these practices within the nutrition space.

Introduction/UNASSIGNED:Community-based organizations (CBOs) have provided critical resources during the pandemic, particularly for marginalized communities, and are trusted liaisons who connect socially and linguistically isolated community members, such as the highly diverse Asian American population, to care during public health emergencies. Stereotypes such as the model minority myth have permeated public perception of Asian Americans' health status and health care access needs, fueling widespread belief that Asian Americans do not experience health disparities, and mask the high rates of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection, hospitalization, and mortality among Asian Americans. The unequal burden of COVID-19 on Asian American communities has largely remained absent from the public health and national discourse, with exceptions such as community voices that have directed news media coverage and leading roles of CBOs in offering culturally adapted, in-language programming on COVID-19 infection prevention and control. Methods/UNASSIGNED:CBOs and their staff are well-equipped with the cultural acuity, language capacity, and familiarity with local norms to improve structural gaps affecting health outcomes and support health care delivery. Results/UNASSIGNED:We discuss the roles and responsibilities of CBOs in strengthening the health care workforce and expanding community-clinic linkages and provide two case studies illustrating the efforts of two community organizations serving Asian American and immigrant communities, who have been disproportionally affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Discussion/UNASSIGNED:CBOs are essential to supporting health service coordination and care delivery for structurally vulnerable populations, and are vital to sustaining the coordinated, multilevel public health response to improving community health. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:Bolstering the current infrastructure to support CBOs is necessary to facilitating immediate responses to serve community needs.

Improving race/ethnicity data quality is imperative to ensuring underserved populations are represented in datasets used to identify health disparities and inform healthcare policy. We performed a scoping review of methods that retrospectively improve race/ethnicity classification in secondary datasets. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science Core Collection in July 2022. A total of 2,441 abstracts were dually screened, 453 full-text articles were reviewed, and 120 articles were included. Study characteristics were extracted and described in a narrative analysis, including: method type used for race/ethnicity classification; races/ethnicities targeted for classification; publication year; method inputs; reference population (if applicable); target population; and whether the article included a validation process. Six main method types for improving race/ethnicity were identified: Expert Review (n=9; 8%), Name Lists (n = 27; 23%), Name Algorithms (n=55; 46%), Machine Learning (n=14; 12%), Data Linkage (n=9; 8%), and Other (n=6; 5%). The main racial/ethnic groups targeted for classification were Asian (n = 56; 47%) and White (n = 51; 43%). Eighty-six articles (72%) included some form of validation evaluation. We discuss the strengths and limitations of different method types and potential harms of identified methods. We recommend the need for innovative methods to better identify racial/ethnic subgroups and further validation studies. Accurately collecting and reporting disaggregated data by race/ethnicity is critical to address the systematic missingness of relevant demographic data that can erroneously guide policymaking and hinder the effectiveness of healthcare practices and intervention.

BACKGROUND:The burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is increasing in the aging population. However, little is known about CVD risk factors and outcomes for Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Other Pacific Islander (NH/PI) older adults by disaggregated subgroups. METHODS:Data were from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services 2011-2015 Health Outcomes Survey, which started collecting expanded racial/ethnic data in 2011. Guided by Andersen and Newman's theoretical framework, multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine the prevalence and determinants of CVD risk factors (obesity, diabetes, smoking status, hypertension) and CVD conditions (coronary artery disease [CAD], congestive heart failure [CHF], myocardial infarction [MI], other heart conditions, stroke) for 10 Asian American and NH/PI subgroups and White adults. RESULTS:Among the 639 862 respondents, including 26 853 Asian American and 4 926 NH/PI adults, 13% reported CAD, 7% reported CHF, 10% reported MI, 22% reported other heart conditions, and 7% reported stroke. CVD risk factors varied by Asian American and NH/PI subgroup. The prevalence of overweight, obesity, diabetes, and hypertension was higher among most Asian American and NH/PI subgroups than White adults. After adjustment, Native Hawaiians had significantly greater odds of reporting stroke than White adults. CONCLUSIONS:More attention should focus on NH/PIs as a priority population based on the disproportionate burden of CVD risk factors compared with their White and Asian American counterparts. Future research should disaggregate racial/ethnic data to provide accurate depictions of CVD and investigate the development of CVD risk factors in Asian Americans and NH/PIs over the life course.

OBJECTIVE:Immigrant health discussions often focus on acculturation and omit discussions on historical events that may underlie health differences among immigrant older adults. This paper provides a historical overview of immigration policy and flows to the U.S. and examines insurance access and health difficulties by sending country. METHODS:We analyzed the "Immigrants Admitted to the United States, Fiscal Years 1972-2000" and 2015-2019 American Community Survey datasets to examine the number of admitted immigrants, sociodemographic profiles for current immigrant older adults, and the predicted probabilities of health insurance access and health difficulties. RESULTS:Our results highlight alignment of immigration flows with immigration legislation and vast heterogeneity in migration, health, and healthcare access of immigrants by sending country. DISCUSSION/IMPLICATIONS:Public health practitioners must consider how historical events and social factors contribute to the healthcare access and health of immigrant populations, as demographic shifts will require interventions that promote equitable healthy aging.

Within twenty years, the number of adults in the United States over age 65 is expected to more than double and the number over age 85 is expected to more than triple. The risk for most chronic diseases and disabilities increases with age, so this demographic shift carries significant implications for the individual, health care providers, and population health. Strategies that delay or prevent the onset of age-related diseases are becoming increasingly important. Although considerable progress has been made in understanding the contribution of nutrition to healthy aging, it has become increasingly apparent that much remains to be learned, especially since the aging process is highly variable. Most federal nutrition programs and nutrition research studies define all adults over age 65 as 'older' and do not account for physiological and metabolic changes that occur throughout older adulthood that influence nutritional needs. Moreover, the older adult population is becoming more racially and ethnically diverse, so cultural preferences and other social determinants of health need to be considered. The Research Centers Collaborative Network (RCCN) sponsored a 1.5-day multi-disciplinary workshop that included sessions on Dietary Patterns in Health and Disease, Timing and Targeting Interventions, and Health Disparities and the Social Context of Diet and Food Choice. The agenda and presentations can be found at https://www.rccn-aging.org/nutrition-2023-rccn-workshop. Here we summarize the workshop's themes and discussions and highlight research gaps that if filled will considerably advance our understanding of the role of nutrition in healthy aging.

The monolithic misrepresentation of Asian American (AsAm) populations has maintained assumptions that AsAm people are not burdened by health disparities and social and economic inequities. However, the story is more nuanced. We critically review AsAm health research to present knowledge of AsAm health profiles from the past two decades and present findings and opportunities across three topical domains: (a) general descriptive knowledge, (b) factors affecting health care uptake, and (c) effective interventions. Much of the literature emphasized underutilization of health care services; low knowledge and awareness among AsAms about risk factors, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment; inadequate efforts to improve language access, provider-patient communication, and trust; and the critical roles of community- and faith-based organizations and leaders in health promotion initiatives. Future opportunities for AsAm health research will require adoption of and significant investment in community-engaged research infrastructure to increase representation, funding, and research innovation for AsAm communities. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Public Health, Volume 45 is April 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.