Faculty Bibliography

Longstanding gaps in the detection of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) and biopsychosocial care call for public health action to improve population health. We aim to broaden the understanding of the iterative role state plans have played over the last 20 years in prioritizing improvements in the detection of ADRD, primary care capacity, and equity for disproportionately affected populations. Informed by national ADRD priorities, state plans convene stakeholders to identify local needs, gaps, and barriers and set the stage for development of a national public health infrastructure that can align clinical practice reform with population health goals. We propose policy and practice actions that would accelerate the collaboration between public health, community organizations, and health systems to improve ADRD detection-the point of entry into care pathways that could ultimately improve outcomes on a national scale. HIGHLIGHTS: We systematically reviewed the evolution of state/territory plans for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD). Plan goals improved over time but lacked implementation capacity. Landmark federal legislation (2018) enabled funding for action and accountability. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funds three Public Health Centers of Excellence and many local initiatives. Four new policy steps would promote sustainable ADRD population health improvement.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Little is known on the independent effects of generational status and acculturation on the consumption of specific foods among disaggregated Asian American (AA) populations. This study explores the associations of generational status and acculturation with dietary behaviors of a nationwide non-probability sample of 3018 AAs (57.6% East Asian American (EAA), 18.9% South Asian American (SAA), 19.4% Southeast Asian American (SEAA)). METHODS:Recruited participants completed an online dietary survey designed and adapted for AAs to assess a range of diet and food purchasing behaviors. Generational status was assessed through participant and parental country of birth (1st-Gen, 2nd-Gen, 3rd-Gen); the Marin Short Acculturation Scale was adapted to measure acculturation. Linear regression models assessed the association of generational status and acculturation with consumption of 11 food/nutrient groups, adjusted for socio-economic variables. RESULTS:Compared to estimated US averages, participants reported lower fruit, dairy, and seafood intake yet lower red and processed meat, and higher whole grain, calcium, and fiber intake. Compared to EAA, SAA reported higher dairy (1.72 vs. 1.46 cups/day) and calcium (1029 vs. 954 mg/day) intakes, while SEAA reported lower vegetable intake (1.66 vs. 1.78 cups/day). In adjusted analyses, processed meat intake was higher among 2nd-Gen and 3rd-Gen vs.1st-Gen (+0.029 times/day; +0.061 times/day) participants. Higher acculturation was associated with lower vegetable, fiber, and seafood intake (-0.005 cups/day; -0.02 g/day; -0.002 times/day). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Greater attention to the role of generational status and acculturation in AA dietary behaviors is needed, and findings call for further research to understand the mechanisms behind the dietary influence of different socialization and acculturative processes.

BACKGROUND:In several recent articles, authors have called for aligning the fields of implementation and improvement science. In this paper, we call for implementation science to also align with improvement practice. Multiple implementation scholars have highlighted the importance of designing implementation strategies to fit the existing culture, infrastructure, and practice of a healthcare system. Worldwide, healthcare systems are adopting improvement models as their primary approach to improving healthcare delivery and outcomes. The prevalence of improvement models raises the question of how implementation scientists might best align their efforts with healthcare systems' existing improvement infrastructure and practice. MAIN BODY/METHODS:We describe three challenges and five benefits to aligning implementation science and improvement practice. Challenges include (1) use of different models, terminology, and methods, (2) a focus on generalizable versus local knowledge, and (3) limited evidence in support of the effectiveness of improvement tools and methods. We contend that implementation science needs to move beyond these challenges and work toward greater alignment with improvement practice. Aligning with improvement practice would benefit implementation science by (1) strengthening research/practice partnerships, (2) fostering local ownership of implementation, (3) generating practice-based evidence, (4) developing context-specific implementation strategies, and (5) building practice-level capacity to implement interventions and improve care. Each of these potential benefits is illustrated in a case study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:To effectively integrate evidence-based interventions into routine practice, implementation scientists need to align their efforts with the improvement culture and practice that is driving change within healthcare systems worldwide. This paper provides concrete examples of how researchers have aligned implementation science with improvement practice across five implementation projects.