Faculty Bibliography

We evaluated the effectiveness of a community research partnership focused on improving severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing for New York City residents during the pandemic. We employed interviews, a focus group, and a survey to evaluate partnership characteristics, engagement, and future collaboration. Qualitative analysis revealed five core themes: committee identity, collective goals, information sharing, adaptability, and trust. The findings highlight the importance of flexibility, shared goals, diverse representation, open communication, and trust in effective multisector community health partnerships. (Am J Public Health. 2026;116(4):431-436. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2025.308358).

BACKGROUND:People living with HIV are two to three times more likely to smoke than the general population, resulting in higher risk for tobacco-related morbidity and mortality. Despite this growing burden of disease, there is little evidence for the long-term effectiveness of tobacco cessation interventions among people living with HIV, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of three tobacco cessation interventions among people living with HIV. METHODS:We conducted an open-label, three-arm pragmatic randomised controlled trial in 13 outpatient HIV clinics (OPCs) in Hanoi, Viet Nam. Adults who smoked at least one cigarette a day, lived in Hanoi, had a clinic visit in the past 12 months, and had daily access to a mobile telephone that could receive text messages were allocated (1:1:1) to either: proactive referral to Viet Nam's national smokers' Quitline counselling programme (Quitline group); six-session tailored counselling delivered by trained OPC nurses plus text messages (Counselling + SMS group); or Counselling + SMS plus 6 weeks of nicotine replacement therapy (ie, 2 mg nicotine gum; Counselling + SMS+ gum group). Randomisation was by stratified permuted block randomisation with block sizes of three and six. Neither study participants, OPC health-care workers, nor study staff were masked to group assignment. All patients received advice to quit and brief cessation counselling during their physician visit. The primary outcome was 7-day point-prevalence smoking abstinence confirmed at 6 months by exhaled carbon monoxide concentration of less than 8 ppm, assessed with an intention-to-treat analysis. The trial was registered on Dec 17, 2021, at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05162911). FINDINGS/RESULTS:Between Nov 30, 2021 and Sept 27, 2023, 672 patients were randomly allocated to the three test groups (221 to the Quitline group, 225 to the Counselling + SMS group, and 226 to the Counselling + SMS + gum group). 338 (50%) patients reported dual waterpipe and cigarette use. At 6 months, 109 (16%) patients had confirmed abstinence (28 [13%] for Quitline, 40 [18%] for Counselling + SMS, and 41 [18%] for Counselling + SMS + gum). There were no significant differences between intervention groups: Counselling + SMS versus Quitline (odds ratio 1·48, 95% CI 0·78-2·81; p=0·33), Counselling + SMS+ gum versus Quitline (1·64, 0·86-3·11; p=0·17), and Counselling + SMS + gum versus Counselling +SMS (1·11, 0·61-2·00; p=0·91). There were no serious adverse events linked to the study interventions throughout the trial duration. INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:Integrating nurse-delivered cessation treatment and proactive referral to a national Quitline was feasible within the context of HIV care. In the absence of evidence that tailored interventions provide additional benefit, our findings suggest that national Quitlines, available in 42 low-income and middle-income countries, might serve as a resource for integrating tobacco treatment into HIV care systems. FUNDING/BACKGROUND:US National Cancer Institute.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Integration of management of tuberculosis (TB) and HIV with prevention and treatment of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) is a global priority. However, delivering the full spectrum of HIV/TB and NCD services is hindered by a lack of evidence regarding effective models and strategies for integrating NCDs and HIV/TB care services in varying contexts and across interventions. We conducted a scoping review to describe service delivery models and strategies used to facilitate integration of NCD care in HIV and/or TB care settings in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS:We searched eight electronic databases for studies published from 2010 to 2025 that evaluated methods to integrate evidence-based screening and/or treatment of NCDs (diabetes, cervical cancer, hypertension and depression) and NCD risk factors (alcohol and tobacco use) in the context of HIV and/or TB care in LMICs. We applied a framework for categorising integration models ranging from coordination to full integration and used implementation science taxonomies to define implementation strategies and outcomes. RESULTS:72 articles were included; 62.5% evaluated implementation of NCD interventions in HIV care settings, 31.9% in TB care and 5.6% in both. Less than a third (27.8%) reported a fully integrated service delivery model (shared systems and services). Commonly described implementation strategies included training (81.9%), evaluation strategies (43.1%), interactive assistance for providers (40.3%) and infrastructure change (eg, changing record systems) (37.5%). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Studies in LMICs are evaluating a range of strategies and service models for integrating NCD interventions into HIV and TB care in LMICs. This reflects differences in health system capacity and priorities. Greater alignment with WHO systems-integration models and implementation science frameworks could strengthen the evidence base and support progress towards global NCD goals through more consistent reporting of frameworks, integration strategies and implementation outcomes.

IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:Emergency departments (EDs) serve patients at high risk for overdose. There is increasing interest in peer-delivered ED interventions for substance use but little rigorous research on their effectiveness. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To examine the effectiveness of an initiative (Relay) operated by the New York City Health Department that dispatches trained peer wellness advocates (WAs) to support ED patients after a nonfatal opioid overdose. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:This randomized clinical trial compared Relay and site-directed care (SDC) at 4 EDs in New York, New York. Adult patients presenting after opioid-involved overdose were enrolled from October 6, 2020, to June 30, 2022, with 12 months of outcome follow-up. Statistical analysis was performed from November 4, 2024, to May 6, 2025. INTERVENTION/UNASSIGNED:ED workers (generally physicians) called the Relay hotline for patients presenting after a suspected opioid-involved overdose. WAs met patients in the ED to provide peer support and brief overdose risk reduction education. WAs attempted to contact patients for 90 days to provide ongoing support, education, and referrals using a harm reduction framework. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES/UNASSIGNED:Opioid-related adverse events (any opioid-involved overdose [fatal or nonfatal] or any other substance use-related ED visit) in the 12 months after enrollment were identified using health care administrative data plus self-report. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Among a total of 253 participants randomized, 127 were randomized to the Relay arm and 126 to the SDC arm. A total of 247 participants, 125 in the Relay arm and 122 in the SDC arm (190 [76.9%] men; 80 [32.4%] Black, 126 [51.0%] Hispanic or Latinx, 76 [30.8%] White, and 91 other race [36.8%]), were included in the intention-to-treat analyses. No statistically significant differences between arms were observed for the primary outcome (mean [SD] opioid-related adverse events, 3.29 [4.52] in the Relay arm and 4.10 [9.36] in the SDC arm; rate ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.72-1.45; P = .90). By 12 months after enrollment, 24 participants (9.7%) had died (17 [70.8%] due to overdose). Relay participants reported high satisfaction with the ED intervention. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/UNASSIGNED:This randomized clinical trial examining the impact of an ED peer navigator intervention on subsequent opioid-related adverse events did not find significant outcome differences for Relay vs SDC participants. These findings highlight the importance of intervening to save lives in this high-risk population and suggest potential refinements to future ED peer intervention research. TRIAL REGISTRATION/UNASSIGNED:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04317053.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Tobacco smoke exposure (TSE) among individuals who do not smoke has declined in the USA, however, gaps remain in understanding how TSE patterns across indoor venues-including in homes, cars, workplaces, hospitality venues, and other areas-contribute to TSE disparities by income level. METHODS:We obtained data on adults (ages 18+, N=9909) and adolescents (ages 12-17, N=2065) who do not smoke from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2013-2018. We examined the prevalence of self-reported, venue-specific TSE in each sample, stratified by poverty income ratio (PIR) quartile. We used linear regression models with a log-transformed outcome variable to explore associations between self-reported TSE and serum cotinine. We further explored the probability of detectable cotinine among individuals who reported no recent TSE, stratified by PIR. RESULTS:Self-reported TSE was highest in cars (prevalence=6.2% among adults, 14.2% among adolescents). TSE in own homes was the most strongly associated with differences in log cotinine levels (β for adults=1.92, 95% CI=1.52 to 2.31; β for adolescents=2.37 95% CI=2.07 to 2.66), and the association between home exposure and cotinine among adults was most pronounced in the lowest PIR quartile. There was an income gradient with regard to the probability of detectable cotinine among both adults and adolescents who did not report recent TSE. CONCLUSIONS:Homes and vehicles remain priority venues for addressing persistent TSE among individuals who do not smoke in the USA. TSE survey measures may have differential validity across population subgroups.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Evidence-based interventions (EBI) for cardiovascular disease (CVD) in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) may face feasibility challenges due to the inadequacy of existing instruments. To address this, researchers developed the Contextual Index of Feasibility on Early-Stage Implementation in LMIC (CATALYTIC) tool, which integrates contextual factors into the assessment of feasibility. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:The tool's items were developed through a systematic review and key informant interviews, and were later assessed for relevance and importance by 13 LMIC researchers and implementers employing a Delphi technique. The survey was then tested for usability by five individuals with CVD experience in LMIC. The CATALYTIC tool consists of 17 items that measure contextual factors that directly influence early-stage LMIC implementation. Descriptive analysis, logistic regression, item reliability using Cronbach's alpha, and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) were performed on survey data. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:In a survey of 216 respondents from 46 countries, 63.4 to 81.5% of respondents noted a significant impact of contextual factors on implementation feasibility, with high reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.88) for 12 items. The majority of interventions focused on patient-level care in rural settings. The survey items align primarily with constructs related to implementation climate and readiness for implementation, as well as inductive themes addressing existing needs and barriers to inform intervention design. The survey found diversity in geographic and experiential backgrounds, with significant representation from South Africa, Mexico, and India. Over a third identified as researchers, and 15% held multiple roles. The survey identified three distinct factors influencing how researchers and implementers assess CVD intervention feasibility in LMIC. A 6% increase in odds for moderately feasible interventions was linked to each point increase in the composite score of perceived contextual influence. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Overall, the CATALYTIC tool with 12 reliable survey items can help researchers and implementers elucidate perceptions of contextual factors influencing the feasibility of CVD-related EBI in LMIC. The survey items reflect respondents' practical focus in resource-limited settings and can inform intervention design by addressing existing needs and barriers. The tool's integration of contextual factors into the assessment of feasibility can help overcome the inadequacy of existing instruments by providing more tailored and conceptually clear assessments of feasibility.

BACKGROUND:Permanent supportive housing (PSH) is an evidence-based intervention for people experiencing homelessness which integrates permanent housing with voluntary support services. PSH tenants are at high risk for overdose death, yet little research to date has examined overdose in PSH. We sought to examine overdose risk and existing responses in PSH, which can shed light on opportunities for future overdose prevention efforts. METHODS:We conducted focus groups with PSH tenants, staff, and leaders in New York City and New York's Capital Region. Focus groups were recorded and professionally transcribed. Two investigators independently completed rapid turnaround qualitative analysis, completing templated summaries of each focus group and compiling key content in an analysis matrix, which a third investigator reviewed; discrepancies were resolved by consensus. RESULTS:From October to December 2022, we held 8 focus group sessions with PSH tenants (3 focus groups, n = 10 total participants), staff (3 focus groups, n = 13), and leaders (2 focus groups, n = 11) grouped by role and region. Participants were diverse in age (26-67 years), gender (18 women, 16 men), race (3 Asian, 12 Black, 11 White, 5 multiracial, 3 other), and ethnicity (5 Latinx, 29 not Latinx). Analysis revealed four main themes: (1) Overdose was a large concern in PSH and created significant trauma for tenants and staff; (2) Environmental factors in PSH contributed to overdose risk; (3) There was heterogeneity in PSH buildings' current overdose prevention efforts and adoption of harm reduction principles; and (4) Multifactorial barriers resulted in limited tenant use of opioid agonist treatment. CONCLUSIONS:Overdose is a major concern for PSH tenants, staff, and leaders. Our findings shed new light on overdose in PSH settings, providing insight into risk factors, existing responses, and barriers and facilitators to future overdose prevention efforts. These findings can inform future overdose prevention interventions within PSH. TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05786222, registered 27 March 2023.

BACKGROUND:Community-clinical linkage models (CCLM) display significant potential to address the unique, multi-level type 2 diabetes risk factors facing minoritized communities, such as South Asian Americans. However, there lacks a systematic, longitudinal evaluation of how such tailored CCLMs can be better implemented in dynamic, real-world settings. This study aims to leverage multi-partner insights, collected in real time, to explore the barriers and facilitators to implement a South Asian American diabetes management and prevention intervention (the DREAM intervention). METHODS:The DREAM intervention, a two-arm randomized controlled trial, was implemented from 2019-2022; partners involved in its implementation were interviewed annually to understand their experiences of the program. Implementation partners included community health workers (CHWs), participating healthcare providers, community advisory board (CAB) partners, and research staff. The interview guide and subsequent deductive qualitative analysis was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). RESULTS:Overall, 78 interviews were conducted across four waves (2019-2022) with 5 research staff, 8 CHWs, 18 providers/clinic staff, and 12 CAB partners. CHWs adapted intervention characteristics by tailoring curriculum and implementation to patient needs, including personalized goal setting and shifting to remote delivery with COVID-19-related content. At the individual level, participants' occupations, family dynamics, and technological capacity shaped engagement, while changing social, financial, and health contexts over time required CHWs to continually adjust support. Within the inner setting, partner roles and resource availability fluctuated, yet structured and consistent meetings facilitated communication and problem-solving. Outer setting influences, including shifting government and universities policies and the COVID-19 pandemic, required repeated adaptations, while CAB partnerships expanded community connections and services over time. Process-related findings underscored the evolving role of CHWs and research staff in planning and fidelity, with training shifting toward peer mentorship to build capacity. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Findings revealed the pivotal role of programmatic adaptability and robust partner engagement in navigating dynamic contexts to support the diabetes needs of minoritized communities. The real-time, longitudinal approach taken for data collection and analysis was crucial in understanding how intervention changes were implemented and experienced, providing a model for similar implementation assessments.

Despite progress to define primary care practice transformation models, there remain gaps in translating evidence-based guidelines into routine clinical care. Primary care providers (MD, DO, NP, PA) and researchers need tools to assess modifiable factors that improve practice performance to inform practice transformation efforts. We aimed to develop a pragmatic tool for assessing practice-level primary care structures and processes that are associated with better care quality and clinical outcomes. We generated 314 candidate items for the Tool for Advancing Practice Performance (TAPP) using data from a comprehensive literature review, Delphi study, and qualitative interviews with high-performing practices. We used empirical criteria and expert review to eliminate redundancy and improve clarity via removing and retaining items. The retained items were formatted into a survey tool, and we further revised the tool based on feedback elicited from cognitive interviews and pilot testing with primary care providers and staff. The final candidate pool comprised 126 items after refinement and expert review. For the survey tool, we adapted and developed survey questions for each of the 126 items. Eight cognitive interview participants reviewed the tool and provided feedback on its content and language. Based on this feedback, we eliminated 13 items because they were poorly or incorrectly understood by participants, resulting in a 113-item tool. Fifteen participants pilot tested the tool and no additional items were eliminated. The TAPP is a novel, low-burden tool that researchers and primary care providers can use to identify areas for improvement at the practice-level. Practices and health systems could use the TAPP to assess their own performance and identify gaps in their structures and processes, and practice networks and health systems can use the tool to assess structures and processes at individual clinics, track this information over time, and evaluate its relationship to care quality and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:As part of an initiative to increase COVID-19 testing uptake among underserved populations, we conducted focus groups to explore experiences and attitudes related to testing in two understudied groups-young adults and socially-isolated older adults-recruited from residents living in New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) public housing developments. MATERIALS AND METHODS/UNASSIGNED: = 32 total). To identify themes, we conducted a rapid qualitative analysis approach. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Residents discussed four overarching themes: (1) trusted COVID-19 information sources; (2) reasons for testing; (3) barriers to testing, and (4) strategies to increase testing uptake. Findings were similar across the two age groups; both cited multiple sources of information, including major media outlets, government or public health officials, and doctors. Young adults were more likely to access information from social media despite concerns about misinformation. Participants identified several barriers to testing, such as long lines, insurance coverage, and cost. Young adults reported that at-home COVID testing was more convenient, while older adults expressed concern about accuracy and administering the tests themselves. Recommendations for improving testing emphasized easier access via a central well-known location, in-home visits, free or low-cost tests, and increased outreach. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Mainstream media, doctors and public agencies remain the most trusted sources of information among younger and older residents alike. Many resident recommendations involved leveraging NYCHA infrastructure, highlighting the continuing role public housing authorities can play in COVID-19 and other health initiatives.