Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) affects 9.4% of US adults and children, while another 33.9% of Americans are at risk of DM. Health care institutions face many barriers to systematically delivering the preventive care needed to decrease DM incidence. Community health workers (CHWs) may, as frontline public health workers bridging clinic and community, help overcome these challenges. This paper presents the protocol for a pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial integrating CHWs into two primary care clinics to support DM prevention for at-risk patients. METHODS:The trial will randomize 15 care teams, stratified by practice site (Bellevue Hospital and Manhattan VA), totaling 56 primary care physicians. The study cohort will consist of ~ 2000 patients who are 18-75 years of age, actively enrolled in a primary care team, able to speak English or Spanish, and have at least one glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) result in the prediabetic range (5.7-6.4%) since 2012. Those with a current DM diagnosis or DM medication prescription (other than metformin) are ineligible. The intervention consists of four core activities - setting health goals, health education, activation for doctor's appointments, and referrals to DM prevention programs - adjustable according to the patient's needs and readiness. The primary outcome is DM incidence. Secondary outcomes include weight loss, HbA1C, and self-reported health behaviors. Clinical variables and health behaviors will be obtained through electronic medical records and surveys, respectively. Implementation outcomes, namely implementation fidelity and physicians' perspectives about CHW integration into the clinic, will be assessed using interviews and CHW activity logs and analyzed for the influence of moderating organizational factors. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:This is the first rigorous, pragmatic trial to test the effectiveness of integrating CHWs into primary care for DM prevention reaching a population-based sample. Our study's limitations include language-based eligibility and the use of HbA1c as a measure of DM risk. It will measure both clinical and implementation outcomes and potentially broaden the evidence base for CHWs and patient-centered medical home implementation. Further, the intervention's unique features, notably patient-level personalization and referral to existing programs, may offer a scalable model to benefit patients at-risk of DM. TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03006666 (Received 12/27/2016).

Analysis of the politics of HIV programme scale-up requires critical attention to the role of the state, since the state formulates HIV policies, provides resources for the HIV response and negotiates donor involvement in HIV programmes. However, conceptual and methodological approaches to analysing states' responses to HIV remain underdeveloped. Research suggests that differences in states' successes in HIV programme scale-up reflect their levels of 'political commitment' to responding to HIV. Few empirical measures of political commitment exist, and those that do, notably the AIDS Program Effort Index (API), employ ad hoc scoring approaches to combine information from different variables into an index of commitment. The indices are thus difficult to interpret and may not have empirically useful meaning. In this paper, we apply exploratory factor analysis to examine whether, and how, selected variables that comprise the API score reflect previously theorised dimensions of political commitment. We investigate how variables associated with each of the factors identified in the analyses correspond to these theorised dimensions as well as to API categories. Finally, we discuss potential uses--such as political benchmarking and accountability--and challenges of factor analysis as a means to identify and measure states' political commitment to respond to HIV.

OBJECTIVES: National political commitment is likely to become particularly crucial to sustaining antiretroviral treatment programmes in the coming decade, as donor contributions to HIV funding decreases. The objective of this study is to synthesise information on existing indicators of political commitment to respond to national HIV epidemics. METHODS: The authors describe and critically evaluate the existing indicators and propose studies to validate them. RESULTS: Several indicators have been developed to measure governments' political commitment to respond to national HIV epidemics--the AIDS Program Effort Index, the United Nations General Assembly Special Session on HIV/AIDS Declaration of Commitment Indicators and the AIDS Policy Aggressiveness Indicators--but the validity of these measures has not been systematically assessed. The indicators differ in their intended use, collection methods, content categories, data coverage, and strengths and limitations. Several types of studies could be used to test indicator validity (based on indicator content, comparisons of the same indicator using different elicitation methods, relationship patterns between indicators, relations between indicators and other variables and the consequences of using the indicators). CONCLUSIONS: The existing indicators of political commitment to respond to national HIV epidemics are useful for many purposes, including research, policymaking and advocacy. A range of studies could improve the understanding of indicator validity. New data collection and measurement approaches offer opportunities to improve how actors in the HIV community capture the complicated, multidimensional concept of political commitment.

BACKGROUND: Researchers have long recognized the importance of a central government's political "commitment" in order to mount an effective response to HIV. The concept of political commitment remains ill-defined, however, and little guidance has been given on how to measure this construct and its relationship with HIV-related outcomes. Several countries have experienced declines in HIV infection rates, but conceptual difficulties arise in linking these declines to political commitment as opposed to underlying social and behavioural factors. METHODS: This paper first presents a critical review of the literature on existing efforts to conceptualize and measure political commitment to respond to HIV and the linkages between political commitment and HIV-related outcomes. Based on the elements identified in this review, the paper then develops and presents a framework to assist researchers in making choices about how to assess a government's level of political commitment to respond to HIV and how to link political commitment to HIV-related outcomes. RESULTS: The review of existing studies identifies three components of commitment (expressed, institutional and budgetary commitment) as different dimensions along which commitment can be measured. The review also identifies normative and ideological aspects of commitment and a set of variables that mediate and moderate political commitment that need to be accounted for in order to draw valid inferences about the relationship between political commitment and HIV-related outcomes. The framework summarizes a set of steps that researchers can follow in order to assess a government's level of commitment to respond to HIV and suggests ways to apply the framework to country cases. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas existing studies have adopted a limited and often ambiguous conception of political commitment, we argue that conceiving of political commitment along a greater number of dimensions will allow researchers to draw a more complete picture of political commitment to respond to HIV that avoids making invalid inferences about the relationship between political commitment and HIV outcomes.