Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Participation in clinical trials among people of color remains low, compared with white subjects. This protocol describes the development of "Advancing People of Color in Clinical Trials Now!" (ACT Now!), a culturally tailored website designed to influence clinical trial decision making among people of color. OBJECTIVE:This cluster randomized study aims to test the efficacy of a culturally tailored website to increase literacy, self-efficacy, and willingness to enroll in clinical trials among people of color. METHODS:ACT Now! is a randomized trial including 2 groups: (1) intervention group (n=50) with access to the culturally tailored website and (2) control group (n=50) exposed to a standard clinical recruitment website. Clinical trial literacy and willingness to enroll in a clinical trial will be measured before and after exposure to the website corresponding to their assigned group (intervention or control). Surveys will be conducted at baseline and during the 1-month postintervention and 3-month follow-up. Website architecture and wireframing will be informed by the literature and experts in the field. Statistical analysis will be conducted using a two-tailed t test, with 80% power, at .05 alpha level, to increase clinical trial literacy, self-efficacy, and willingness to enroll in clinical trials 3 months post intervention. RESULTS:We will design a culturally tailored website that will provide leverage for community stakeholders to influence clinical trial literacy, self-efficacy, and willingness to enroll in clinical trials among racial and ethnic groups. ACT Now! applies a community-based participatory research approach through the use of a community steering committee (CSC). The CSC provides input during the research study conception, development, implementation, and enrollment. CSC relationships help foster trust among communities of color. ACT Now! has the potential to fill a gap in clinical trial enrollment among people of color through an accessible web-based website. This study was funded in July 2017 and obtained institutional review board approval in spring 2017. As of December 2019, we had enrolled 100 participants. Data analyses are expected to be completed by June 2020, and expected results are to be published in fall 2020. CONCLUSIONS:ACT Now! has the potential to fill an important gap in clinical trial enrollment among people of color through an accessible web-based website. TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03243071; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00102401. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)/UNASSIGNED:DERR1-10.2196/17589.

Introduction: Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among nearly every racial and ethnic group.With almost 40,000 fatalities every year, breast cancer is the second leading cause of death among women. Bettercare in the past 25 years has reduced breast cancer deaths by up to 34% in certain communities, but not allcommunities are benefiting equally from these improvements. To address these disparities, we launched anavigation-based program as a model to improve outcomes for medically underserved women with breast cancer byreducing barriers to quality care and advancing pioneering treatments for breast cancer. We look at the insurancestatus of the women educated and navigated over the past two years.
Method(s): The program has three objectives: (1) advance an effective and scalable community-based navigationmodel for reducing disparities in screening and diagnostic follow-up care in medically underserved women; (2)improve access to and use of high-quality breast cancer care and supportive services at Bellevue, Tisch, and NYUBrooklyn hospitals among underserved woman utilizing patient navigation; and (3) increase access to, andparticipation in, clinical trials for the most promising and innovative therapies for breast cancers among underservedwomen. Preliminary data were collected between August 2016 and April 2018 from women on their first encounterwith the navigator.
Result(s): Our community navigators have provided outreach to 144 unique sites in New York City, primarily inBrooklyn and lower Manhattan. Community navigators provided health outreach to 8,304 women, of whom 2071were eligible but not up to date on screening. 887 of these women enrolled in patient navigation and 711 womenprovided insurance information. 69% of our clients are AA, 25% Hispanic. 24% of our clients were uninsured, 19%had Medicaid, 10% had Medicare, and the remaining women had private insurance. The most salient reportedbarriers to screening addressed by our navigators included lack of adequate insurance, immigration status, housingand food insecurity, and lack of transportation and child care.
Discussion(s): Through a combination of outreach, education, and navigation, we have developed a novelinterdisciplinary model to reduce barriers for screening and treatment for breast cancer. While many of our clientsand patients had insurance, many still had formidable financial challenges. In our experience, comprehensiveassessment of financial, social, and logistical barriers is an integral component of the navigation process, and isnecessary to overcome the significant roadblocks to high-quality breast cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatmentthat underserved women face

Members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) community experience marginalization, bias, and discrimination, including in the world of academic medicine. People who are transgender and gender non-binary (TGNB) experience further marginalization compared to individuals who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer. According to a recent survey, more than half of medical students who are TGNB chose not to disclose their gender identities during training due to fears of discrimination, feeling a lack of support, and concerns about future career options. Academic medicine has historically pathologized TGNB individuals, perpetuating discrimination structurally and reinforcing discriminatory behaviors in peers and faculty. In this Perspective, the authors provide a comprehensive overview of the challenges that administrators and educators face in creating a learning environment that is inclusive of TGNB trainees. They outline opportunities for change and provide strategies to address administrative and educational challenges, including those related to institutional climate, policies, data collection, physical spaces, health care, the curriculum, mentoring, and the evaluation of TGNB trainees. Finally, the authors issue a call to action for medical educators and administrators to create environments in which trainees who are TGNB can fulfill their primary mission: to learn the practice of medicine.

Introduction/UNASSIGNED:Mentorship is crucial for academic success. And yet, there are few mentoring programs that address the needs of underrepresented, racially/ethnically diverse junior faculty conducting health-related research in the United States. Methods/UNASSIGNED:To expand mentoring capacity for these racially/ethnically diverse faculty, we developed a Peer Mentor Development Program (PMDP) to prepare near-peers, who have similar characteristics and personal experiences, to provide support to participants in an NIH-PRIDE funded Institute. The PMDP program is designed based on the 8-year experience of the Mentor Development Program of the NYU-Health and Hospitals Clinical Translational Science Institute. Annually, up to six alumni are selected into the PMDP, participate in the 12-hour program over 4 days, are paired with 1 to 3 scholar participants to mentor and join monthly PMDP conference calls during the ensuing year. Results/UNASSIGNED:We describe the program, participant experience and lessons learned from our first 18 peer mentors in three PMDP cohorts. Additionally, all 18 peer mentors completed a post-evaluation survey to assess the program. Overall, peers agreed that participating in the PMDP enhanced most of the specific skills targeted. Participants rated 53%-86% of skills as "more than before" participating in PMDP, demonstrating the appreciation and impact of the program. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:The PMDP may be a model for higher education and academic medicine programs committed to mentoring and retaining racially/ethnically diverse faculty and ultimately contributing to reducing entrenched health disparities between majority and minority populations.

Importance/UNASSIGNED:Black individuals and Hispanic individuals are less likely to recognize stroke and call 911 (stroke preparedness), contributing to racial/ethnic disparities in intravenous tissue plasminogen activator use. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To evaluate the effect of culturally tailored 12-minute stroke films on stroke preparedness vs the usual care practice of distributing stroke education pamphlets. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:Cluster randomized clinical trial between July 26, 2013, and August 16, 2018, with randomization of 13 black and Hispanic churches located in urban neighborhoods to intervention or usual care. In total, 883 congregants were approached, 503 expressed interest, 375 completed eligibility screening, and 312 were randomized. Sixty-three individuals were ineligible (younger than 34 years and/or did not have at least 1 traditional stroke risk factor). Interventions/UNASSIGNED:Two 12-minute stroke films on stroke preparedness for black and Hispanic audiences. Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:The primary outcome was the Stroke Action Test (STAT), assessed at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Results/UNASSIGNED:In total, 261 of 312 individuals completed the study (83.7% retention rate). Most participants were female (79.1%). The mean (SD) age of participants was 58.57 (11.66) years; 51.1% (n = 159) were non-Hispanic black, 48.9% (n = 152) were Hispanic, and 31.7% (n = 99) had low levels of education. There were no significant end-point differences for the STAT at follow-up periods. The mean (SD) baseline STAT scores were 59.05% (29.12%) correct for intervention and 58.35% (28.83%) correct for usual care. At 12 months, the mean (SD) STAT scores were 64.38% (26.39%) correct for intervention and 61.58% (28.01%) correct for usual care. Adjusted by education, a post hoc subgroup analysis revealed a mean (SE) intervention effect of 1.03% (0.44%) (P = .02) increase per month in the low-education subgroup (about a 10% increase in 12 months). In the high-education subgroup, the mean (SE) intervention effect was -0.05% (0.30%) (P = .86). Regarding percentage correct, the low-education intervention subgroup improved from 52.4% (7 of 21) to 66.7% (14 of 21) compared with the other subgroups. Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:No difference was observed in stroke preparedness at 12 months in response to culturally tailored 12-minute stroke films or conventional stroke education pamphlets. Additional studies are required to confirm findings from a post hoc subgroup analysis that suggested a significant education effect. Trial Registration/UNASSIGNED:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01909271.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Although screening for diabetes is recommended at age 45, some populations may be at greater risk at earlier ages. Our objective was to quantify age disparities among patients with type 2 diabetes in New York City. METHODS:Using all-payer hospital claims data for New York City, we performed a cross-sectional analysis of patients with type 2 diabetes identified from emergency department visits during the 5-year period 2011-2015. We estimated type 2 diabetes prevalence at each year of life, the age distribution of patients stratified by decade, and the average age of patients by sex, race/ethnicity, and geographic location. RESULTS:We identified 576,306 unique patients with type 2 diabetes. These patients represented more than half of all people with type 2 diabetes in New York City. Patients in racial/ethnic minority groups were on average 5.5 to 8.4 years younger than non-Hispanic white patients. At age 45, type 2 diabetes prevalence was 10.9% among non-Hispanic black patients and 5.2% among non-Hispanic white patients. In our geospatial analyses, patients with type 2 diabetes were on average 6 years younger in hotspots of diabetes-related emergency department use and inpatient hospitalizations. The average age of patients with type 2 diabetes was also 1 to 2 years younger in hotspots of microvascular diabetic complications. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:We identified profound age disparities among patients with type 2 diabetes in racial/ethnic minority groups and in neighborhoods with poor health outcomes. The younger age of these patients may be due to earlier onset of diabetes and/or earlier death from diabetic complications. Our findings demonstrate the need for geographically targeted interventions that promote earlier diagnosis and better glycemic control.

Background: Current guidelines for diabetes screening start at age 45, but disparities in certain subgroups exist and poor diabetic outcomes are known to cluster in specific neighborhoods. The objective of this study was to quantify disparities in the age distribution of patients with type 2 diabetes by sex, race/ethnicity, and geographic location. We also studied how patient age relates to diabetes-related hospital use and development of diabetic complications.
Method(s): Using all-payer hospital claims data, we performed a cross-sectional analysis of patients with type 2 diabetes. Our study included patients in New York City as identified by geocoded home address. Patients aged 10 to 100 years old were identified as having type 2 diabetes based on diagnosis codes from emergency claims data from 2011-2015. Our main measures included the estimated prevalence of type 2 diabetes at each year of life, the age distribution of patients as stratified by decade, and the comparison of patient age in geographic hotspots of frequent diabetes-related hospital use and diabetic complications.
Result(s): We identified 576,306 unique patients diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, which represented over half of all cases in New York City. Minority subgroups were on average 5.5 to 8.4 years younger than non-Hispanic White patients. Males with type 2 diabetes were 2.6 years younger than females. At 45 years of age, the estimated prevalence of type 2 diabetes was 10.9% among Black patients compared to 5.2% among White patients. In our geospatial analyses, patients with type 2 diabetes were on average 5.9 years younger in hotspots of diabetes-related emergency department use and inpatient hospitalizations. The average age of patients with type 2 diabetes was 1.5 to 2.2 years younger in hotspots of microvascular diabetic complications.
Conclusion(s): We identified profound disparities in the age of patients with type 2 diabetes among minorities and in neighborhoods with poor health outcomes. The younger age of these patients may be due to earlier onset of diabetes and/or earlier death from diabetes-related complications. Our findings demonstrate the need for geographically targeted interventions that promote earlier diagnosis and better glycemic control to reduce disparities in diabetes burden. [Figure Presented] Age Distribution of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes by Race and Ethnicity