Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of a multicomponent intervention to address the burden of drug use-related infectious diseases and overdose in rural settings. DESIGN/METHODS:Single-arm hybrid implementation-effectiveness design. SETTING/METHODS:Rural area comprising the Illinois counties of the Delta Regional Authority. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:People who use opioids and/or stimulants nonmedically. INTERVENTION/METHODS:Expansion of community-based harm reduction services, capacity-building for opioid use disorder and hepatitis C treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES/METHODS:Harm reduction service expansion intervention Reach, Effectiveness (injection equipment sharing), Adoption and Cost (per participant and budget impact analysis). RESULTS:Three hundred six people who use drugs were enrolled. Of the 207 of who were not previously engaged in harm reduction services, 121 (59%) accepted referral and were retained in services at 6 months past study enrollment (intervention reach). In regards to intervention efficacy, among these individuals, 41 (35%) completed follow-up surveys; compared with their baseline self-report, there was a significant increase in obtaining sterile equipment from the harm reduction organization (43.9% vs. 68.3%, P = 0.03) and decrease in sharing injection equipment (46.3%-19.5%, P = .02). The harm reduction organization experienced an increase of approximately 100-550 program participants and an increase in service delivery area coverage from 1258 to 5509 square miles after intervention implementation (adoption). Cost per participant served by the harm reduction organization was $1486 per year, with annual budget impact to the program of $817 295. In regards to treatment capacity building, a total of 80 providers in the study area completed training in opioid use and/or hepatitis C management. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The pragmatic evaluation of harm reduction service expansion supported by a suite of implementation strategies serves to inform the practical considerations and decision-making by community-based organizations seeking to increase services in rural areas heavily affected by substance use, overdose, and related infectious diseases.

The Networks and Causal Inference for Public Health Research (NCIPHER) Lab at the University of Rhode Island (URI) was established in 2018, with an initial pilot project supported by Advance Rhode Island Clinical Translational Research (RI-CTR), to develop methodological and computational approaches for evaluating interventions in real-world settings where individuals are connected in ways that impact their health. Leveraging bioinformatics and high-performance computing resources through Advance RI-CTR, we integrate empirical and simulation methods to estimate causal intervention effects (i.e., change in an outcome caused by a specific intervention) beyond treated individuals, including spillover through social and healthcare networks and clusters. Our work demonstrates that accounting for spillover improves understanding of the effectiveness of HIV and opioid use disorder (OUD) interventions. In the Transmission Reduction Intervention Project Athens, Greece, participants not exposed themselves to community alerts about HIV risk, with 50% of their immediate contacts exposed, reported three fewer unsafe injection behaviors (per 100 participants), compared to those who had 20% of their contacts exposed (95% CI: -7, 0). We also found 26 fewer reports (per 100 persons) at six months under individual treatment with medication for opioid use disorder with 60% of other individuals in the network treated, compared to no treatment with 20% of others treated (95% CI: -38, -13). Understanding effects in networks can improve translation from intervention delivery to population-level impact, supporting evidence-based policy.

HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a highly effective prevention strategy, yet awareness, knowledge, and willingness to use it among people who inject drugs (PWID) remains inadequate despite widespread eligibility. Stigma, particularly HIV-stigmatizing beliefs and attitudes, may be a key barrier to engagement at early stages of the PrEP care continuum. We examine how HIV-stigmatizing beliefs and attitudes affect PrEP awareness, knowledge, and willingness among PWID. We surveyed 262 HIV-negative PWID in Los Angeles and Denver (2021-2023) and used structural equation modeling to examine associations between HIV-stigmatizing beliefs and attitudes (11-item validated scale with α = 0.899 and 1-factor structure) and three early PrEP outcomes: awareness, knowledge, and willingness, while controlling for race/ethnicity, gender, housing status, and conducted sub-analyses on willingness to use long-acting injectable PrEP. HIV-stigmatizing beliefs and attitudes were significantly associated with lower PrEP awareness (β - 0.212, p < 0.001) and less accurate knowledge (β - 0.179, p = 0.006). Accurate knowledge was associated with greater willingness to use PrEP (β 0.175, p = 0.027). Black, Indigenous, and Other Persons of Color (BIPOC) participants reported higher HIV-stigmatizing beliefs and attitudes than non-Hispanic White participants (β 0.196, p = 0.003). Over half (56%) of participants were willing to take daily oral PrEP once informed, and many were interested in long-acting injectable PrEP. HIV-stigmatizing beliefs and attitudes are associated with lower PrEP care continuum engagement among PWID, particularly through limiting awareness and understanding of PrEP. BIPOC participants reported higher levels of stigmatizing attitudes, suggesting that broader structural and intersectional stigma may shape PrEP engagement, consistent with prior research. Interventions to increase PrEP uptake should address both individual- and structural-level stigma and consider leveraging peer networks and community supports to foster resilience and improve equitable access to HIV prevention tools.

Stigma in healthcare settings is a critical barrier to HIV prevention and treatment among people who inject drugs (PWID). While previous tools have measured anticipated stigma, few account for the intersectional and provider-specific experiences of PWID-particularly from syringe service programs (SSPs). We developed and validated the Substance Use Anticipated Provider Stigma Scale (SU-APSS), a multidimensional instrument assessing anticipated stigma from four provider types: healthcare workers, substance use treatment staff, pharmacists, and SSP personnel. Data were drawn from a cross-sectional survey of 264 PWID who were 18 or older, HIV-negative, had injected drugs and used opioids within the past 30 days, and showed visible signs of recent injection. We conducted confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on responses from 218 participants to evaluate structural validity and used Cronbach's alpha to assess internal consistency. The CFA supported a four-factor structure with strong model fit indices (CFI = 0.97, RMSEA = 0.09 [0.07, 0.11], SRMR = 0.04). All items significantly loaded onto their respective factors (loadings: 0.62-1.06). Internal consistency was high across all subscales (α = 0.85-0.96) and for the overall scale (α = 0.87). Attribution analysis revealed drug use, physical appearance, and income level as the most common perceived reasons for anticipated stigma. The SU-APSS offers a practical tool for identifying provider-specific stigma, informing stigma-reduction interventions, and evaluating implementation strategies to improve HIV prevention and care engagement among PWID.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Hazardous working conditions fuel inequities in accidental-poisoning, suicide, and chronic-liver-disease mortality. Relational theories suggest such hazards flow from power imbalances between workers, managers, and employers - social classes demarcated by power over property and labor. However, to our knowledge, no US studies using relational measures have analyzed class inequities in the cause-specific mortality. METHODS:We used the Mortality Disparities in American Communities dataset, which links the 2008 American Community Survey to the National Death Index through December 31, 2019. We classified respondents as incorporated business owners, unincorporated business owners, managers, workers, or not in the labor force based on their employment, occupational, and business-ownership status. Then, using an inverse-probability-weighted Aalen-Johansen estimator, we estimated risk differences in the cause-specific mortality across classes at the end of follow-up, including by sex, race/ethnicity, and education. RESULTS:Our sample included 2,304,500 respondents and 10,870 accidental-poisoning, suicide, and chronic-liver-disease deaths. Compared to incorporated business owners, those not in the labor force, workers, and unincorporated business owners had, respectively, 8.9 (95 % CI: 8.0, 9.7), 0.9 (95 % CI: 0.4, 1.5), and 1.1 (95 % CI: 0.3, 1.9) greater 12-year age- and sex-adjusted risks of the cause-specific mortality per 1000. Managers' risks resembled incorporated business owners'. Inequities largely persisted after thorough sociodemographic adjustment. Among workers, risks were elevated among the unemployed and those with blue-collar or service occupations. Finally, inequities were greater among men and less-educated respondents than among women and more-educated respondents. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:We estimated considerable class inequities in the cause-specific mortality, adding to research connecting class relations to mortality inequities and worsening population health.

PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:Understanding the types of individuals and their position in the network may improve interventions for people who inject drugs (PWID). METHODS/UNASSIGNED:From the Transmission Reduction Intervention Project (TRIP), which enrolled PWID and their contacts in Athens, Greece, from 2013 to 2015, we extracted the largest connected component of the network (i.e., the largest group of connected individuals) and identified members who were in the top quartile of the distribution for three network centrality measures: closeness, betweenness, and eigenvector. Using logistic regression, we evaluated associations between high centrality measures and individual sociodemographic characteristics and behaviors. We also varied the definition for high centrality. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Among 231 individuals, 80% were male and between the ages of 25-40 years. Over half of the individuals injected at least once per day, compared to less than daily. Individuals who injected at least once per day were more likely to have high closeness (odds ratio (OR) = 3.36; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.57, 8.42), high betweenness (OR = 2.22; 95% CI = 1.06, 4.67), and eigenvector centrality (OR = 4.50; 95% CI = 1.89,10.68). Individuals who engaged in sex without a condom were less likely to have high closeness (OR = 0.18; 95% CI = 0.07, 0.45) or eigenvector (OR = 0.19; 95% CI = 0.07, 0.49) centrality. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Individual characteristics and behaviors were associated with centrality and may impact an individual's position in the network. These associations could be useful in identifying important community members to engage as part of public health initiatives.

The social determinants of health (SDOH) framework has proven useful for research and practice in addressing the social causes of many health outcomes. However, its limitations may restrict its value as the world undergoes rapid ecological and social change. We argue that SDOH does not adequately incorporate rapidly changing or "far upstream" social processes (particularly social movements), the dialectics of social conflict and creative social innovation, or bidirectional causation. Ecosocial theory addresses some of these issues, yet dialectical frameworks offer additional insights during periods of rapid social change and disruption. The implications for research methods and practice are discussed. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print September 18, 2025:e1-e9. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2025.308239).

Between May 2020 and December 2021, there were 159,872 drug overdose deaths in the US. Higher eviction rates have been associated with higher overdose mortality. Amid the economic turmoil caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, 43 states and Washington, DC, implemented eviction moratoria of varying durations. These moratoria reduced eviction filing rates, but their impact on fatal drug overdoses remains unexplored. We evaluated the effect of these policies on county-level overdose death rates by focusing on the dates the state eviction moratoria were lifted. We obtained mortality data from NCHS and eviction moratoria dates from the COVID-19 US State Policy Database. We employed a longitudinal targeted minimum-loss-based estimation with Super Learner to flexibly estimate the average treatment effect (ATE) of never lifting the moratoria. Lifting state eviction moratoria was associated with a 0.14 per 100,000 higher rate of monthly overdose mortality (95%CI: -0.03, 0.32), although confidence intervals were wide and included zero. Eviction moratoria may not be sufficient to prevent overdose mortality during crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic.