Faculty Bibliography
Searched for:
in-biosketch:yes
person:yinh02
Total Results:
113
Good Friends and Good Neighbors: Social Capital and Food Insecurity in Families with Newborns
OBJECTIVE:To examine the association between social capital and household food insecurity among US families with newborns. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:This cross-sectional analysis used enrollment data from 881 newborn-caregiver dyads at six geographically-diverse US academic sites enrolled in the Greenlight Plus Trial, a comparative effectiveness trial to prevent childhood obesity. Ordinal proportional-odds models were used to characterize the associations of two self-reported measures of social capital: 1) caregiver social support and 2) neighborhood social cohesion, with household food insecurity after controlling for sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS:Among 881 newborn-caregiver dyads (49% Hispanic, 23% non-Hispanic white, 17% non-Hispanic Black; 49% with annual household income <$50,000), food security was high for 75%, marginal for 9%, low for 11% and very low for 4%. In covariate-adjusted analyses, caregivers with a low social support score of 18 had five times the odds (aOR=5.03 95%CI=3.28-7.74) of greater food insecurity compared with caregivers with a high social support score of 30. Caregivers with a low neighborhood social cohesion score of 10 had nearly three times the odds (aOR=2.87 95%CI 1.61-5.11) of greater food insecurity compared with caregivers with a high neighborhood social cohesion score of 20. These associations remained robust when both social capital measures were included in one model. CONCLUSIONS:Caregiver social support and neighborhood social cohesion each appear to be inversely associated with food insecurity among US families with newborns. Longitudinal research is needed to determine the directionality of these relationships and whether improving social capital for families with young children reduces household food insecurity.
PMID: 39428091
ISSN: 1097-6833
CID: 5738862
Creating Culturally Adapted Multilingual Materials for Research
Patients who speak languages other than English are frequently excluded from research. This exclusion exacerbates inequities, biases results, and may violate federal regulations and research ethics. Language justice is the right to communicate in an individual's preferred language to address power imbalances and promote equity. To promote language justice in research, we propose a method to translate and culturally-adapt multifaceted research materials into multiple languages simultaneously. Our method involves a multistep approach, including professional translation, review by bilingual expert panels to refine and reach consensus, and piloting or cognitive interviews with patients and families. Key differences from other translation approaches (eg, the World Health Organization) include omitting back-translation, given its limited utility in identifying translation challenges, and limiting expert panelist and piloting-participant numbers for feasibility. We detail a step-by-step approach to operationalizing this method and outline key considerations learned after utilizing this method to translate materials into 8 languages other than English for an ongoing multicenter pediatric research study on family safety-reporting. Materials included family brochures, surveys, and intervention materials. This approach took ∼6 months overall at a cost of <$2000 per language (not including study personnel costs). Key themes across the project included (1) tailor scope to timeline, budget, and resources, (2) thoughtfully design English source materials, (3) identify and apply guiding principles throughout the translation and editing process, and (4) carefully review content and formatting to account for nuances across multiple languages. This method balances feasibility and rigor in translating participant-facing materials into multiple languages simultaneously, advancing language justice in research.
PMID: 38860305
ISSN: 1098-4275
CID: 5668922
The Effect of an Obesity Prevention Intervention Among Specific Subpopulations: A Heterogeneity of Treatment Effect Analysis of the Greenlight Trial
PMID: 38722268
ISSN: 2153-2176
CID: 5733982
The Injury Prevention Program to Reduce Early Childhood Injuries: A Cluster Randomized Trial
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The American Academy of Pediatrics designed The Injury Prevention Program (TIPP) in 1983 to help pediatricians prevent unintentional injuries, but TIPP's effectiveness has never been formally evaluated. We sought to evaluate the impact of TIPP on reported injuries in the first 2 years of life. METHODS:We conducted a stratified, cluster-randomized trial at 4 academic medical centers: 2 centers trained their pediatric residents and implemented TIPP screening and counseling materials at all well-child checks (WCCs) for ages 2 to 24 months, and 2 centers implemented obesity prevention. At each WCC, parents reported the number of child injuries since the previous WCC. Proportional odds logistic regression analyses with generalized estimating equation examined the extent to which the number of injuries reported were reduced at TIPP intervention sites compared with control sites, adjusting for baseline child, parent, and household factors. RESULTS:A total of 781 parent-infant dyads (349 TIPP; 432 control) were enrolled and had sufficient data to qualify for analyses: 51% Hispanic, 28% non-Hispanic Black, and 87% insured by Medicaid. Those at TIPP sites had significant reduction in the adjusted odds of reported injuries compared with non-TIPP sites throughout the follow-up (P = .005), with adjusted odds ratios (95% CI) of 0.77 (0.66-0.91), 0.60 (0.44-0.82), 0.32 (0.16-0.62), 0.26 (0.12-0.53), and 0.27 (0.14-0.52) at 4, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:In this cluster-randomized trial with predominantly low-income, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic Black families, TIPP resulted in a significant reduction in parent-reported injuries. Our study provides evidence for implementing the American Academy of Pediatrics' TIPP in routine well-child care.
PMCID:11035157
PMID: 38557871
ISSN: 1098-4275
CID: 5655672
Pediatrician perspectives on barriers and facilitators to discharge instruction comprehension and adherence for parents of children with medical complexity
BACKGROUND:High rates of posthospitalization errors are observed in children with medical complexity (CMC). Poor parent comprehension of and adherence to complex discharge instructions can contribute to errors. Pediatrician views on common barriers and facilitators to parent comprehension and adherence are understudied. OBJECTIVE:To examine pediatrician perspectives on barriers and facilitators experienced by parents in comprehension of and adherence to inpatient discharge instructions for CMC. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:We conducted a qualitative, descriptive study of attending pediatricians (n = 20) caring for CMC in inpatient settings (United States and Canada) and belonging to listservs for pediatric hospitalists/complex care providers. We used purposive/maximum variation sampling to ensure heterogeneity (e.g., hospital, region). MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES/METHODS:A multidisciplinary team designed and piloted a semistructured interview guide with pediatricians who care for CMC. Team members conducted semistructured interviews via phone or video call. Interviews were audiorecorded and transcribed. We analyzed transcripts using content analysis; codes were derived a priori from a conceptual framework (based on the Pediatric Self-Management Model) and a preliminary transcript analysis. We applied codes and identified emerging themes. RESULTS:Pediatricians identified three themes as barriers and facilitators to discharge instruction comprehension and adherence: (1) regimen complexity, (2) access to the healthcare team (e.g., inpatient team, outpatient pediatrician, home nursing) and resources (e.g., medications, medical equipment), and (3) need for a family centered and health literacy-informed approach to discharge planning and education. Next steps include the assessment of parent perspectives on barriers and facilitators to discharge instruction comprehension and adherence for prents of CMC and the development of intervention strategies.
PMCID:10987266
PMID: 38445808
ISSN: 1553-5606
CID: 5670152
Implementing a Family-Centered Rounds Intervention Using Novel Mentor-Trios
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Patient and Family Centered I-PASS (PFC I-PASS) emphasizes family and nurse engagement, health literacy, and structured communication on family-centered rounds organized around the I-PASS framework (Illness severity-Patient summary-Action items-Situational awareness-Synthesis by receiver). We assessed adherence, safety, and experience after implementing PFC I-PASS using a novel "Mentor-Trio" implementation approach with multidisciplinary parent-nurse-physician teams coaching sites. METHODS:Hybrid Type II effectiveness-implementation study from 2/29/19-3/13/22 with ≥3 months of baseline and 12 months of postimplementation data collection/site across 21 US community and tertiary pediatric teaching hospitals. We conducted rounds observations and surveyed nurses, physicians, and Arabic/Chinese/English/Spanish-speaking patients/parents. RESULTS:We conducted 4557 rounds observations and received 2285 patient/family, 1240 resident, 819 nurse, and 378 attending surveys. Adherence to all I-PASS components, bedside rounding, written rounds summaries, family and nurse engagement, and plain language improved post-implementation (13.0%-60.8% absolute increase by item), all P < .05. Except for written summary, improvements sustained 12 months post-implementation. Resident-reported harms/1000-resident-days were unchanged overall but decreased in larger hospitals (116.9 to 86.3 to 72.3 pre versus early- versus late-implementation, P = .006), hospitals with greater nurse engagement on rounds (110.6 to 73.3 to 65.3, P < .001), and greater adherence to I-PASS structure (95.3 to 73.6 to 72.3, P < .05). Twelve of 12 measures of staff safety climate improved (eg, "excellent"/"very good" safety grade improved from 80.4% to 86.3% to 88.0%), all P < .05. Patient/family experience and teaching were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS:Hospitals successfully used Mentor-Trios to implement PFC I-PASS. Family/nurse engagement, safety climate, and harms improved in larger hospitals and hospitals with better nurse engagement and intervention adherence. Patient/family experience and teaching were not affected.
PMID: 38164122
ISSN: 1098-4275
CID: 5627932
Changes in Provider Perceptions and Practices Regarding Dosing Units for Oral Liquid Medications
OBJECTIVE:A 2015 survey of primary care providers (PCPs) found that while many believed that milliliter (mL)-only dosing was safest for oral liquid medications, few would use mL alone in dosing instructions. Since 2015, many recommendations have promoted "mL-only" dosing. In 2019, a follow-up survey was conducted to assess if PCP perceptions and practices have changed. METHODS:Pediatricians, family medicine physicians, nurse practitioners, and internists participating in the 2015 and 2019 DocStyles cross-sectional, web-based surveys were asked about their perceptions and practices regarding dosing units for oral liquid medications. RESULTS:In 2019, among 1392 respondents, the proportion of PCPs who reported they believed using mL-only is the safest dosing instruction ranged from 55.1% of internists to 80.8% of pediatricians. While fewer PCPs believed patients/caregivers prefer dosing instructions in mL-only (23.9% of nurse practitioners to 48.4% of pediatricians), more held this belief in 2019 compared to 2015; pediatricians had the greatest absolute increase (+14.4%) and family medicine physicians had the smallest increase (+1.3%). While 61.6% of pediatricians reported they would use mL-only dosing, only 36.0% of internists, 36.6% of nurse practitioners, and 42.5% of family medicine physicians reported they would do so. After controlling for age, gender, region, and specialty, 2019 PCP survey participants were more likely to report that they would use mL-only dosing compared to 2015 participants (adjusted odds ratio 1.51, 95% confidence interval 1.29-1.77). CONCLUSIONS:Broader educational efforts may be necessary to reach nonpediatricians, to encourage prescribing and communication with patients/caregivers using mL-only dosing.
PMCID:10919552
PMID: 37666391
ISSN: 1876-2867
CID: 5669992
Prenatal Risks to Healthy Food Access and High Birthweight Outcomes
OBJECTIVE:Infants with high birthweight have increased risk for adverse outcomes at birth and across childhood. Prenatal risks to healthy food access may increase odds of high birthweight. We tested whether having a poor neighborhood food environment and/or food insecurity had associations with high birthweight. METHODS:We analyzed cross-sectional baseline data in Greenlight Plus, an obesity prevention trial across six US cities (n = 787), which included newborns with a gestational age greater than 34 weeks and a birthweight greater than 2500 g. We assessed neighborhood food environment using the Place-Based Survey and food insecurity using the US Household Food Security Module. We performed logistic regression analyses to assess the individual and additive effects of risk factors on high birthweight. We adjusted for potential confounders: infant sex, race, ethnicity, gestational age, birthing parent age, education, income, and study site. RESULTS:Thirty-four percent of birthing parents reported poor neighborhood food environment and/or food insecurity. Compared to those without food insecurity, food insecure families had greater odds of delivering an infant with high birthweight (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] 1.96, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 1.01, 3.82) after adjusting for poor neighborhood food environment, which was not associated with high birthweight (aOR 1.35, 95% CI: 0.78, 2.34). Each additional risk to healthy food access was associated with a 56% (95% CI: 4%-132%) increase in high birthweight odds. CONCLUSIONS:Prenatal risks to healthy food access may increase high infant birthweight odds. Future studies designed to measure neighborhood factors should examine infant birthweight outcomes in the context of prenatal social determinants of health.
PMID: 37659601
ISSN: 1876-2867
CID: 5618142
Researching COVID to enhance recovery (RECOVER) pediatric study protocol: Rationale, objectives and design
IMPORTANCE/OBJECTIVE:The prevalence, pathophysiology, and long-term outcomes of COVID-19 (post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 [PASC] or "Long COVID") in children and young adults remain unknown. Studies must address the urgent need to define PASC, its mechanisms, and potential treatment targets in children and young adults. OBSERVATIONS/METHODS:We describe the protocol for the Pediatric Observational Cohort Study of the NIH's REsearching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER) Initiative. RECOVER-Pediatrics is an observational meta-cohort study of caregiver-child pairs (birth through 17 years) and young adults (18 through 25 years), recruited from more than 100 sites across the US. This report focuses on two of four cohorts that comprise RECOVER-Pediatrics: 1) a de novo RECOVER prospective cohort of children and young adults with and without previous or current infection; and 2) an extant cohort derived from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study (n = 10,000). The de novo cohort incorporates three tiers of data collection: 1) remote baseline assessments (Tier 1, n = 6000); 2) longitudinal follow-up for up to 4 years (Tier 2, n = 6000); and 3) a subset of participants, primarily the most severely affected by PASC, who will undergo deep phenotyping to explore PASC pathophysiology (Tier 3, n = 600). Youth enrolled in the ABCD study participate in Tier 1. The pediatric protocol was developed as a collaborative partnership of investigators, patients, researchers, clinicians, community partners, and federal partners, intentionally promoting inclusivity and diversity. The protocol is adaptive to facilitate responses to emerging science. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/CONCLUSIONS:RECOVER-Pediatrics seeks to characterize the clinical course, underlying mechanisms, and long-term effects of PASC from birth through 25 years old. RECOVER-Pediatrics is designed to elucidate the epidemiology, four-year clinical course, and sociodemographic correlates of pediatric PASC. The data and biosamples will allow examination of mechanistic hypotheses and biomarkers, thus providing insights into potential therapeutic interventions. CLINICAL TRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER/BACKGROUND:Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT05172011.
PMCID:11075869
PMID: 38713673
ISSN: 1932-6203
CID: 5658342
Management of Discharge Instructions for Children With Medical Complexity: A Systematic Review
CONTEXT/BACKGROUND:Children with medical complexity (CMC) are at risk for adverse outcomes after discharge. Difficulties with comprehension of and adherence to discharge instructions contribute to these errors. Comprehensive reviews of patient-, caregiver-, provider-, and system-level characteristics and interventions associated with discharge instruction comprehension and adherence for CMC are lacking. OBJECTIVE:To systematically review the literature related to factors associated with comprehension of and adherence to discharge instructions for CMC. DATA SOURCES/METHODS:PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycInfo, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science (database initiation until March 2023), and OAIster (gray literature) were searched. STUDY SELECTION/METHODS:Original studies examining caregiver comprehension of and adherence to discharge instructions for CMC (Patient Medical Complexity Algorithm) were evaluated. DATA EXTRACTION/METHODS:Two authors independently screened titles/abstracts and reviewed full-text articles. Two authors extracted data related to study characteristics, methodology, subjects, and results. RESULTS:Fifty-one studies were included. More than half were qualitative or mixed methods studies. Few interventional studies examined objective outcomes. More than half of studies examined instructions for equipment (eg, tracheostomies). Common issues related to access, care coordination, and stress/anxiety. Facilitators included accounting for family context and using health literacy-informed strategies. LIMITATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:No randomized trials met inclusion criteria. Several groups (eg, oncologic diagnoses, NICU patients) were not examined in this review. CONCLUSIONS:Multiple factors affect comprehension of and adherence to discharge instructions for CMC. Several areas (eg, appointments, feeding tubes) were understudied. Future work should focus on design of interventions to optimize transitions.
PMCID:10598634
PMID: 37846504
ISSN: 1098-4275
CID: 5605632
