Article

Beyond the cathedral: building trust to engage the African American community in health promotion and disease prevention.

Center for Minority Health (CMH) at the Graduate School of Public Health (GSPH), University of Pittsburgh. .
Health Promotion Practice (Impact Factor: 0.55). 10/2009; 10(4):485-9. DOI: 10.1177/1524839909342848
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Effective efforts to eliminate health disparities must be grounded in strong community partnerships and trusting relationships between academic institutions and minority communities. However, there are often barriers to such efforts, including the frequent need to rely on time-limited funding mechanisms that take categorical approaches. This article provides an overview of health promotion and disease prevention projects implemented through the Community Outreach and Information Dissemination Core (COID) of the Center for Minority Health, within the Graduate School of Public Health at the University of Pittsburgh. The COID is one of five Cores that comprised the University of Pittsburgh's NIH Excellence in Partnerships for Community Outreach, and Research on Disparities in Health and Training (EXPORT Health) funded from 2002 to 2007 by the National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities. Based in large part on the success of the community engagement activities, in 2007, the National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities, National Institutes of Health, designated the CMH as a Research Center of Excellence on Minority Health Disparities. COID major initiatives included the Community Research Advisory Board, Health Disparity Working Groups, Health Advocates in Reach, Healthy Class of 2010, and the Healthy Black Family Project. Lessons learned may provide guidance to other academic institutions, community-based organizations, and health departments who seek to engage minority communities in changing social norms to support health promotion and disease prevention.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
112 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to identify parent and child characteristics which could influence par-ent satisfaction with preventive health services designed to detect preschool children with speech and language (SL) delay. This study was conducted on 101 children aged 18 to 36 months who participated in an organized SL delay early detection program. Validated instruments were used to assess children's and parents' charac-teristics. Satisfaction was evaluated using the client satisfaction questionnaire for the three activities of the program: 1) a public information session about SL development, 2) parent train-ing sessions for parents concerned by their child SL development, and 3) a child's SL assessment. Multiple logistic regressions were used to iden-tify all independent factors (p < 0.05) associated with satisfaction and to estimate the odds ratios (OR) for satisfaction. Economically disadvan-taged parents were less prone to participate in the first two activities of the early detection pro-gram. Older parents were more satisfied with the public information session (OR = 1.33 for 1 year increment; p = 0.001). Distressed parents were less satisfied with both the parent training sessions (OR = 0.28; p = 0.009) and the SL as-sessment (OR = 0.43; p = 0.046). Parents whose child had health problems at birth were less sa-tisfied with the public information session (OR = 0.14, p = 0.03) and the SL assessment (OR = 0.33, p = 0.036). There is a need to better adapt the delivery of preventive services for the early de-tection of SL delay, especially for disadvantaged and distressed parents and for those whose child had suffered from health problems at birth.
    Open Journal of Preventive Medicine 10/2011; 1(3):135-142.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Few studies examine the use of family history to influence risk perceptions in the African American population. This study examined the influence of a family health history (FHH) intervention on risk perceptions for breast (BRCA), colon (CRC), and prostate cancers (PRCA) among African Americans in Pittsburgh, PA. Participants (n = 665) completed pre- and post-surveys and FHHs. We compared their objective and perceived risks, classified as average, moderate, or high, and examined the accuracy of risk perceptions before and after the FHH intervention. The majority of participants had accurate risk perceptions post-FHH. Of those participants who were inaccurate pre-FHH, 43.3%, 43.8%, and 34.5% for BRCA, CRC, and PRCA, respectively, adopted accurate risk perceptions post-FHH intervention. The intervention was successful in a community setting. It has the potential to lead to healthy behavior modifications because participants adopted accurate risk perceptions. We identified a substantial number of at-risk individuals who could benefit from targeted prevention strategies, thus decreasing racial/ethnic cancer disparities.
    Journal of Genetic Counseling 07/2011; 20(6):639-49. · 1.45 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Because interventions developed in partnership with African American fathers not residing with their children are virtually non-existent, existing interventions fail to address the multiple factors that constrain these fathers' positive involvement with their children. We developed a videotape fatherhood intervention: Building Bridges to Fatherhood. In collaboration with a Fathers Advisory Council composed of 12 African American fathers, we used Aranda's framework for community-based nursing intervention development to design the intervention. Data from 13 focus group meetings show Advisory Council members' insights on program structure and content, fathers' commitment to their children and communities, and the benefits they garnered from Council participation. The implications for involving fathers in intervention development include using relevant language, vernacular, and interpersonal interactions. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Res Nurs Health 35:490-506, 2012.
    Research in Nursing & Health 06/2012; 35(5):490-506. · 2.18 Impact Factor