Jennifer Andersen

Dr. Jennifer Andersen

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

10Years (2017-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
2 July 2021 in Clinical and Translational Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DWDon Willis
Don Willis
JAJennifer Andersen
Jennifer Andersen
KBKeneshia Bryant‐Moore
Keneshia Bryant‐Moore
JSJames P. Selig
James P. Selig
CLChristopher R. Long
Christopher R. Long
PMPearl A. McElfish
Pearl A. McElfish
Understanding and minimizing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) vaccine hesitancy is critical to population health and minimizing health inequities, which continue to be brought into stark relief by the pandemic. We investigate questions regarding vaccine hesitancy in a sample (n = 1205) of Arkansas adults surveyed online in July/August of 2020. We examine relationships among sociodemographics, COVID‐19 health literacy, fear of COVID‐19 infection, general trust in vaccines, and COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy using bivariate analysis and a full information maximum likelihood (FIML) logistic regression model. One in five people (21,21.86%) reported hesitancy to take a COVID‐19 vaccine. Prevalence of COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy was highest among Black/African Americans (50.00%), respondents with household income less than $25K (30.68%), some college (32.17%), little to no fear of infection from COVID‐19 (62.50%), and low trust in vaccines in general (55.84%). Odds of COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy were 2.42 greater for Black/African American respondents compared to White respondents (p < 0.001), 1.67 greater for respondents with some college/technical degree compared to respondents with a 4‐year degree (p < 0.05), 5.48 greater for respondents with no fear of COVID‐19 infection compared to those who fear infection to a great extent (p < 0.001), and 11.32 greater for respondents with low trust in vaccines (p < 0.001). Sociodemographic differences in COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy raise concerns about the potential of vaccine implementation to widen existing health disparities in COVID‐19 related infections, particularly among Black/African Americans. Fear of infection and general mistrust in vaccines are significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy.

PMPearl A. McElfish
Pearl A. McElfish
RPRachel Purvis
Rachel Purvis
LJLaura P. James
Laura P. James
DWDon Willis
Don Willis
JAJennifer Andersen
Jennifer Andersen
(1) Background: Prior studies have documented that access to testing has not been equitable across all communities in the US, with less testing availability and lower testing rates documented in rural counties and lower income communities. However, there is limited understanding of the perceived barriers to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) testing. The purpose of this study was to document the perceived barriers to COVID-19 testing. (2) Methods: Arkansas residents were recruited using a volunteer research participant registry. Participants were asked an open-ended question regarding their perceived barriers to testing. A qualitative descriptive analytical approach was used. (3) Results: Overall, 1221 people responded to the open-ended question. The primary barriers to testing described by participants were confusion and uncertainty regarding testing guidelines and where to go for testing, lack of accessible testing locations, perceptions that the nasal swab method was too painful, and long wait times for testing results. (4) Conclusions: This study documents participant reported barriers to COVID-19 testing. Through the use of a qualitative descriptive method, participants were able to discuss their concerns in their own words. This work provides important insights that can help public health leaders and healthcare providers with understanding and mitigating barriers to COVID-19 testing.

26 July 2022 in Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MNMarie-Rachelle Narcisse
Marie-Rachelle Narcisse
JAJennifer Andersen
Jennifer Andersen
HFHolly C Felix
Holly C Felix
CHCorey J Hayes
Corey J Hayes
HEHari Eswaran
Hari Eswaran
PMPearl A. McElfish
Pearl A. McElfish
Introduction: During the COVID-19 pandemic, health care shifted to virtual interactions with health professionals. The aim of this study was to examine the determinants of telehealth use in a nationally representative sample of the United States adult population. Methods: The study used data from the 2020 National Health Interview Survey of 17,582 respondents aged ≥18. Andersen’s model of health services utilization was employed to examine predisposing, enabling, and needs factors associated with past-year telehealth use. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to examine statistical associations. Results: 32.5% of adults ( n = 6402; mean age 51.6, SE = 0.4) reported telehealth use. Predisposing factors: Women and married/partnered adults and those with higher levels of education had greater odds of using telehealth. Adults living in Midwest and South and adults living in medium-small and non-metropolitan areas had decreased odds of using telehealth. Enabling factors: Income and having a usual source of care were positively associated with telehealth use. A negative association was found for those with no insurance and telehealth use, whereas a positive association was found for military insurance. Needs factors: Odds of using telehealth were increased for adults who had well-visits and ER visits in the past 12 months. Mental health services quadrupled the odds of telehealth use. Odds of using telehealth increased with each additional chronic disease, including COVID-19. Conclusion: There are disparities in telehealth use according to sex, education, rurality, access to care, and health needs. Tackling these disparities is pivotal to ensure barriers to telehealth use are not exacerbated post-pandemic.

8 January 2021 in Telemedicine and e-Health
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JAJennifer Andersen
Jennifer Andersen
DSDylan Scoggins
Dylan Scoggins
TMTzeyu Michaud
Tzeyu Michaud
NWNeng Wan
Neng Wan
MWMing Wen
Ming Wen
DSDejun Su
Dejun Su
Introduction:Despite growing documentation of the efficacy of telemedicine in diabetes management, racial disparities in telemedicine-facilitated diabetes management remain underexplored. This study examined disparities in diabetes management outcomes between black and white patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in a remote monitoring program. Methods:The analysis sample included 914 white T2D patients and 365 black T2D patients in Nebraska who completed a 3-month remote patient monitoring and coaching after hospital discharge from 2014 to 2017. Ordinary least squares regression was estimated to examine racial differences in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and logistic regression was used to determine the odds of HbA1c > 9% at the end of the program, controlling for demographics, baseline health conditions, and patient activation and engagement with the program. Results:The proportion of white patients with HbA1c > 9% was reduced from 16% at the baseline to 7% at program completion, and the corresponding reduction among black patients was from 30% to 18%. After adjusting for the effects of baseline HbA1c and other covariates, the average HbA1c among black patients at the end of the program was 0.23 points higher than that among white patients (p < 0.01), and the adjusted odds of black patients having HbA1c > 9% was 1.68 times that of white patients (95% confidence interval [1.07–2.63]). Discussion:The remote patient monitoring and coaching program reduced the absolute gap between black and white T2D patients. However, substantial racial disparities in HbA1c still remained at the end of the program and warranted further research.

4 May 2022 in Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
DWDon Willis
Don Willis
MSMario Schootman
Mario Schootman
SSSumit K. Shah
Sumit K. Shah
SRSharon Reece
Sharon Reece
JSJames P. Selig
James P. Selig
PMPearl A. McElfish
Pearl A. McElfish
Vaccination is critical for protecting adults and children from COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and death. Analyzing subsamples of parent/guardians of children age 0–11 (n = 343) and 12–17 (n = 322) from a larger national survey of US adults (n = 2,022), we aimed to assess intentions to vaccinate children and how intentions might vary across parent/guardian sociodemographic characteristics, healthcare coverage, vaccination status, political affiliation, prior COVID-19 infection, exposure to COVID-19 death(s) of family or friends, perceived norms of vaccination, and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. We also report the prevalence of vaccinated children for parents whose oldest child was eligible for vaccination at the time of the survey. More than one third of parents whose oldest child was not yet eligible for vaccination (11 or younger) planned to get them vaccinated right away when a vaccine became available to them. Among parents whose child was eligible to be vaccinated (age 12–17 years), approximately a third reported their child had already been vaccinated and approximately a third planned to do so right away. Intentions to vaccinate children age 0 to 11 were significantly associated with age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, COVID-19 vaccination, political affiliation, social norms, and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Intentions to vaccinate children age 12 to 17 were significantly associated with age, education, healthcare coverage, COVID-19 vaccination, political affiliation, social norms, and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. We discuss implications for public health officials and for future research.

13 June 2021 in Arthritis Care & Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JMJulia T. McQuillan
Julia T. McQuillan
JAJennifer Andersen
Jennifer Andersen
TBTerceira A. Berdahl
Terceira A. Berdahl
JWJeff Willett
Jeff Willett