Access to healthcare for adolescents is often overlooked in the United States due to federal and state-sponsored insurance programs such as Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program. While these types of programs provide some relief, the issue of healthcare access goes beyond insurance coverage and includes an array of ecological factors that hinder youths from receiving services. The purpose of this scoping review was to identify social-ecological barriers to adolescents’ healthcare access and utilization in the United States. We followed the PRISMA and scoping review methodological framework to conduct a comprehensive literature search in eight electronic databases for peer-reviewed articles published between 2010 and 2020. An inductive content analysis was performed to thematize the categories identified in the data extraction based on the Social-Ecological Model (SEM). Fifty studies were identified. Barriers across the five SEM levels emerged as primary themes within the literature, including intrapersonal-limited knowledge of and poor previous experiences with healthcare services, interpersonal-cultural and linguistic barriers, organizational-structural barriers in healthcare systems, community-social stigma, and policy-inadequate insurance coverage. Healthcare access for adolescents is a systems-level problem requiring a multifaceted approach that considers complex and adaptive behaviors.

Students who are parents in higher education (HE) in the United States encounter competing demands and challenges while navigating multiple roles as parents, students, and employees. These challenges are multifaceted and can hinder their degree attainment. Using the socio-ecological model, we systematically summarised existing literature published between 2009–2020 to understand the experiences and predictors of student-parents academic outcomes in HE. The reviewed articles included students from two-year and four-year institutions (community college, undergraduates, and graduate students). The analysis revealed that the constraints to student-parents academic success are a system-level problem. Most of the barriers and facilitators identified were related to structural policies adopted by HE. This study concludes with recommendations for future research, policymakers, and the school ecosystem.

Contraceptive use is deemed one of the 10 greatest public health achievements of the 20th century because its benefits are universally acknowledged as a cornerstone for reducing global maternal morbidity and mortality. However, although the adoption of the Affordable Care Act in the United States (US) enhanced access to preventive health services, as well as increased contraceptive use, a considerable proportion of reproductive-aged women still have unmet reproductive health needs. Current data indicates gaps in contraceptive use patterns in the US, particularly among low-income women and those from racial/ethnic and gender minority subgroups, necessitating further investigation using an ecological approach. This narrative literature review aims to investigate the current perspective of contraceptive use in the US using the social-ecological model (SEM). Based on SEM levels, barriers to contraceptive use entail the following levels: individual (e.g., misbelief about the side effects of contraceptives), interpersonal (e.g., influence of family and friends), institutional (e.g., lack of training on how to use different types of contraceptives), community (e.g., societal stigma and shame), and policy (e.g., restrictive federal and states policies). Access to contraceptives for women is a system-level issue that necessitates consideration for multilevel strategies by key stakeholders to improve contraceptive uptake among vulnerable populations.

Collective impact (CI) is a structured approach that helps drive multi-sector collaborations to address social problems through systems changes. While the CI approach is gaining popularity, practitioners experience challenges in evaluating its implementation and intended outcomes. We conducted a systematic scoping review to understand evaluation methods specific to CI initiatives, identify challenges or limitations with these evaluations, and provide recommendations for the design of CI evaluations. Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Process evaluations were the most frequently used evaluation design. Most studies collected cross-sectional data to evaluate their efforts. The complexity of CI was most frequently cited as the greatest evaluation challenge. Study recommendations primarily focused on improvements during the evaluation planning phase. Taking careful consideration in the planning of CI evaluations, developing context-specific data collection methods, and communicating results intentionally and effectively could prove useful to sufficiently capture and assess this systems-level approach to address social problems.

This manuscript introduces a new framework for creating innovations in public health—the Framework for Public Health Innovation. The framework was developed through a longitudinal qualitative research study that investigated the process of creating innovative adolescent health programs. Interviews were conducted with a national sample of 26 organizations over two time points. Data collection focused on the process of innovative program development; organizational capacity; training; and technical assistance needs, successes, and barriers. The framework was developed and modified based on interview findings and expert advice; then, the final framework was validated with content experts. The framework illustrates a dynamic process of innovation that begins with dissatisfaction with the status quo, and then, illustrates three necessary components for innovation—space, process, and partnerships. Four categories of innovation, which range in complexity, are proposed: (1) creating a new component to an existing program, (2) adapting an existing program to meet new needs, (3) taking an alternative approach to addressing an existing program, and (4) reframing a health problem from a new perspective. As illustrated by a feedback loop, the resulting innovations disrupt the status quo. This model can be applied to any content area in public health and is useful for both research and practitioners.

The COVID-19 pandemic shed light on the burden of behavioral health conditions prevalent in the United States (U.S.). Consequently, there is a behavioral healthcare provider shortage, particularly in rural areas, to support this need. Recently, primary care providers (PCPs) have shifted to incorporate behavioral health to their practice. However, many PCPs lack knowledge and skills to successfully manage their patients’ behavioral health conditions. In response to the need for effective behavioral healthcare across the U.S. Weitzman ECHO launched the Advanced Primary Care (APC ECHO) Adult Psychiatry Module to provide continuing education (CE) for rural PCPs. This study presents the results from the APC ECHO pilot to demonstrate how CE can support PCPs in addressing their patients’ mental health needs. Evaluators used a one-group repeated measures study design to assess the APC ECHO Module and understand learner outcomes and individual practice changes. Participant characteristics and individual practice changes were summarized using descriptive statistics, with support from open-ended responses to illustrate findings. Repeated measures analyses of covariance were applied to compare the differences in pre- and post-module learner outcomes. A total of 18 providers participated in the study, with the majority encompassing medical providers (72.2%). There was a significant increase in knowledge (pre-module: 21.11 + 6.99; post-module: 25.08 + 5.66; p < .01), self-efficacy (pre-module: 6.89 + 3.05; post-module: 9.78 + 3.25; p < .01), and skills (pre-module: 7.67 + 4.03; post-module: 10.06 + 3.23; p < .05) gained over the duration of the ECHO module. Additionally, participants indicated they are applying best practices learned through the module to their patients experiencing psychiatric conditions (3.96 + 0.09). This study suggests that tailored CE for PCPs can promote an increase in knowledge, self-efficacy, and skills to apply best practices when treating patients with behavioral health conditions. This, in turn, allows patients to receive more comprehensive care and mitigates access barriers, especially for rural populations.