John Patena

Dr. John Patena

HealthRight International, New York, USA
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

14Years (2013-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 March 2016 in General Hospital Psychiatry
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MRMegan L. Ranney
Megan L. Ranney
John PatenaJohn Patena
John Patena
NNNicole Nugent
Nicole Nugent
ASAnthony Spirito
Anthony Spirito
EBEdward Boyer
Edward Boyer
RCRebecca Cunningham
Rebecca Cunningham

15 September 2021 in JMIR Mental Health
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
EKEmily R Kutok
Emily R Kutok
SDShira Dunsiger
Shira Dunsiger
John PatenaJohn Patena
John Patena
NNNicole Nugent
Nicole Nugent
ARAlison Riese
Alison Riese
MRMegan L Ranney
Megan L Ranney
Background: Between 15% and 70% of adolescents report experiencing cybervictimization. Cybervictimization is associated with multiple negative consequences, including depressed mood. Few validated, easily disseminated interventions exist to prevent cybervictimization and its consequences. With over 97% of adolescents using social media (such as YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, or Snapchat), recruiting and delivering a prevention intervention through social media and apps may improve accessibility of prevention tools for at-risk youth. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of and obtain preliminary outcome data on IMPACT (Intervention Media to Prevent Adolescent Cyber-Conflict Through Technology), a brief, remote app-based intervention to prevent and reduce the effect of cyberbullying. Methods: From January 30, 2020, to May 3, 2020, a national sample of 80 adolescents with a history of past-year cybervictimization was recruited through Instagram for a randomized control trial of IMPACT, a brief, remote research assistant–led intervention and a fully automated app-based program, versus enhanced web-based resources (control). Feasibility and acceptability were measured by consent, daily use, and validated surveys. Although not powered for efficacy, outcomes (victimization, bystander self-efficacy, and well-being) were measured using validated measures at 8 and 16 weeks and evaluated using a series of longitudinal mixed models. Results: Regarding feasibility, 24.5% (121/494) of eligible participants provided contact information; of these, 69.4% (84/121) completed full enrollment procedures. Of the participants enrolled, 45% (36/80) were randomized into the IMPACT intervention and 55% (44/80) into the enhanced web-based resources groups. All participants randomized to the intervention condition completed the remote intervention session, and 89% (77/80) of the daily prompts were answered. The retention rate was 99% (79/80) at 8 weeks and 96% (77/80) at 16 weeks for all participants. Regarding acceptability, 100% (36/36) of the intervention participants were at least moderately satisfied with IMPACT overall, and 92% (33/36) of the participants were at least moderately satisfied with the app. At both 8 and 16 weeks, well-being was significantly higher (β=1.17, SE 0.87, P=.02 at 8 weeks and β=3.24, SE 0.95, P<.001 at 16 weeks) and psychological stress was lower (β=−.66, SE 0.08, P=.04 at 8 weeks and β=−.89, SE 0.09, P<.001 at 16 weeks) among IMPACT users than among control group users. Participants in the intervention group attempted significantly more bystander interventions than those in the control group at 8 weeks (β=.82, SE 0.42; P=.02). Conclusions: This remote app-based intervention for victims of cyberbullying was feasible and acceptable, increased overall well-being and bystander interventions, and decreased psychological stress. Our findings are especially noteworthy given that the trial took place during the COVID-19 pandemic. The use of Instagram to recruit adolescents can be a successful strategy for identifying and intervening with those at the highest risk of cybervictimization. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04259216; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04259216.

19 September 2022 in JMIR mHealth and uHealth
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
HFHamish S F Fraser
Hamish S F Fraser
GCGregory Cohan
Gregory Cohan
CKChristopher Koehler
Christopher Koehler
JAJared Anderson
Jared Anderson
ALAlexis Lawrence
Alexis Lawrence
MRMegan L Ranney
Megan L Ranney
Background: Symptom checkers are clinical decision support apps for patients, used by tens of millions of people annually. They are designed to provide diagnostic and triage advice and assist users in seeking the appropriate level of care. Little evidence is available regarding their diagnostic and triage accuracy with direct use by patients for urgent conditions. Objective: The aim of this study is to determine the diagnostic and triage accuracy and usability of a symptom checker in use by patients presenting to an emergency department (ED). Methods: We recruited a convenience sample of English-speaking patients presenting for care in an urban ED. Each consenting patient used a leading symptom checker from Ada Health before the ED evaluation. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated by comparing the symptom checker’s diagnoses and those of 3 independent emergency physicians viewing the patient-entered symptom data, with the final diagnoses from the ED evaluation. The Ada diagnoses and triage were also critiqued by the independent physicians. The patients completed a usability survey based on the Technology Acceptance Model. Results: A total of 40 (80%) of the 50 participants approached completed the symptom checker assessment and usability survey. Their mean age was 39.3 (SD 15.9; range 18-76) years, and they were 65% (26/40) female, 68% (27/40) White, 48% (19/40) Hispanic or Latino, and 13% (5/40) Black or African American. Some cases had missing data or a lack of a clear ED diagnosis; 75% (30/40) were included in the analysis of diagnosis, and 93% (37/40) for triage. The sensitivity for at least one of the final ED diagnoses by Ada (based on its top 5 diagnoses) was 70% (95% CI 54%-86%), close to the mean sensitivity for the 3 physicians (on their top 3 diagnoses) of 68.9%. The physicians rated the Ada triage decisions as 62% (23/37) fully agree and 24% (9/37) safe but too cautious. It was rated as unsafe and too risky in 22% (8/37) of cases by at least one physician, in 14% (5/37) of cases by at least two physicians, and in 5% (2/37) of cases by all 3 physicians. Usability was rated highly; participants agreed or strongly agreed with the 7 Technology Acceptance Model usability questions with a mean score of 84.6%, although “satisfaction” and “enjoyment” were rated low. Conclusions: This study provides preliminary evidence that a symptom checker can provide acceptable usability and diagnostic accuracy for patients with various urgent conditions. A total of 14% (5/37) of symptom checker triage recommendations were deemed unsafe and too risky by at least two physicians based on the symptoms recorded, similar to the results of studies on telephone and nurse triage. Larger studies are needed of diagnosis and triage performance with direct patient use in different clinical environments.

25 October 2023 in Frontiers in Health Services
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
SSShivani Shenoy
Shivani Shenoy
PSPriyanka Sharma
Priyanka Sharma
ARAishwarya Rao
Aishwarya Rao
NANusrat Aparna
Nusrat Aparna
DADeborah Adenikinju
Deborah Adenikinju
Emmanuel Kwame PeprahEmmanuel Kwame Peprah
Emmanuel Kwame Peprah
Introduction: Despite remarkable strides in global efforts to reduce maternal mortality, low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) continue to grapple with a disproportionate burden of maternal mortality, with malnutrition emerging as a significant contributing factor to this enduring challenge. Shockingly, malnourished women face a mortality risk that is twice as high as their well-nourished counterparts, and a staggering 95% of maternal deaths in 2020 occurred within LMICs. The critical importance of addressing maternal malnutrition in resource-constrained settings cannot be overstated, as compelling research studies have demonstrated that such efforts could potentially save thousands of lives. However, the landscape is marred by a scarcity of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) specifically tailored for pregnant individuals aimed at combatting maternal malnutrition and reducing mortality rates. It is against this backdrop that our study endeavors to dissect the feasibility, adoption, sustainability, and cost-effectiveness of EBIs designed to combat maternal malnutrition.Methods: Our comprehensive search encompassed eight prominent databases covering the period from 2003 to 2022 in LMICs. We began our study with a comprehensive search across multiple databases, yielding a total of 149 studies. From this initial pool, we eliminated duplicate entries and the remaining studies underwent a thorough screening process resulting in the identification of 63 full-text articles that aligned with our predefined inclusion criteria.Results: The meticulous full-text review left us with a core selection of six articles that shed light on interventions primarily centered around supplementation. They underscored a critical issue -the limited understanding of effective implementation in these countries, primarily attributed to inadequate monitoring and evaluation of interventions and insufficient training of healthcare professionals. Moreover, our findings emphasize the pivotal role of contextual factors, such as cultural nuances, public trust in healthcare, the prevalence of misinformation, and concerns regarding potential adverse effects of interventions, which profoundly influence the successful implementation of these programs.Discussion: While the EBIs have shown promise in reducing maternal malnutrition, their true potential for feasibility, adoption, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability hinges on their integration into comprehensive programs addressing broader issues like food insecurity and the prevention of both communicable and non-communicable diseases.

AKArvin Brandon Karbasi
Arvin Brandon Karbasi
Judy FordjuohJudy Fordjuoh
Judy Fordjuoh
MAMentalla Abbas
Mentalla Abbas
CIChukwuemeka Iloegbu
Chukwuemeka Iloegbu
John PatenaJohn Patena
John Patena
Emmanuel Kwame PeprahEmmanuel Kwame Peprah
Emmanuel Kwame Peprah
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region is severely understudied despite the region’s increase in new HIV infections since 2010. A key population that is particularly affected, due to the lack of adequate knowledge and proper interventional implementation, includes people who inject drugs (PWID). Furthermore, the paucity of HIV data (prevalence and trends) worsens an already critical situation in this region. A scoping review was conducted to address the scarcity of information and to synthesize the available data on HIV prevalence rates within the key population of PWID throughout the MENA region. Information was sourced from major public health databases and world health reports. Of the 1864 articles screened, 40 studies discussed the various factors contributing to the under-reporting of HIV data in the MENA region among PWID. High and overlapping risk behaviors were cited as the most prevalent reason why HIV trends were incomprehensible and hard to characterize among PWID, followed by lack of service utilization, lack of intervention-based programs, cultural norms, lack of advanced HIV surveillance systems, and protracted humanitarian emergencies. Overall, the lack of reported information limits any adequate response to the growing and unknown HIV trends throughout the region.

1 November 2021 in Journal of Adolescent Health
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
EKEmily R. Kutok
Emily R. Kutok
NDNicole Doria
Nicole Doria
SDShira Dunsiger
Shira Dunsiger
John PatenaJohn Patena
John Patena
NNNicole R. Nugent
Nicole R. Nugent
MRMegan L. Ranney
Megan L. Ranney