Although Asian women immigrants to the USA rarely disclose intimate partner violence, local research indicates that among them domestic abuse is prevalent. This study aimed to determine the main psychosocial barriers and enablers to disclosure among Asian-American women in California, and whether barriers outweighed benefits. We used a novel qualitative methodology of indirect and direct questioning with sixty married women from four ethnicities (Korean, Chinese, Thai and Vietnamese). Overall, barriers to disclosure were more compelling and tangible than enablers, particularly among Mandarin Chinese and Korean speakers. Five main barriers were found: victim-blaming, beliefs in female inferiority and male dominance, familial shame, individual shame and fear of undesirable consequences. Only extreme violence and the need to protect children from harm were seen as warranting disclosure. As as result, health and other providers’ encouragement of disclosure is unlikely to be sufficient to achieve behavioural change. Abused Asian immigrant women need anonymous ways of obtaining professional counselling, information and resources. In addition, community-level awareness programmes in Asian languages are needed to reduce victim-blaming and misinformation.

Introduction: The Health Belief Model (HBM) has been successfully applied to understanding adherence to COVID-19 prevention practices. It has not, however, been used to understand behavior in people who use drugs (PWUD). The aim of this study was to use the HBM to better understand COVID-19 perceptions among PWUD and understand how resiliency affects those perceptions.Materials and methods: A cross-sectional survey was completed from September to December 2021 with PWUD (n = 75) who utilize services at a large harm reduction organization in Philadelphia. Segmentation analysis was done using a k-means clustering approach. Two clusters emerged based on perceived COVID-19 personal impact and resiliency (Less COVID impact/High resilience (NoCOV/HR) and High COVID impact/Low resilience (COV/LR). Differences in responses by cluster to perceptions of COVID-19 and individual pandemic response grouped by HBM constructs were assessed using Student’s t-test and chi squares.Results: Significant differences in HBM constructs were seen between clusters. Those in the COV/LR cluster were more likely to think they were susceptible to getting COVID-19 and less likely to believe they knew how to protect themselves. The NoCOV/HR cluster believed they were able to protect themselves from COVID-19 and that they were able to easily understand messages about protecting themselves.Conclusion: Understanding how PWUD conceptualize disease threat and using HBM can better inform interventions to improve future pandemic response. Findings suggest that resilience is key to protecting PWUD from future infectious disease outbreaks. Interventions aimed at increasing resiliency among PWUD may improve preventative behavior and decrease disease burden in this vulnerable population.

Background: Women who inject drugs (WWID) have significant biological, behavioral, and gender-based barriers to accessing HIV prevention services, including Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) medication. Little is known about how beliefs about PrEP impact both perceived barriers and benefits of PrEP use and how they may be related to the decision-making process. Methods: Surveys were conducted with 100 female clients of a large syringe services program in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The sample was categorized into three groups based on mean PrEP beliefs scores using terciles: accurate beliefs, moderately accurate beliefs, and inaccurate beliefs. Oneway ANOVA tests were used to compare groups by perceived benefits and barriers to PrEP, drug use stigma, healthcare beliefs, patient self-advocacy, and intention to use PrEP. Results: Participants had a mean age of 39 years (SD 9.00), 66% reported being White, 74% finished high school, and 80% reported having been homeless within the past 6 months. Those with the most accurate PrEP beliefs reported highest intent to use PrEP and were more likely to agree that benefits of PrEP included it preventing HIV and helping them “feel in charge”. Those with inaccurate beliefs were more likely to strongly agree that barriers, such as fear of reprisal from a partner, potential theft, or feeling they “might get HIV anyway”, were reasons not to use PrEP. Conclusions: Results indicate perceived personal, interpersonal and structural barriers to PrEP use are associated with accuracy of beliefs is, pointing to important intervention targets to increase uptake among WWID.

Purpose: Black women with breast cancer experience a 40% higher mortality rate compared to white women, and this disparity may be influenced by suboptimal patient-provider communication. Evidence has suggested that Black patients with breast cancer have unique informational needs, yet few studies focus on patient-provider communication for this community. The aim of this scoping review was to identify best practices for communicating breast cancer diagnosis and treatment options with Black women. Methods: Following PRISMA-ScR, a search strategy was developed and implemented in 4 databases and grey literature. Coders achieved reliability and independently screened articles by title and abstract, then full-text. Articles were included if they studied Black patients with breast cancer and reported on patient-provider communication. Outcomes of interest included patients’ appraisals of their communication, and associated health outcomes. Results: A final sample of 27 studies were included. Black patients’ positive appraisal of their providers was based on their interactions, rather than providers' perceived expertise. Patients had negative appraisal of communication when they received limited information regarding their treatment plan, side-effects, or possibility of disease recurrence. High-quality communication was associated with adherence to adjuvant therapy; low-quality communication was associated with treatment discontinuation or delay, and lower self-rating of physical well-being. Conclusion: Patients’ perceptions of their quality of communication with their healthcare providers was associated with their treatment decisions and health outcomes. Future research is needed to test interventions that optimize communication between Black breast cancer patients and their providers, including discussing navigating barriers to care.

Underlying causes of vaccine hesitancy could significantly affect successful uptake of the SARS-CoV2 vaccine booster doses during new waves of COVID-19. Booster rates among US adults are far below what is needed for immunity, but little is known about booster hesitancy among fully vaccinated adults and whether medical mistrust exacerbates barriers to uptake. A cross-sectional survey was completed among 119 adults in Philadelphia, PA who reported having received the primary SARS-CoV2 vaccine series but not a booster dose. Using the LaVeist Medical Mistrust (MM) Index, a k-means cluster analysis showed two clusters (Low MM, High MM) and differences in attitudes and perceptions about COVID-19 booster vaccines were assessed using F-tests. Respondents were 62% Black and female; mean age was 41; 46% reported earning less than $25,000 and 53% had a high school education or less. Overall intention to get boosted was low (mean 3.3 on 0-10 scale). Differences in COVID-19 booster perceptions between those with High (n = 56) vs. Low (n = 59) MM were found, independent of any demographic differences. Most statements (7/10) related to reasons to not be boosted were significant, with those with High MM indicating more concern about feeling sick from the vaccine (F=-3.91, p≤ .001), beliefs that boosters are ineffective for vaccinated people (F= -3.46, p≤ .001), and long-term side effect worries (F=-4.34, p≤ .001). Those with High MM were also more concerned about the adverse effects of the vaccine (F=-2.48, p=.02), but were more likely to trust getting information from doctors or healthcare providers (F= -2.25, p=.03). Results indicate that medical mistrust is an important independent construct when understanding current COVID-19 booster hesitancy. While much work has looked at demographic differences to explain vaccine hesitancy, these results suggest that further research into understanding and addressing medical mistrust could be important for implementing interventions to increase booster rates.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is well documented, but less is known about booster hesitancy among fully vaccinated adults. A qualitative approach was employed to identify factors affecting COVID-19 booster hesitancy using diffusion of innovation (DoI) theory. The study was conducted in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. In-depth interviews (n = 30) were done with adults, including those who had (n = 9) and had not (n = 21) been boosted. Participants were categorized into DoI adopter groups or a “refuser” group for those with no intention of getting boosted. Transcripts were analyzed using an iterative coding process with consensus and triangulation to develop thematic categories. Participants had a mean age of 41 and were 63.3% Black; 20% were classified as innovators, 6.7% early adopters, 3.3% early majority, 6.7% late majority, 43.3% laggards and 20% refusers. Three themes varied across groups: level of perceived risk susceptibility of getting COVID-19 in the future, information needs and levels of vaccine literacy, and effects of ongoing institutional mistrust. Those in the laggard and refuser groups generally had lower vaccine literacy, higher levels of institutional mistrust, and were more likely to listen to friends and family for booster advice, all consistent with DoI adopter characteristics. These differences indicate important intervention targets to promote booster uptake, especially in those who have been previously vaccinated.