Greenberg, Alexandra J.

Objective: During the past decade, the availability of health information online has increased dramatically. We assessed progress toward the Healthy People 2020 (HP2020) health communication and health information technology objective of increasing the proportion of health information seekers who easily access health information online. Methods: We used data from 4 administrations of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 2008-2017) (N = 18 103). We conducted multivariable logistic regression analysis to evaluate trends over time in experiences with accessing health information and to examine differences by sociodemographic variables (sex, age, race/ethnicity, education, income, metropolitan status) separately for those who used the internet (vs other information sources) during their most recent search for health information. Results: Among US adults who looked for health information and used the internet for their most recent search, the percentage who reported accessing health information without frustration was stable during the study period (from 37.2% in 2008 to 38.5% in 2017). Accessing information online without frustration was significantly and independently associated with age 35-49 (vs age 18-34) (odds ratio [OR] = 1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03 -1.73), non-Hispanic black (vs non-Hispanic white) race/ethnicity (OR = 2.15; 95% CI, 1.55-2.97), and annual household income <$20 000 (vs >$75 000) (OR = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47-0.93). The percentage of adults who used an information source other than the internet and reported accessing health information online without frustration ranged from 31.3% in 2008 to 42.7% in 2017. Survey year 2017 (vs 2008) (OR = 1.61; 95% CI, 1.09-2.35) and high school graduate education (vs college graduate) (OR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.49-0.97) were significantly and independently associated with accessing health information without frustration from sources other than the internet. Conclusions: The percentage of online health information seekers reporting easily accessing health information did not meet the HP2020 objective. Continued efforts are needed to enable easy access to online health information among diverse populations.

Problem Case-based learning is an established means of educating students in law, business, and medicine; however, this methodology is not often applied to educating translational biomedical researchers. The application of case-based learning to translational biomedical research education allows scholars to actively engage with real-world material and apply their newfound knowledge as it is acquired. Approach Through the Mayo Clinic Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCaTS), three courses were delivered in 2009–2017 which emphasized case-based learning in clinical and translational science, entrepreneurship, and individualized medicine. Quantitative measures collected in student course reviews upon course completion were analyzed. Additionally, products arising from each course were identified, including publications and startups pitched. Outcomes Analyses demonstrate that case-based learning techniques are well suited to graduate biomedical research education. Furthermore, case studies can be employed throughout the entire clinical and translational spectrum, from basic and preclinical work through to clinical and population-based learning. Next Steps Within CCaTS, next steps include creating case-based courses in regulatory and team science to continue to allow scholars to learn and apply these critical skills to real-world material. The goal is to continue to provide immersive training opportunities in areas of clinical and translational science that cannot be readily learned in a traditional lecture-based class setting.

Abstract Introduction: Many forms of cancer screening involve imaging technologies utilizing radiation. Broad media coverage of radiation-related health risks may shape the public's perceptions of imaging-based cancer screening, such as mammography. In turn, this may impact patient outcomes by affecting cancer screening decisions. Our primary aim was to evaluate population differences in beliefs about medical radiation exposure in the United States and associations with mammography screening rates in women. Methods: We analyzed data from the National Cancer Institute's Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) 2012 administration. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to evaluate associations of sex, ethnicity, age, annual income, and education with perceptions of harm from medical test radiation exposure. Additional analyses evaluated the role of radiation perception on compliance with current mammography screening recommendations from the United States Preventive Services Task Force. Results: Approximately one-third of respondents indicated that they worried about medical imaging-related radiation exposure. Respondents who perceived medical imaging radiation as harmful to health were more likely to be female, be diagnosed with cancer, have less formal education, report lower socioeconomic status, and identify as an ethnic minority. Most female participants were not in compliance with current breast cancer screening recommendations (weighted percentage = 83.8%). Annual income (p = 0.042) and ethnicity (p = 0.0478) were two variables that were significantly associated with adherence to the recommended mammography screening paradigm. Women without health insurance were more likely to worry about medical imaging-related radiation (p=0.073). Neither health insurance (95%CI = 0.29, 4.99) nor excess worry about radiation exposure from medical imaging devices (95%CI=0.42, 1.89) predicted compliance to mammography screening, after adjusting for relevant sociodemographic variables. Conclusions: These results indicate that some populations may be more concerned about harm from medical device-related radiation than others. Identifying these populations may help improve future cancer patient outcomes by promoting targeted health interventions and communication strategies for these individuals. Women may be more likely to perceive medical imaging radiation exposure as harmful to health, however this alone could not account for why the majority of female respondents were not adhering to recommended mammograms screening guidelines. Future studies are needed to identify the major contributor to low breast cancer screening rates in the United States. Citation Format: Kekoa Taparra, Kay M. Pepin, Alexandra J. Greenberg-Worisek. Associations between perceived medical device-related radiation harm and adherence to mammography screening guidelines [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 4241.