Allyse, Megan

Individuals with Down syndrome (DS) experience increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Recent studies suggest that a vaccine against AD may be forthcoming. Parental buy-in is critical to the success of any intervention in this population, as adults with DS often rely on familial support. This study aims to characterize parents’ perceptions of a hypothetical vaccine to prevent AD in individuals with DS. A mixed-methods, anonymous survey was distributed via social media. Participants were asked about their experiences with DS and reactions to proposed interventions. Open-ended responses were thematically analyzed using NVivo 12. Of 1,093 surveys initiated, 532 were completed. Of the parents sampled (N = 532), a small majority (54.3%), supported the proposed AD vaccine. All expressed the need for extensive pre-enrollment education and minimal risk. For many, limited research and long-term sequelae were concerns.

AbstractBackgroundBlack breast and ovarian cancer patients are underrepresented in clinical cancer trials disproportionate to the prevalence of these cancers in Black females. Historically, lower enrollment has been attributed to individualized factors, including medical mistrust, but more recently structural factors, including systemic racism, have received additional scrutiny. We interviewed Black women with a personal or family history of breast and ovarian cancer to understand their views and experiences related to research participation.MethodsQualitative interviews were conducted via telephone or video conference and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were qualitatively analyzed for iterative themes related to the offer and participation in cancer clinical trials and research studies, impact on cancer care, and recommendations to increase enrollment of Black patients.ResultsSixty‐one Black women completed an interview. Participants expressed that Black women are underrepresented in cancer research, and that this negatively impacted their own care. Many cited past historical abuses, including the Tuskegee syphilis trial, as a potential factor for lower enrollment but suggested that lower enrollment was better understood in the context of the entirety of their healthcare experiences, including present‐day examples of patient mistreatment or dismissal. Participants suggested that proactive community engagement, transparency, and increased representation of Black research team members were strategies likely to foster trust and bolster research participation.Conclusion(s)Medical mistrust is only a partial factor in the lower participation of Black patients in cancer research. Researchers should implement the strategies identified by our participants to promote diverse enrollment and ensure that Black patients are included in future therapeutic advances.

Abstract: Objective: Pediatric diagnoses of sex chromosome multisomies (SCMs) have increased as genetic testing has expanded. However, depending on SCM presentation, there may be significant delays between symptom recognition and diagnosis. We conducted a survey of parents of children diagnosed with SCMs to understand their experiences receiving an SCM diagnosis and their support needs. Methods: We conducted an inductive qualitative analysis of open-ended survey responses for iterative themes related to presenting symptoms, diagnostic odyssey, immediate and long-term support needs, and awareness of SCMs. Results: Of the 323 parents who completed the survey, 185 parents received a pediatric diagnosis (0–21 years) in a child. Many parents expressed feelings of relief when receiving the diagnosis, especially if it occurred after a lengthy diagnostic odyssey. Parents reported frustration that their child's nonmedical symptoms, including learning disabilities, speech delays, attention deficits, and behavioral issues, were not flagged as potential indications for SCMs and suggested that greater awareness of SCMs by pediatricians, educators, and other professionals involved in their child's care may lead to earlier diagnosis and intervention. Conclusion: This is the largest qualitative study to date examining parent and caregiver experiences with a pediatric diagnosis of SCMs. Increased knowledge and awareness of nonmedical SCM symptoms are needed among medical, education, occupational, and psychology professionals for early testing referral and improved support of children with SCMs.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionally affected historically marginalized populations and their access to resources and healthcare. In times of crisis, authentic community engagement is more important than ever. This study was Phase 1 of a larger 3-phase study to conduct timely community-engaged research with community members to understand the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on historically underserved communities. The objective of this work was to conduct key informant (KI) interviews (1) to understand community organizations perspectives about the role that large academic health centers play as they interface with community organizations to support their work, (2) to leverage KI’s expertise to identify needs and assets within the community, and (3) to inform both Phase 2 (focus group qualitative research) and Phase 3 (survey) of the broader study. Methods: A total of 24 key informants were identified through purposeful sampling and one-on-one semi-structured interviews were conducted across 4 states using video conferencing. Results: Barriers to access and lack of transparency were highlighted as major issues requiring reform—in particular, aggressive billing practices and insurance barriers exacerbated local distrust of medical institutions. KIs recognized the health institution’s support for testing and vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic, but noted other significant gaps in care, especially regarding mental health support. Although communication with the health institution was consistent for some KIs, others experienced unsustained communication efforts that hindered cooperation and relationship building. Conclusions: Leaders in the community as key stakeholders can provide unique insights into the challenges and potential solutions required to promote health equity, and foster understanding between local communities and healthcare institutions.

The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the healthcare system have been widespread, with many institutions in the United States pausing elective procedures to redirect resources to critical care. Fertility care and assisted reproductive procedures were classified as elective procedures and similarly paused. We conducted qualitative interviews with patients and/or their partners ( n = 25 female patients; n = 3 male partners) receiving care at a fertility clinic in the Midwest to understand patient appraisal of COVID-19 risk on the resumption of care following a month-long closure of an infertility clinic, and patient agreement with the clinic closure. Interview transcripts were thematically analyzed from a grounded theory approach. Study participants reported an increased sense of urgency due to the delay in fertility procedures. This urgency often superseded concerns of potential COVID-19 infection, motivating patients to continue fertility treatment during a pandemic. In hindsight, some participants did not agree with the clinic's closure and treatment cessation, feeling that these steps negatively interrupted time-sensitive reproductive goals. Patient responses highlight the need for additional resources to support decision-making during times of crisis. Triaging patients based on time-sensitivity of treatment instead of a total shutdown respects patient autonomy for continuing treatment amidst uncertain COVID-19-impact.

Abstract The practice of maternal-fetal surgery (MFS) has expanded from lethal fetal conditions to conditions which are significantly disabling but not a lethal fetal abnormality. The inclusion of myelomeningocele within the scope of MFS in the 1990s sparked a renewed debate over the ethics of MFS. While demonstrating increasing efficacy and range of application, MFS continues to be ethically fraught due to the inherent tension between maternal and fetal interests. Ethical issues central to MFS include the patienthood of the fetus; the balance of risks and benefits between the woman and fetus; informed consent for experimental procedures; and determination of conditions that meet ethical qualifications for MFS intervention. These concerns are likely to persist and evolve as perinatal medicine continues to advance. Here we summarize the current state of MFS ethics, highlighting the major positions in the literature thus far as well as examine future directions. It is essential robust discussions of these important issues continue both to ensure ethical medical practice and to provide support to clinicians, pregnant women, and their families.