In addition to publishing in peer-reviewed journals, Center for HOPES researchers publish briefs, memos, reports, fact sheets, presentations, and data visualizations for government agencies, community groups, policymakers, issue advocates, health professionals, and the general public.
Briefs & Memos
Frazier, L.A., Trinh, A., Nawaz, S. (2020, November). The dual burden of unmet reproductive health care needs among women with substance use disorder. Center for HOPES [Issue Overview]. https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/u.osu.edu/dist/1/80885/files/2020/11/Dual_Burden_Overview.pdf
February 2021 Use of Non-Preferred Contraceptive Methods Among Women in Ohio co-authored by Saira Nawaz.
Chakraborty, P., Gallo, M.F., Nawaz, S., Smith, M., Hood, R.B., Chettri, S., Bessett, D., Norris, A.H., Casterline, J., Turner, A.N., (2021). Use of non-preferred contraceptive methods among women in Ohio. Contraception. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2021.02.006
While contraceptive use is well-characterized in the US, the mismatch between use and preference is not as well studied. Understanding method preference is essential to understanding unmet contraceptive needs. Using the Ohio Survey of Women (OSW), a population-based survey about reproductive health conducted among adult, reproductive-age women in Ohio, the authors measure the gap between preferred and actual contraceptive method use among women 18-44 years of age.
The authors, who are part of the Ohio Policy Evaluation Network (OPEN), find that a quarter of women reported not using their preferred contraceptive method and that the most common barrier to obtaining their preferred method was affordability. Long-acting methods, oral conception, and condoms were the most preferred methods; emergency contraception was the least preferred. Those using their preferred method reported more consistent contraceptive use and intent to continue use compared to those not using their preferred method. (Consistent contraceptive use is strongly associated with lower rates of unintended pregnancy.)
Consistent with the finding that affordability was reported as the most common reason for non-use of preferred methods, the authors find that low socioeconomic status is a key predictor of preferred method use. Reporting poor provider satisfaction related to contraceptive care, not having a yearly women’s checkup, and Hispanic ethnicity were also associated with lower use of preferred method. These findings provide further evidence that cost, quality, and access barriers in conceptive care reduce effectiveness and autonomy in conceptive use.
January 2021 Rebuilding With Impacted Communities at the Center co-authored by Saira Nawaz.
Montiel, GI., Cantero, P.J., Montiel, I., Moon, K., Nawaz, S. (2021). Rebuilding with impacted communities at the center: the case for civic engagement approach to COVID-19 response and recovery. Family & Community Health. doi: 10.1097/FCH.0000000000000294
Hispanic/Latinx persons are shouldering disproportionate burdens of both the COVID-19 pandemic disease and its economic fallout. Societal inclusion (in contrast to marginalization) is an important social determinant of health; voting, in particular, is associated with better self-reported health. While inequities in health care access, housing, income, and employment type have been discussed as drivers of poor COVID outcomes in Latinx communities, little attention has been paid to the role of civic engagement.
In a survey of Latinx program participants and community members, Latino Health Access – a nonprofit community-based organization in Orange County, California – found that nonvoters had significantly higher rates of food insecurity, reductions in work hours, and housing instability, and less capacity to respond to a COVID-19 case in the household.
These preliminary findings indicate that civic engagement may be an important pathway to building resilience within Latinx communities for future health crises.
December 2020 Racism Measurement Framework: A Tool for Public Health Action and Accountability co-authored by Saira Nawaz, Eric Seiber, and Anne Trinh.
Nawaz, S., Moon, K.J., Seiber, E., Trinh, A., Bennett, S., Joseph, J.J. (2020). Racism measurement framework: A tool for public health action and accountability. Ohio Journal of Public Health, 3(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.18061/ojph.v3i3.8037
Racism is a principal determinant of health inequity. While it is encouraging that public health leaders around Ohio and the nation have declared racism a public health crisis, sustained progress will require ongoing measurement to determine which anti-racist efforts are working, and why.
In this review and commentary, Center for HOPES researchers categorize measures of racism along 3 dimensions that interact and build off of one another: (1) systemic racism, considering the health effects of policies in housing, voting, criminal legal system, economic opportunity, and health care; (2) interpersonal racism, and measures of provider bias and cultural competency; (3) internalized racism, measured as allostatic stress and heightened vigilance in distinct contexts.
After identifying knowledge gaps, they present a racism measurement framework that more comprehensively depicts the disparities caused by racism within Ohio and can be used to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of anti-racist efforts implemented across the state. As such, this framework provides not only a call for action against racism in Ohio, but an opportunity for organizations to measure the extent to which efforts have intervened on supposedly entrenched pathways to health inequities and disparities caused by racism.
December 2020 Health economic design for cost, cost-effectiveness and simulation analyses in the HEALing Communities Study co-authored by Drs. Kristin J. Harlow, Eric Seiber, and Ayaz Hyder.
Aldridge, A.P., Barbosa, C., Barocas, J.A., Bush, J.L., Chhatwal, J., Harlow, K.J., … & Murphy, S.M. (2020). Health economic design for cost, cost-effectiveness and simulation analyses in the HEALing Communities Study. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 217(1), 108336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2020.108336
The opioid epidemic has had a devastating impact on Ohio, including 46,802 overdose deaths in 2018. A consortium of academic, state, and community partners in Ohio received a federal research grant, the HEALing Communities Study, to reduce overdose deaths by 40% through a community-level intervention intended to bolster evidence-based practices including harm reduction strategies, medication for addiction treatment, and safer prescribing practices. Ohio is one of four states participating in the HEALing Communities Study.
Researchers from the Center for HOPES are leading the HEALing Communities Study health economics effort in Ohio. They co-authored the recently published protocol for the study-wide health economics efforts. Although the study is ongoing, the health economics protocol paper outlines the boundary-pushing strategy for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of the HEALing Communities Study interventions. The four-state team is utilizing costing strategies that have been used in clinical trials and extrapolating to cost the community-level intervention. In addition, simulation modeling will be used to estimate economic impacts of the intervention.
Dr. Eric Seiber leads the health economics team in Ohio. The team, including Dr. Kristin Harlow, collaborated with the national health economics team to design the research strategy for the cost-effectiveness analysis. They are collecting complex costing data to understand the societal costs of the intervention, as well as interpreting the economic data as it is collected.