UNASSIGNED: 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.
UNASSIGNED: 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.
UNASSIGNED: 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).
UNASSIGNED: 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.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of ever considering self-managing an abortion (SMA) and its associations with experiences of medical mistrust and mistreatment in a nationally representative sample.
METHODS: In 2021-22, we conducted a national, cross-sectional, online probability-based survey of U.S. people assigned female at birth ages 15-49. Among those who had ever been pregnant, we ran weighted multivariable logistic regressions to examine whether having had difficulty trusting medical providers and/or experiencing medical mistreatment was associated with SMA consideration.
RESULTS: Of 4,260 participants who had ever been pregnant, 5.2% (95% CI, 4.3%-6.3%) ever considered SMA. Additionally, 38.8% (95% CI, 36.8%-40.9%) reported prior moderate medical mistrust; 17.0% (15.4%-18.6%) experienced neglect of symptoms only, and 22.2% (20.6%-24.0%) experienced ridicule or humiliation in a previous healthcare encounter. In multivariable analyses, those who reported prior high medical mistrust had increased odds of considering SMA (aOR=5.2, [95% CI, 2.9-9.2]), compared to those who had no prior medical mistrust. Those who had experienced ridicule or humiliation by healthcare providers had increased odds of considering SMA (aOR=3.8, [95% CI, 2.3-6.1]), compared to those without such experiences. Participants who believed others perceived them as Black or Arab/Middle Eastern, were poor in their youth, or identified as LGBTQ+ had higher proportions of considering SMA (p-values < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Experiences of medical mistrust and mistreatment are common and are associated with increased likelihood of considering SMA. Those who identified with a structurally minoritized group were more likely to consider SMA, and those whose \"street race\" was Arab/Middle Eastern had the highest likelihood.
CONCLUSIONS: If restrictions on abortion continue to increase, individuals may further consider SMA. Our findings suggest a need to create healthcare environments that foster trust and respect, as well as to ensure people have access to safe options for SMA.

BACKGROUND: Medical mistrust among Black patients has been used to explain the existence of well-documented racial inequities at the end of life that negatively impact this group. However, there are few studies that describe patient perspectives around the impact of racism and discriminatory experiences on mistrust within the context of serious illness.
OBJECTIVE: To better characterize experiences of racism and discrimination among patients with serious illness and its association with medical mistrust.
METHODS: Seventy-two Black participants with serious illness hospitalized at an academic county hospital.
METHODS: This is a convergent mixed methods study using data from participant-completed surveys and existing semi-structured interviews eliciting participants\' perspectives around their experiences with medical racism, communication, and decision-making.
METHODS: The experience of medical racism and its association with Group-Based Medical Mistrust (GBMM) scale scores, a validated measure of medical mistrust.
RESULTS: Of the 72 Black participants, 35% participated in interviews. Participants were mostly men who had significant socioeconomic disadvantage, including low levels of wealth, income, and educational attainment. There were reported high levels of race-based mistrust in the overall GBMM scale score (mean [SD], 36.6 [9.9]), as well as high scores within the suspicion (14.2 [5.0]), group disparities in healthcare (9.9 [2.8]), and lack of support (9.1 [2.7]) subscales. Three qualitative themes aligned with the GBMM subscales. Participants expressed skepticism of healthcare workers (HCWs) and modern medicine, recounted personal experiences of discrimination in the medical setting, and were frustrated with poor communication from HCWs.
CONCLUSIONS: This study found high levels of mistrust among Black patients with serious illness. Suspicion of HCWs, disparities in healthcare by race, and a lack of support from HCWs were overarching themes that influenced medical mistrust. Critical, race-conscious approaches are needed to create strategies and frameworks to improve the trustworthiness of healthcare institutions and workers.

BACKGROUND: HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a critical biomedical strategy to prevent HIV transmission among cisgender women. Despite its proven effectiveness, Black cisgender women remain significantly underrepresented throughout the PrEP care continuum, facing barriers such as limited access to care, medical mistrust, and intersectional racial or HIV stigma. Addressing these disparities is vital to improving HIV prevention outcomes within this community. On the other hand, nurse practitioners (NPs) play a pivotal role in PrEP utilization but are underrepresented due to a lack of awareness, a lack of human resources, and insufficient support. Equipped with the rapid evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) and advanced large language models, chatbots effectively facilitate health care communication and linkage to care in various domains, including HIV prevention and PrEP care.
OBJECTIVE: Our study harnesses NPs\' holistic care capabilities and the power of AI through natural language processing algorithms, providing targeted, patient-centered facilitation for PrEP care. Our overarching goal is to create a nurse-led, stakeholder-inclusive, and AI-powered program to facilitate PrEP utilization among Black cisgender women, ultimately enhancing HIV prevention efforts in this vulnerable group in 3 phases. This project aims to mitigate health disparities and advance innovative, technology-based solutions.
METHODS: The study uses a mixed methods design involving semistructured interviews with key stakeholders, including 50 PrEP-eligible Black women, 10 NPs, and a community advisory board representing various socioeconomic backgrounds. The AI-powered chatbot is developed using HumanX technology and SmartBot360\'s Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant framework to ensure data privacy and security. The study spans 18 months and consists of 3 phases: exploration, development, and evaluation.
RESULTS: As of May 2024, the institutional review board protocol for phase 1 has been approved. We plan to start recruitment for Black cisgender women and NPs in September 2024, with the aim to collect information to understand their preferences regarding chatbot development. While institutional review board approval for phases 2 and 3 is still in progress, we have made significant strides in networking for participant recruitment. We plan to conduct data collection soon, and further updates on the recruitment and data collection progress will be provided as the study advances.
CONCLUSIONS: The AI-powered chatbot offers a novel approach to improving PrEP care utilization among Black cisgender women, with opportunities to reduce barriers to care and facilitate a stigma-free environment. However, challenges remain regarding health equity and the digital divide, emphasizing the need for culturally competent design and robust data privacy protocols. The implications of this study extend beyond PrEP care, presenting a scalable model that can address broader health disparities.
UNASSIGNED: PRR1-10.2196/59975.

BACKGROUND: Medical mistrust (MM) is seen as a barrier to assessing healthcare needs and addressing health disparities; however, limited literature has focused on assessing MM for vulnerable populations, especially racial/ethnic minority and sexual/gender minority youth and young adults (YYA).
METHODS: Between February 2021 and March 2022, we conducted the Youth and Young Adults COVID-19 Study, a prospective cohort of minoritized YYA aged 14 to 24 years (n = 1027), within the United States and its territories. Participants were recruited through a combination of paid social media ads, outreach with organizations serving marginalized youth, and an existing registry, targeting racial and ethnic minority and LGBTQ + youth for a study on COVID-19 health behaviors. Multiple multinomial logistic regression models were developed to examine associations between demographics and three dimensions of MM including healthcare experience, government information, and scientific information.
RESULTS: Most participants were between the ages of 18 and 21 years (48.3%), identified as Hispanic (33.3%) or white (22.5%), and bisexual or pansexual (34.3%). Queer YYA had higher odds of reporting worse personal healthcare experiences than their straight peers. The odds of gay/lesbian YYA that reported somewhat or extreme trust in doctor\'s sources were two times higher than their straight peers. Except for those who identified as Asian, racial/ethnic minority YYA were less likely to report somewhat or extreme trust in the CDC\'s general information or its COVID-19 data than white YYA. Transgender and gender diverse YYA were more than twice as likely to report being very or extremely influenced by statistics of the dangers of COVID-19 than cisgender YYA.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicated the importance of incorporating marginalized identities into the assessment of medical mistrust to better understand YYA\'s health prevention and treatment behaviors and to develop public health prevention and treatment strategies, especially for minoritized communities.

An overarching theme in clinical literature suggests an inherent mistrust among populations of color within the healthcare system and the importance of healthcare professionals to bridge this gap in care. This is especially true when addressing cancer care in underserved populations due to mistrust in providers, diagnostic tools, and treatments. Ovarian cancer is difficult to diagnose early in all populations; however, women of color who have an intrinsic mistrust of the medical community will delay or refuse screenings or treatments that could be greatly beneficial. Similarly, although breast cancer rates are high in women of color, many are reluctant to utilize genetic screenings or counseling services due to bad experiences with healthcare, both personally and within their community. Moreover, transgender patients are at a unique disadvantage, as they face barriers to accessing culturally competent care while also being at a higher risk for developing cancer. The objective of this study was to conduct a scoping review of the literature in order to synthesize knowledge about the climate of mistrust between medical providers and racial, ethnic, and gender minorities with breast cancer and ovarian cancer. It is imperative for healthcare workers to acknowledge medical mistrust and strive to reduce internalized bias, increase their availability to patients, and ensure patients feel heard, respected, and well cared for during visits. Improving care by physicians can enhance trust between underserved communities and healthcare workers, encouraging all people to actively seek proper medical care and cancer screening, potentially resulting in a reduction of mortality and morbidity rates.

Medical mistrust is an important barrier to accessing health care among Latinx populations in the United States (US). However, research on the validity and reliability of medical mistrust scales is limited. We examined the validity and reliability of a modified bilingual version of the Group-Based Medical Mistrust scale (mGBMMS) among a sample of Latinx adults. Participants included 308 Latinx adults (ages 18-25), who responded in Spanish (n = 134) or English (n = 174). Following feedback from bilingual/bicultural staff during the English-Spanish translation process, we made three changes to the original GBMMS. Validation testing of our 12-item mGBMMS scale included: split-half and internal consistency reliability; discriminant, convergent, and predictive validity; and both exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. The mGBMMS had good internal consistency (overall sample: Cronbach\'s α = 0.79; Spanish: Cronbach\'s α = 0.73; English: Cronbach\'s α = 0.83). The mGBMMS showed good convergent (moderately correlated with the experiences of discrimination scale, r = 0.46, p < 0.001) and discriminant (weakly correlated with the acculturation scale, r = 0.11, p = 0.06) validity. Split-half reliability was 0.71 (p < 0.001). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses found a two-factor solution. The mGBMMS was associated with satisfaction with care (OR = 0.60, 95%CI: 0.42-0.87), a sign of good predictive validity. Findings suggest that the mGBMMS is a valid and reliable scale to utilize among bilingual (Spanish/English) populations in the US. Further validation studies should be considered among Latinx respondents of different ages, backgrounds, languages, and US regions.

Black women in the USA experience some of the poorest health outcomes and this is especially true for those involved in the carceral system who are at elevated risks for HIV/STIs, reproductive health, and chronic diseases. This study aimed to investigate Black women\'s experience accessing healthcare services. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 43 women from Project EWORTH under community supervision in New York City. We analysed responses focusing on barriers to healthcare engagement. All interviews were recorded, and data analysis was conducted using NVivo. Themes influencing Black women\'s ability to engage with healthcare providers and systems included: 1) disclosed provider mistrust/judgement; 2) feeling disrespected by providers and the medical system; 3) mistrust of medical providers/system/hospital/government; 4) lack of health communication; 5) low health literacy; 6) provider gender preference. Findings highlight the need to improve trust and collaboration between healthcare providers and Black women. This study addresses the critical gap in understanding perceptions of discrimination, stigma, and barriers to attaining health care. Funders and accreditation agencies must hold providers and organisations accountable for acquiring and making available diversity, equity and inclusion training for providers, demonstrating increasingly equitable medical relationships through responsiveness to patient feedback, and increasing the number of Black providers.

BACKGROUND: Medical mistrust, rooted in unethical research, is a barrier to cancer-related health care for Black/African American (AA) persons. Understanding trust, mistrust, and health care experiences is crucial, especially in multiple myeloma (MM), which disproportionately burdens Black/AA persons in incidence and survival.
OBJECTIVE: This study qualitatively examines the experiences of Black/AA and White dyads (patient with MM and adult caregiver) to gain insights into these phenomena.
METHODS: From November 2021 to April 2022, we recruited 21 dyads from the UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center. Participants completed a sociodemographic survey and a 60-90 min semi-structured interview. We used ATLAS.ti v9 for project management and to facilitate data analysis using the Sort and Sift, Think and Shift approach (ResearchTalk Inc).
RESULTS: We interviewed 21 racially concordant dyads (11 Black/AA, 10 White) with mean patient ages of 70 (Black/AA) and 72 (White) at enrollment. Both Black/AA and White caregivers had a mean enrollment age of 68. The mean duration from MM diagnosis to enrollment for all patients was 5.5 years. Four key themes emerged: (1) knowledge and trust, (2) heightened emotions and discomfort, (3) differing mental constructs of health care experiences, and (4) mitigating mistrust, which varied by self-identified race. Black/AA participants had greater knowledge of historical events like the U.S. Public Health Service Untreated Syphilis Study at Tuskegee and carried the emotional burden longer. They also emphasized self-learning and self-guided research about MM for informed medical decision-making. Both Black/AA and White dyads emphasized the pivotal role of patient-provider relationships and effective communication in fostering trust and addressing concerns.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study offers contextual insights into the enduring challenges of medical mistrust, particularly within the Black/AA community, and its implications for patients and caregivers accessing and receiving MM-related care. Future studies should leverage these insights to guide the development of multilevel interventions addressing medical mistrust within the Black/AA community.

UNASSIGNED: Worsening rates of infant and maternal mortality in the United States serve as an urgent call for multi-modal intervention. Infant Well Child Visits (WCVs) provide an opportunity for prevention, however not all infants receive the recommended schedule of visits, with infants of low-income and Black families missing a higher portion of WCVs. Due to diverse experiences and needs of under-resourced communities throughout the United States, caregiver voice is essential when designing improvement efforts.
UNASSIGNED: Purposeful sampling and interviewing of 10 caregivers in Cincinnati, OH was performed by community peer researchers. Interview transcripts were evaluated by the research team, with identification of several important themes.
UNASSIGNED: Nine out of 10 caregivers self-identified as Black. All young children of the interviewed caregivers had Medicaid as their insurance provider. All interviews highlighted rich perspectives on caregiver hopes for their child, family, and selves. Establishing trust through empathy, shared decision making, and the nurturing of interpersonal patient-practitioner relationships is crucial for fostering a positive healthcare experience. Levels of mistrust was perceptibly high across several interviews, with lack of racial concordance between medical provider and family exacerbating the issue for some caregivers. Caregivers voiced a tendency to rely on family and community members for when to seek out health care for their children, and additionally cited racism and perceptions of being rushed or judged as barriers to seeking further care.
UNASSIGNED: This study emphasizes the importance of being community-informed when considering interventions. Prior research on the topic of missed WCV\'s often focused on material resource availability and limitations. While that was commented on by caregivers in this study as well, equal-if not more-attention was directed toward interpersonal relationship formation, the presence or absence of trust between practitioner and caregiver, and the importance of social-emotional support for caregivers. We highlight several opportunities for systemic improvements as well as future directions for research.