The impact of social support networks on compliance with hypertensive therapeutic regimens among noninstitutionalized black adults

A conceptual framework based on the Health Belief Model was proposed which identified those factors most significant in the prediction of compliance behavior. The hypothesized model was applied to analyze the effects of sociodemographic characteristics, self-assessed health status, and social support networks on compliance with antihypertensive regimens, focusing on black adults.^ The study population was selected from the National Health and Examination Survey II (NHANES II) which produced a sample of 3,957 eligible persons 35-74 years of age.^ The study addressed the following research questions: (a) what is the relationship between demographic variables and self-assessed health status, (b) what is the relationship between social support network and self-assessed health status, (c) what is the compliance, (d) what factors, e.g., demographic characteristics, social support network, self-assessed health status, are most related to compliance, and (e) does the effect of these factors on compliance differ between black and white adults?^ The results of the study found that blacks: (a) had poorer health than whites, and education and income were significantly related to self-assessed health status, (b) the stronger social support networks of blacks, the better their health status, and (c) older blacks and those in poorer health were more likely to comply with recommended treatment. The hypothesized conceptual model for the prediction of compliance behavior was partially substantiated for both blacks and whites.^ Implications for the application of the conceptual model are also discussed. ^

Functional and motor neuronal analysis of defensive siphon responses in {\it Aplysia californica}

One of the central goals of neuroscience research is to determine how networks of neurons control and modify behavior. One of the most influential model systems for this kind of analysis is the siphon and gill withdrawal reflex of the marine mollusc A. californica. In response to tactile stimulation, the siphon displays 3 different responses: (1) a posterior pointing and leveling (flaring) of the siphon in response to tail stimulation (the siphon T response), (2) constriction and anterior pointing to head stimulation (the siphon H response) and (3) constriction and withdrawal between the animal's parapodia (the siphon S response). The siphon S response is pseudoconditioned by a noxious tail stimulus to resemble the siphon T response. Behavioral and combined behavioral/intracellular studies were conducted to determine the motor neuronal control of these behaviors and to search for mechanisms of siphon response transformation following pseudoconditioning. The present studies have found that the flaring component of pseudoconditioned siphon S responses occurs during mantle pumping (MP) triggered by noxious tail stimulation. Siphon stimulation also triggers MP, as recorded in neurons of the Interneuron II pattern generator which commands MP. The 4 LF$\rm\sb{SB}$ siphon motor neurons (SMNs) were found necessary and sufficient for the siphon T response, while SMNs RD$\rm\sb S$ and LD$\rm\sb{S1}$ were found necessary and sufficient for the siphon H response. Following pseudoconditioning, there is an increase in the number of evoked spikes to the test stimulus for the LF$\rm\sb{SB}$ cells and a decreased number for RD$\rm\sb S.$ Siphon flaring occurring during the pseudoconditioned response correlates with increased LF$\rm\sb{SB}$ activity during triggered MP cycles. This suggests that psuedoconditioning is in part due to reconfiguration of the motor outputs of the Interneuron II network. These results suggest that these defensive responses are controlled and patterned by a well-defined, finite set of motor neurons and interneurons (Interneuron II) that are dedicated to specific behavioral functions, but also have parallel distributed properties. ^

'Reform' of the British national health service after the election of a labour government: Understanding the policy development process

The policy development process leading to the Labour government's white paper of December 1997—The new NHS: Modern, Dependable—is the focus of this project and the public policy development literature is used to aid in the understanding of this process. Policy makers who had been involved in the development of the white paper were interviewed in order to acquire a thorough understanding of who was involved in this process and how they produced the white paper. A theoretical framework is used that sorts policy development models into those that focus on knowledge and experience, and those which focus on politics and influence. This framework is central to understanding the evidence gathered from the individuals and associations that participated in this policy development process. The main research question to be asked in this project is to what extent do either of these sets of policy development models aid in understanding and explicating the process by which the Labour government's policies were developed. The interview evidence, along with published evidence, show that a clear pattern of policy change emerged from this policy development process, and the Knowledge-Experience and Politics-Influence policy making models both assist in understanding this process. The early stages of the policy development process were characterized as hierarchical and iterative, yet also very collaborative among those participating, with knowledge and experience being quite prevalent. At every point in the process, however, informal networks of political influence were used and noted to be quite prevalent by all of the individuals interviewed. The later stages of the process then became increasingly noninclusive, with decisions made by a select group of internal and external policy makers. These policy making models became an important tool with which to understand the policy development process. This Knowledge-Experience and Politics-Influence dichotomy of policy development models could therefore be useful in analyzing other types of policy development. ^

A qualitative and quantitative assessment of cancer patients' perceptions of barriers to treatment

This study examined barriers that cancer patients experience in obtaining treatment. The principal aim of the study was to conduct a comprehensive quantitative and qualitative assessment of barriers to cancer treatment for Texas cancer patients. The three specific aims of the study were to: (1) conduct a review and critique of published and unpublished research on barriers to cancer treatment; (2) conduct focus groups for the qualitative assessment of cancer patients' perceived barriers to cancer treatment; and (3) survey a representative sample of cancer patients regarding perceived barriers to treatment. The study was guided by the Aday and Andersen access framework of predisposing, enabling, and need determinants of care-seeking.^ To address the first specific aim, a total of 732 abstracts were examined, from which 154 articles were selected for review. Of these 154 articles, 57 that related directly to research on barriers to cancer treatment were chosen for subsequent analysis. Criteria were applied to each article to evaluate the strength of the study design, sampling and measurement procedures. The major barriers that were consistently documented to influence whether or not cancer patients sought or continued required treatment included problems with communication between the patient and provider, lack of information on side effects, the cost of treatment and associated difficulties in obtaining and maintaining insurance coverage, and the absence of formal and informal networks of social support. Access barriers were generally greater for older, minority women, and patients of lower socioeconomic status.^ To address the second specific aim, a total of eight focus groups (n = 44) were conducted across the State of Texas with cancer patients identified by the Texas Community Oncology Network, American Cancer Society, and community health centers. One important finding was that cost is the greatest hurdle that patients face. Another finding was that with the health care/insurance crisis, an increasing number of physicians are working with their patients to develop individually-tailored payment plans. For people in rural areas, travel to treatment sites is a major barrier due to the travel costs as well as work time forfeited by patients and their family members. A third major finding was the patients' family and church play important roles in providing social and emotional support for cancer patients.^ To address the third aim, a total of 910 cancer patients were surveyed during October and November, 1993. Approximately 65% of the cancer patients responded to the survey. The findings showed that the major barriers to treatment included costs of medications and diagnostic tests, transportation, lack of social support, problems understanding the written information regarding their disease as well as losing coverage or having higher premiums or copayments once they were diagnosed (particularly among blacks).^ Significant differences in reported barriers were found between racial groups. The minority respondents (i.e., blacks and Hispanics) tended to experience more barriers to treatment compared to the white respondents. More specifically, Hispanics were more likely to report transportation as a barrier to treatment than both white and blacks. Future research is needed to better understand the problems that minority cancer patients experience in receiving treatment. (Abstract shortened by UMI.) ^