SHARP Program ($60 million) - to support improvements in healthcare quality, safety, efficiency by “breakthrough” HIT advances

News Release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Friday, April 2, 2010

Contact: HHS Press Office (202) 690-6343

HHS Awards $144 Million in Recovery Act Funds to Institutions of Higher Education and Research to Address Critical Needs for the Widespread Adoption and Meaningful Use of Health Information Technology

Academia and the Research Community will support health providers by delivering more than 50,000 new health IT professionals to the workforce and addressing current and future barriers to achieving meaningful use of health IT

Washington, D. C.— Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has enlisted the talent and resources of some of the nation’s leading universities, community colleges, and major research centers to advance the widespread adoption and meaningful use of health information technology (health IT).

Awards totaling $84 million to 16 universities and junior colleges will support training and development of more than 50,000 new health IT professionals. Additionally Strategic Health IT Advanced Research Projects (SHARP) awards totaling $60 million were provided to four advanced research institutions ($15 million each) to focus on solving current and future challenges that represent barriers to adoption and meaningful use of health IT. Both sets of awards are funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Today’s awards are part of the $2 billion effort to achieve widespread meaningful use of health IT and provide for the use of an electronic health record (EHR) for each person in the United States by 2014.

“Training a cadre of new health IT professionals and breaking down barriers to the adoption of meaningful use of health IT are both critical to the national effort to use information technology to realize better patient care,” stated David Blumenthal, MD, MPP, national coordinator for health information technology. “The institutions receiving awards today will develop necessary roadmaps to help health care providers and hospitals implement and effectively use electronic health records.”

Workforce Award recipients, by program area, include:

Community College Consortia Program ($36 million):

The Community College Consortia Program provides assistance to five regional recipients to establish a multi-institutional consortium within each designated region. The five regional consortia will include 70 community colleges in total. Each college will create non-degree training programs that can be completed in six months or less by individuals with appropriate prior education and/or experience. First year grant awards are estimated at $36 million. An additional $34 million is available for year two funding of these programs after successful completion of a mid-project evaluation.

Institution	Amount of Award
Bellevue College Bellevue, Washington	$ 3,364,798
Cuyahoga Community College District Cleveland, Ohio	$ 7,531,403
Los Rios Community College District Sacramento, California	$ 5,435,587
Pitt Community College Winterville, North Carolina	$10,901,009
Tidewater Community College Norfolk, Virginia	$ 8,492,793

Curriculum Development Center ($10 million):

The Curriculum Development Centers will develop educational materials for key health IT topics to be used by the members of the Community College Consortia program. The materials will also be made available to institutions of higher education across the country. One of the centers will receive additional assistance to act as the National Training and Dissemination Center (NTDC) for the curriculum materials.

Institution	Amount of Award
University of Alabama at Birmingham Birmingham, Alabama	$1,820,000
The Trustees of Columbia University New York City, New York	$1,820,000
Duke University Durham, North Carolina	$1,820,000
Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, Maryland	$1,820,000
Oregon Health & Science University Portland, Oregon	$2,720,000*

*(Will also receive the NTDC awards)

University-Based Training Programs ($32 million):

The University-based training programs will produce trained professionals for vital, highly specialized health IT roles. Most trainees in these programs will complete intensive courses of study in 12-months or less and receive a university-issued certificate of advanced training.  Other trainees supported by these grants will study toward masters’ degrees.

Institution	Amount of Award
The Trustees of Columbia University New York City, New York	$3,786,677
University of Colorado Denver College of Nursing Denver, Colorado	$2,622,186
Duke University Durham, North Carolina	$2,167,121
George Washington University District of Columbia	$4,612,313
Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana	$1,406,469
Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, Maryland	$3,752,512
University of Minnesota Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota	$5,145,705
Oregon Health & Science University Portland, Oregon	$3,085,812
Texas State University San Marcos, Texas	$5,421,205

Competency Examination Program ($6 million):

This program will support the development and initial administration of a set of health IT competency examinations. The program will create an objective measure to assess basic competency for individuals trained in short-term, non degree health IT programs and for members of the workforce seeking to demonstrate their competency in certain health IT workforce roles.

Institution	Amount of Award
Northern Virginia Community College Annandale, Virginia	$6,000,000

Strategic Health IT Advanced Research Projects (SHARP) Program ($60 million):

The SHARP program recognizes the critical importance of research to support improvements in the quality, safety, and efficiency of healthcare by creating “breakthrough” advances in information technology. The SHARP program targets four areas where improvements in technology are needed. The four SHARP award recipients, their areas of research focus and funding are:

• University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Ill. - Security of Health Information Technology – Developing security and risk mitigation policies and the technologies necessary to build and preserve the public trust as Health IT systems gain widespread use. $15 million.
• The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Texas - Patient-Centered Cognitive Support – Harnessing the power of Health IT so that it integrates with, enhances and supports clinicians’ reasoning and decision-making. $15 million.
• President and Fellows of Harvard College, Boston, Mass. - Healthcare Application and Network Platform Architectures – Developing new and improved architectures that will leverage benefits of today’s architecture and focus on the flexibility and scalability needs for the future to address significant increases in capture, storage and analysis of data. $15 million.
• Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. – Secondary Use of EHR Data– Strategies to make use of data that will be stored in EHRs for improving the overall quality of health care, while maintaining data privacy and security. $15 million.

Information about the HITECH awards available through the workforce development program is available athttp://HealthIT.HHS.gov/ and www.grants.gov.

For information about other HHS Recovery Act programs, see http://www.hhs.gov/recovery.

###

---

Note: All HHS press releases, fact sheets and other press materials are available at http://www.hhs.gov/news.

Last revised: April 02, 2010

www.mocamobile.org AND www.dossia.org

Today at lunchtime I attended an HSPH presentation on www.mocamobile.org (MIT and HSPH developers for global health applications by cellphone/wireless devices that transmit photos and patient info to secure servers) and www.dossia.org (employer-insured systems that collaborated with MIT and HSPH developers - builds in patient incentives to personal responsibility for maintaining and developing personal wellness).

Very promising!

www.mocamobile.org AND www.dossia.org

Today at lunchtime I attended an HSPH presentation on www.mocamobile.org (MIT and HSPH developers for global health applications by cellphone/wireless devices that transmit photos and patient info to secure servers) and www.dossia.org (employer-insured systems that collaborated with MIT and HSPH developers - builds in patient incentives to personal responsibility for maintaining and developing personal wellness).

Very promising!

Dr. Leon Eisenberg, Pioneer in Autism Studies, Dies at 87

Dr. Leon Eisenberg, who conducted some of the first rigorous studies of autism, attention deficit disorder and learning delays and became a prominent advocate for children struggling with disabilities, died on Sept. 15 at his home in Cambridge, Mass. He was 87.

Dr. Leon Eisenberg

The cause was prostate cancer, said his wife, Dr. Carola Eisenberg.

The field of child psychiatry was dominated by Freudian psychoanalysis when, in the late 1950s and 1960s, Dr. Eisenberg began conducting medical studies of children with developmental problems. Working at Johns Hopkins University with Dr. Leo Kanner, who first described autistic behavior, Dr. Eisenberg completed the first detailed, long-term study of children with autism, demonstrating among other things that language problems predicted its severity.

In a similar study among children who were developing normally, Dr. Eisenberg showed that reading difficulties early in school predicted behavior problems later on.

In the 1960s, he performed the first scientific drug trials in child psychiatry, testing stimulants like Dexedrine and Ritalin to soothe the behavior of children identified as “delinquent” or “hyperkinetic.” These studies, which became the basis for drug treatment of what is now called attention deficit disorder, ran counter to psychoanalytic theories on the most effective treatments.

“Leon took a very courageous stand and denounced the way psychiatry treated children, this whole system in which we had a few rich kids and their parents getting psychoanalysis five days a week and still not being cured,” said C. Keith Conners, a professor emeritus in the department of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Duke University. “No one even knew what a cure looked like. He had this conviction that nothing was being done for the bulk of children who needed help, and that we had very little scientific data to guide us.”

Dr. James Harris, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral science at Johns Hopkins University, said that Dr. Eisenberg was “the pivotal person in 20th-century child psychiatry who moved the field from simple descriptions of childhood disorders to actually looking at the science behind both the diagnosis and treatment.”

Leon Eisenberg was born in Philadelphia on Aug. 8, 1922, the eldest child of immigrants from Russia. He earned his undergraduate degree and, in 1946, his medical degree from the University of Pennsylvania, before taking an internship at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, where he developed an interest in psychiatry. He completed his psychiatric residency at Sheppard Pratt Hospital in Towson, Md.

After two years in the Army teaching physiology (Carey incorrectly said psychology), in 1952 he began a residency at Johns Hopkins and his collaboration with Dr. Kanner. In 1967, he took over as chief of psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital, where he continued to publish and, among many other projects, helped formulate and carry out affirmative action policies at Harvard Medical School.

In 1980, he established the medical school’s department of social medicine, with the aim of applying the tools of social science to improving access to and practice of medicine worldwide.

In addition to his wife, a co-founder of Physicians for Human Rights, Dr. Eisenberg is survived by two children from a previous marriage, Kathy and Mark Eisenberg; two stepchildren, Alan and Larry Guttmacher; two sisters, Essie Ellis and Libby Wickler; and six grandchildren.

For two days last week, Harvard lowered its flags to half-staff in honor of Dr. Eisenberg.

In his later years, Dr. Eisenberg became increasingly alarmed at trends in the field he helped establish, criticizing what he saw as a cozy relationships between drug makers and doctors and the expanding popularity of the attention deficit diagnosis.

The diagnosis “has morphed from a relative uncommon condition 40 years ago to one whose current prevalence is 8 percent,” he wrote. “Correspondingly, the prescription of stimulant drugs has gone up enormously. The reasons are not self-evident.”

Primary Prevention NOW !! [That's evidence-based health education for cost-savings]

http://maynardclark.spaces.live.com

The signature I sign in health care petitions is the signature that  includes the clarification that I would support universal inclusion that is truly caring for health, not merely managing disease, and that I believed we could afford to guarantee THAT kind of healthcare as a fundamental right IF we include primary prevention that is behaviorally-oriented and evidence-based.

Ensuring healthy vegetarian (read vegan) meal options (along with suitable health education that sees the benefits of plant-based diets) for students, we cannot deliver the experiential knowledge of what health-supporting eating actually is (and providing a health-aware future for those young citizens going forward).

Who is NOT a Minority?? Promoting Physical Activity in Minority Populations

www.medscape.com

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/707582?src=mp&spon=42&uac=125132EZ

From American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine

Promoting Physical Activity in Minority Populations

Lisa Terre, PhD

Published: 08/27/2009

Abstract and Introduction

Abstract

This review discusses evidence-based perspectives on promoting physical activity in minority populations. Future directions for inquiry and empirically driven public policy initiatives also are addressed.

Introduction

Over the past decade, considerable attention has focused on the nation's physical inactivity epidemic. Notwithstanding myriad public health mandates propped up by a welter of initiatives reminding Americans about exercise's broad-spectrum benefits and prompting them to "get active," too many remain sedentary.^[1,2] Regrettably, ethnic and cultural minorities disproportionately bear the brunt of this health-zapping lifestyle.^[3–11]
Powered by recognition of its threat-multiplying potential for underserved populations already burdened by health disparities, physical inactivity has become a high-value intervention target. Yet, despite some noteworthy strides, resetting sedentary lifestyles remains challenging.^{[5,9,11–17]}
To be sure, minority-focused research has only just begun to explore the complex dynamic of biopsychosocial factors that shape activity habits and crimp efforts to unwind them. Nevertheless, although many details remain sketchy, converging evidence increasingly high-lights the corrosive role of social disadvantage as one prime suspect at or near the epicenter of disproportionate minority risk.

Social Disadvantage as an Activity-relevant Risk Factor

Recent research has provided tantalizing clues to the tangled web of activity-relevant processes in which socioeconomic status (SES) is inextricably inter-twined at the biological, psychological, and social levels. For instance, poverty may set limits on potential activity trajectories by taking a toll on optimal physiological maturation and brain development, raising both near-and long-term risks for cascading adversities (eg, growth delays and cognitive problems) that can tamp down intellectual and self-regulatory capabilities.^[18–20]
Social disadvantage also profoundly affects psychological mediators of active lifestyles, magnifying risks for activity barriers such as negative attributional style (eg, feelings of low self-efficacy, diminished perceptions of control) and activity-hindering emotions (eg, depressed and/ or anxious mood).^[19,21–24] Minority girls, for example, have reported low exercise self-efficacy (including discouragement at initial signs of perceived exertion, high anxiety, and feelings of low self-esteem during activity training) that deters exercise participation.^[19,25] Other evidence similarly highlights the robust relationship between negative emotions (eg, depressed mood, perceived hopelessness) and health risk behaviors, especially among urban minority youth.^{[21,24,26,27]} Accordingly, attention to such psychological stumbling blocks may be crucial to fostering exercise readiness in underserved populations.^[11,19] Indeed, these preparatory steps toward action would seem well worth the effort considering the psychological and physical benefits that accrue to ethnic and cultural minorities who regularly participate in leisure-time activity.^{[6–8,19,28–31]}
At the sociocultural level, physical activity can be foiled by numerous SES-related processes that constrain educational opportunities, health literacy, and resource access, thereby limiting exposure to contexts in which habitual exercise is modeled and encouraged.^[20,21,24] For instance, attitudes about physical activity often are rooted in broader social and cultural traditions that may or may not coincide with professional health ecommendations. These commonsense models^[32,33] wield considerable leverage on activity preferences and practices.^{[4,6–8,11,30,32–38]}
To cite but one of many possible examples, acculturation has been associated with physical activity across diverse groups. As a case in point, Anglo-acculturated Latinas (ie, those acculturated toward the US mainstream) have reported being more physically active than their more traditional Mexican-acculturated counterparts.^[39] These findings parallel those based on other minority participants (eg, American-Indian, African-American) in demonstrating the influence of culturally driven schema on activity habits.^{[6–8,34,35]} Results such as these emphasize the importance of exploring exercise-relevant conceptualizations as a prelude to activity interventions.^{[4,6–8,11,30,34–39]}
As indicated above, social disadvantage limits social capital, one especially relevant form of which is activity-linked social support.^[21,23,24] That is to say, although loved ones' unconditional positive regard offers numerous benefits, its sheer noncontingency typically renders it suboptimal for promoting exercise. Indeed, significant others' generic support for beloved kin (regardless of lifestyle) often is counterproductive to healthful behavior change. It is this activity-specific encouragement that may be hampered by SES-related processes.^{[6–8,11,40]}
Along these lines, research^[40] has underscored the activity-enhancing advantages of social encouragement (ie, accentuating activity benefits) over social constraint (ie, emphasizing sedentariness hazards).^[11,40] Unfortunately, because underserved patients typically access health care on an emergent (versus preventive) basis, they may be most likely to receive lifestyle modification advice in the form of social constraint during crisis-oriented, teachable moments.^[1,2,11]
Even when effectively delivered, professional admonitions may be offset by pervasive, health-detrimental media messages. In response to media's well-documented adverse consequences (eg, from both observing media models of unhealthful habits and sitting motion-less during hours of passive viewing), professionals now urge parents to limit youngsters' screen time.^[41–44] Unfortunately, children from socially disadvantaged families may be especially vulnerable to harmful media influences.^[7]
In a vivid illustration conducted at preschools for low-income children, Robinson and colleagues^[45] recently examined the effects of fast-food branding on taste preferences. Results revealed that 3-to 5-year-old ethnically and culturally diverse children preferred food and drinks (including items such as carrots and milk) they believed were from McDonald's. Central to the point of the present discussion, however, this branding effect was moderated by the number of television sets at home and the frequency of McDonald's food consumption, reinforcing the covariation of risk behaviors that frequently has been observed throughout the health hazards literature.^{[6–8,21,26–29,34,35,46]}
Social disadvantage also undermines physical activity through ecological and environmental inputs such as exercisethwarting social policies and features of the built environment such as the lack of recreation facilities (eg, absence of walking trails and bike paths), neighborhood walkability (eg, few sidewalks, unattractive surroundings), and safety (eg, presence of stray dogs, high crime). In short, disadvantaged neighborhoods are unlikely to provide an optimal context for infusing habitual activity into daily life.^{[4,6–8,11,19,30,34–38,47–49]]}

Promoting Active Lifestyles

Considering activity's biopsychosocial influences, the fight against sedentary lifestyles must engage on many fronts simultaneously,^{[6–9,11,15,50]} reaching beyond traditional providers and medical settings to include indigenous mediators and venues tailored to ethnic and cultural considerations.^{[5,9,12–17,28,29,46,51,52]} Despite the seemingly fitful progress to date, evidence of incremental victories are beginning to dapple the scientific landscape. Leveraging these stepwise achievements into sustainable lifestyle gains will be challenging but, given the potential benefits, are well worth the effort.

References

1. Terre L. Exercise for primary care. Am J Lifestyle Med. 2008;2:290–292.
2. Terre L, Poston W, Foreyt J. Overview and the future of obesity treatment. In: Goldstein D, ed. The Management of Eating Disorders and Obesity. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press; 2005;161–179.
3. Albright C, Pruitt L, Castro C, et al. Modifying physical activity in a multiethnic sample of low-income women: one-year results from the IMPACT (Increasing Motivation for Physical ACTivity) Project. Ann Behav Med. 2005;30:191–200.
4. Bush C, Shadston P, McKay S, et al. Park-based obesity intervention program for inner-city minority children. J Pediatr. 2007;15:513–517.
5. Frierson G, Williams D, Dunsiger S, et al. Recruitment of a racially and ethnically diverse sample into a physical activity efficacy trial. Clin Trials. 2008;5:504–516.
6. Kumanyika S. Environmental influences on childhood obesity: ethnic and cultural influences in context. Physiol Behav. 2008;94:61–70.
7. Kumanyika S, Grier S. Targeting interventions for ethnic minority and low-income populations. Future Child. 2006;16:187–207.
8. Kumanyika S, Obarzanek E, Stettler N, et al. Population-based prevention of obesity: the need for comprehensive promotion of healthful eating, physical activity, and energy balance. A scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council on Epidemiology and Prevention, Interdisciplinary Committee for Prevention (formerly the Expert Panel on Population and Prevention Science). Circulation. 2008;118:428–464.
9. Pekmezi D, Jennings E. Interventions to promote physical activity among African Americans. Am J Lifestyle Med. 2009;3(3):00–00.
10. Resnick B, Luisi D, Vogel A. Testing the Senior Exercise Self-Efficacy Project (SESEP) for use with urban dwelling minority older adults. Public Health Nurs. 2008;25:221–234.
11. Schrop S, Pendleton B, McCord G, et al. The medically underserved: who is likely to exercise and why? J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2006;17:276–289.
12. Dornelas E, Stepnowski R, Fischer E, et al. Urban ethnic minority women's attendance at health clinic vs. church based exercise programs. J Cross Cult Gerontol. 2007;22:129–136.
13. Eakin E, Bull S, Riley K, et al. Recruitment and retention of Latinos in a primary care-based physical activity and diet trial: the Resources for Health study. Health Ed Res. 2007;22:361–371.
14. Tandon S, Phillips K, Bordeaux B, et al. A vision for progress in community health partnerships. Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2007;1:11–30.
15. Yancey A. Building capacity to prevent and control chronic disease in underserved communities: expanding the wisdom of WISEWOMAN in intervening at the environ-mental level. J Women Health. 2004;13:644–649.
16. Yang J, Kagawa-Singer M. Increasing access to care for cultural and linguistic minorities: ethnicity-specific health care organizations and infrastructure. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2007;18:532–549.
17. Zoellner J, Connell C, Santell R, et al. Fit for life steps: results of a community walking intervention in the rural Mississippi Delta. Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2007; Spring. pchp.press. jhu. edu. Accessed October 20, 2008.
18. Genel M, McCaffree M, Hendricks K, et al. A national agenda for America's children and adolescents in 2008: recommendations from the 15th Annual Public Policy Plenary Symposium, Annual Meeting of the Pediatric Academic Societies, May 3, 2008. Pediatrics. 2008;122:843–849.
19. Lemmon C, Ludwig D, Howe C, et al. Correlates of adherence to a physical activity program in young African-American girls. Obesity. 2007;15:695–703.
20. Terre L. Children's nutritional health: running on empty? Am J Lifestyle Med. 2009:2; 115–118.
21. Gallo L, Matthews K. Understanding the association between socioeconomic status and physical health: do negative emotions play a role? Psychol Bull. 2003;129:10–51.
22. Hill-Briggs F, Gary T, Yen H, et al. Association of social problem solving with glycemic control in a sample of urban African Americans with type 2 diabetes. J Behav Med. 2006;29:69–78.
23. Marquez D, McAuley E. Social cognitive correlates of leisure time physical activity among Latinos. J Behav Med. 2006;29:281–289.
24. Poulton R, Caspi A. Commentary: how does socioeconomic disadvantage during child-hood damage health in adulthood? Testing psychosocial pathways. Int J Epidemiol. 2005;34:344–345.
25. Robbins L, Pender N, Ronis D, et al. Physical activity, self-efficacy, and perceived exertion among adolescents. Res Nurs Health. 2004;27:435–446.
26. DiClemente R, Wingood G, Lang D, et al. Adverse health consequences that co-occur with depression: a longitudinal study of black adolescent females. Pediatrics. 2005;116:78–81.
27. Valadez-Meltzer A, Silber T, Meltzer A, et al. Will I be alive in 2005? Adolescent level of involvement in risk behaviors and belief in near-future death. Pediatrics. 2005;116:24–31.
28. Goldfinger J, Arniella G, Wylie-Rosett J, et al. Project HEAL: peer education leads to weight loss in Harlem. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2008;19:180–192.
29. Horowitz C, Goldfinger J, Muller S, et al. A model for using community-based participatory research to address the diabetes epidemic in East Harlem. Mount Sinai J Med. 2008;75:13–21.
30. Miller D, Gilman R, Martens M. Wellness promotion in the schools: enhancing students' mental and physical health. Psychol Sch. 2008;45:5–15.
31. Wise L, Adams-Campbell L, Palmer J, et al. Leisure time physical activity in relation to depressive symptoms in the Black Women's Health Study. Ann Behav Med. 2006;32:68–76.
32. Levanthal H, Levanthal E, Cameron L. Representations, procedures, and affect in illness self-regulation: a perceptual-cognitive model. In: Baum A, Revenson T, Singer J, eds. Handbook of Health Psychology. Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum; 2001:19–47.
33. Levanthal H, Meyer D, Nerenz D. The common sense representation of illness danger. In: Rachman S, ed. Contributions to Medical Psychology. New York, NY: Pergamon; 1980:7–30.
34. Adams A, Harvey H, Brown D. Constructs of health and environment inform child obesity prevention in American Indian communities. Obesity. 2008;16:311–317.
35. Adams A, Quinn R, Prince R. Low recognition of childhood overweight and disease risk among Native-American caregivers. Obes Res. 2005;12:146–152.
36. Hekler E, Lambert J, Leventhal E, et al. Commonsense illness beliefs, adherence behaviors, and hypertension control among African Americans. J Behav Med. 2008;31:391–400.
37. Gordon-Larsen P, Nelson M, Page P, et al. Inequality in the built environment underlies key health disparities in physical activity and obesity. Pediatrics. 2006;117:417–424.
38. McDonald N. The effect of objectively measured crime on walking in minority adults. Am J Health Promot. 2008;22:433–436.
39. Pichon L, Arredondo E, Roesch S, et al. The relation of acculturation to Latinas' perceived neighborhood safety and physical activity: a structural equation analysis. Ann Behav Med. 2007;34:295–303.
40. Gabriele J, Walker M, Gill D, et al. Differentiated roles of social encouragement and social constraint on physical activity behavior. Ann Behav Med. 2005;29:210–215.
41. Connor S. Food-related advertising on preschool television: building brand recognition in young viewers. Pediatrics. 2006;118:1478–1485.
42. Escobar-Chaves S, Anderson C. Media and risky behaviors. Future Child.2008;18:147–180.
43. Evans W. Social marketing campaigns and children's media use. Future Child. 2008;18:181–203.
44. Wilcox B, Kunkel D, Cantor J, et al. Report of the APA Task Force on Advertising and Children. www.apa.org. Retrieved November 2008.
45. Robinson T, Borzekowski D, Matheson D, et al. Effects of fast food branding on young children's taste preferences. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2007;161:792–797.
46. Collins J. Addressing racial and ethnic disparities: lessons from the REACH 2010 communities. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2006;17:1–5.
47. Sallis J, King A, Sirard J, et al. Perceived environmental predictors of physical activity over 6 months in adults: Activity Counseling Trial. Health Psychol. 2007;26:701–709.
48. Sloane D, Nascimento L, Flynn G, et al. Assessing resource environments to tar-get prevention interventions in community chronic disease control. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2006;17:146–158.
49. Stafford M, Cummins S, Ellaway E, et al. Pathways to obesity: identifying local, modifiable determinants of physical activity and diet. Soc Sci Med. 2007;65:1882–1897.
50. Fort J, McClellan L. REACH-Meharry community-campus partnership: developing culturally competent health care providers. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2006;17:78–87.
51. Farmer D, Jackson S, Camacho F, et al. Attitudes of African American and low socioeconomic status white women toward medical research. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2007;18:85–99.
52. Winett R, Anderson E, Wojcik J, et al. Guide to health: nutrition and physical activity out-comes of a group-randomized trial of an internet-based intervention in churches. Ann Behav Med. 2007;33:251–261.

Authors and Disclosures

Lisa Terre, PhD

From the Department of Psychology, University of Missouri–Kansas City.

Address correspondence to
Lisa Terre, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Missouri–Kansas City, 4825 Troost Building, Suite 123, Kansas City, MO 64110-2499; e-mail: terrel@umkc.edu.
Am J Lifestyle Med. 2009;3(3):195-197. © 2009 Sage Publications, Inc.

_: