Dataset Information

An in-depth comparison of well-being among Latinx and non-Latinx White adults: A cautionary tale.

ABSTRACT: Understanding how to optimize the health and well-being of Latinxs is crucial and will aid in informing actions to address inequities. Latinxs' unique cultural backgrounds and lived experiences could have implications for their well-being, which may differ from other racial/ethnic groups. We compared overall and domain-specific well-being and their socio-demographic correlates among two samples of Latinxs and a sample of non-Latinx Whites. Cross-sectional samples were independently drawn from the Stanford WELL Initiative (n = 217 Latinxs, n = 943 non-Latinx Whites) and the On the Move Trial (n = 238 Latinxs), both recruiting in Northern California. Well-being was assessed using the Stanford WELL scale, a novel multifaceted measure. Propensity score matching and mixed effect regressions were employed to compare well-being between samples. Overall well-being levels did not differ between groups. However, when examining constituent domains of well-being, several differences were found. Both Latinx samples reported experiencing more stress, having worse physical health, and being more religious than did the matched non-Latinx White sample. However, on four other well-being domains, only one of the Latinx samples differed from the non-Latinx White sample. Moreover, the two Latinx samples differed from each other in four out of nine domains examined. When evaluating well-being across racial/ethnic groups, we recommend employing multidimensional measures and multiple samples to promote greater confidence in the conclusions. This approach can better inform future research and the tailoring of public health efforts by furthering our understanding of the nature of group well-being differences. Our methods offer a blueprint for similar studies examining well-being in multi-ethnic groups.

SUBMITTER: Rodriguez Espinosa P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8358695 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Food security is a multi-dimensional concept that requires multiple indicators to measure it correctly; however, single food security indicators are often used individually or interchangeably. The misinterpretation of individual food security indicators can have important implications for policy design and implementation. The general objective of this paper is to show the discrepancies that may arise when using two different food security indicators that operate in the same dimension of the food security concept and yield the same outcome (food security status of the household) in three of the scenarios that they might be used: (1) for measuring the prevalence of food insecurity, (2) for understanding its drivers, and (3) for estimating the potential impact of a policy. The specific objectives of this paper are (1) to measure and compare the prevalence of food insecurity in a country using the Latin America Food Security Scale (ELCSA, by its acronym in Spanish) and the household undernourishment indicator, (2) to compare the factors associated with households' food security status using the two indicators, and (3) to assess the potential use of the two indicators for ex ante policy analysis. Data for the study comes from the 2011 Survey of Living Standards from Guatemala, which collected all the data for estimating the ELCSA and the household level data required for calculating the household undernourishment indicator. Our results indicate considerable differences in the estimated prevalence of food insecurity at the national and regional levels using the two alternative indicators, with ELCSA resulting in higher estimates. Logistic regression models estimated to assess and identify household food insecurity drivers also found large differences in both the direction and magnitude of factors affecting food insecurity using the alternative food security indicators. Finally, the magnitude of the simulated impact of a cash transfer policy varied depending on the food indicator used.

Project description:FURIN is a pro-protein convertase previously shown to be important for placental syncytialisation (Zhou et al. [1]), a process of cell fusion whereby placental cytotrophoblast cells fuse to form a multinucleated syncytium. This finding has been broadly accepted however, we have evidence suggesting the contrary. Spontaneously syncytialising term primary human trophoblast cells and BeWo choriocarcinoma cells were treated with either FURIN siRNA or negative control siRNA or the protease inhibitor, DEC-RVKR-CMK, or vehicle. Cells were then left to either spontaneously syncytialise (primary trophoblasts) or were induced to syncytialise with forskolin (BeWo). Effects on syncytialisation were measured by determining human chorionic gonadotrophin secretion and E-cadherin protein levels. We showed that FURIN is not important for syncytialisation in either cell type. However, in primary trophoblasts another protease also inhibited by DEC-RVKR-CMK, may be involved. Our results directly contrast with those published by Zhou et al. Zhou et al. however, used first trimester villous explants to study syncytialisation, and we used term primary trophoblasts. Therefore, we suggest that FURIN may be involved in syncytialisation of first trimester trophoblasts, but not term trophoblasts. What is more concerning is that our results using BeWo cells do not agree with their results, even though for the most part, we used the same experimental design. It is unclear why these experiments yielded different results, however we wanted to draw attention to simple differences in measuring syncytialisation or flaws in method reporting (including omission of cell line source and passage numbers, siRNA concentration and protein molecular weights) and choice of immunoblot loading controls, that could impact on experimental outcomes. Our study shows that careful reporting of methods by authors and thorough scrutiny by referees are vital. Furthermore, a universal benchmark for measuring syncytialisation is required so that various studies of syncytialisation can be validated.

Dataset Information

An in-depth comparison of well-being among Latinx and non-Latinx White adults: A cautionary tale.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets