INTRODUCTION: There is an increased need for capacity building of researchers and professionals in low- and middle-income countries with evidence-based approaches across the tobacco control continuum, particularly with regard to gender-relevant strategies. We describe the development, implementation, and evaluation of a Career Development and Research Training Program (CDRTP) in tobacco control. METHODS: The CDRTP is organized into two modules: Module I is open to the public and provides an overview of tobacco control; Module II, consists of a one-year program with multi-mode sessions toward the development of a pilot research project. Activities are implemented through co-learning to facilitate cross-fertilization of knowledge, collaborations, and team science. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2015, 255 individuals participated in Module I with 57 applying for Module II's selective process. Out of these, 35 were selected, 29 completed the program (83%), 21 submitted pilot research projects that have undergone review, and 16 were approved for funding. Pre- and post-tests among the 29 participants who completed the training indicated improvement in scholars' perceived knowledge and skills on all of the components. CONCLUSION: In addition to attracting researchers and professionals who have not been working in tobacco control, the capacity building program has promoted knowledge, skills, and confidence among participants to pursue gender-relevant tobacco control research.

This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of tobacco use and to describe the demographic profile of female smokers in Parana State, Brazil. The study used a cross-sectional population-based design with cluster sampling (n = 2,153) of women 18 years or older in seven cities. Prevalence of smoking was 13.4%, ranging from 10% in Cascavel to 19% in Irati. According to multivariate analysis, city of residence, marital status, and schooling were significantly associated with tobacco use. Women in Irati (OR = 2.08; 95%CI: 1.22-3.54) were more likely to smoke than those in Cambe. Married women and widows were less likely to smoke (OR = 0.47; 95%CI: 0.30-0.73 and OR = 0.43; 95%CI: 0.22-0.87) than single women. Women living with a partner (but not married) were more likely to smoke than single women (OR = 2.49; 95%CI: 1.12-5.53), and women with university degrees were less likely to smoke than those with eight years of school or less (OR = 0.41; 95%CI: 0.22-0.87). The results confirm the need for tobacco control programs that take gender and regional differences into account.

OBJECTIVE: Racial/ethnic discrimination has adverse effects on health outcomes, as does low income and education, but the relationship between discrimination, income, and education is not well characterized. In this study, we describe the associations of discrimination with income and education in elderly African Americans (AA) and European Americans (EA). DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study involving computer-assisted telephone survey. SETTING: Southeastern United States. PARTICIPANTS: AA and EA Medicare managed care enrollees. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Discrimination was measured with the Experience of Discrimination (EOD) scale (range 0-35). We used zero-inflated negative binomial models to determine the association between self-reported income and education and 1) presence of any discrimination and 2) intensity of discrimination. RESULTS: Among 1,800 participants (45% AA, 56% female, and mean age 73 years), EA reported less discrimination than AA (4% vs. 47%; P < .001). AA men reported more discrimination and more intense discrimination than AA women (EOD scores 4.35 vs. 2.50; P < .001). Both income and education were directly and linearly associated with both presence of discrimination and intensity of discrimination in AA, so that people with higher incomes and education experienced more discrimination. In adjusted models, predicted EOD scores among AA decreased with increasing age categories (3.42, 3.21, 2.99, 2.53; P < .01) and increased with increasing income (2.36, 3.44, 4.17; P < .001) and education categories (2.31, 3.09, 5.12; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests future research should focus less on differences between racial/ethnic groups and more on factors within minority populations that may contribute to healthcare disparities.

BACKGROUND: In adults with insulin-treated diabetes, self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) rates may be lower in minority or low-income populations, but the effect of income on racial/ethnic differences in SMBG is unknown. METHODS: We assessed whether racial/ethnic differences in SMBG vary by income among adults with insulin-treated diabetes by using Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data from 2000 through 2004. We measured the prevalence of SMBG at least once per day among 16,630 adults aged > or = 19 years with insulin-treated diabetes. RESULTS: At incomes > or = $20,000, Hispanics and non-Hispanic Blacks reported similar but lower SMBG rates than did non-Hispanic Whites (78%, 77%, 85%; P < or = .01). However, among those with income < $20,000, Hispanics performed SMBG substantially less than did Blacks or Whites (65%, 79%, 85%; P < or = .01). Racial/ ethnic differences in SMBC persisted after adjustment for age, sex, education, health insurance, health status, survey period, and diabetes measures. Receipt of diabetes education varied significantly by race/ethnicity in the income < $20,000 group only (Hispanics 49%, Blacks 64%, Whites 62%; P < .001). Low-income Hispanics with limited English proficiency had lower SMBG and diabetes education rates than did those with English proficiency (61% vs 79% and 44% vs 58%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Among US adults with insulin-treated diabetes, Hispanics and Blacks performed daily SMBG less frequently than did Whites. Stratification by income revealed a disparity gradient in the income < $20,000 group: SMBG rates decreased from Whites to Blacks to Hispanics. Low-income Hispanics with limited English proficiency are at greater risk for reduced SMBG than are those proficient in English.