ArticleBMC public health2025
Community perceptions of the health equity navigators program: a cross-sectional study in rural and medically underserved areas of Georgia, USA.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Profiles of Non-medical Drivers and Health Burden Associated With Care Seeking Among Rural Women.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealth navigation programs are increasingly gaining attention as a promising strategy to promote healthcare access and reduce disparities, particularly in underserved and rural communities. This study explores community perceptions of the Health Equity Navigators Program, identifies socio-demographic factors associated with perceived helpfulness in improving healthcare access and navigation, and highlights practical implications for tailoring and implementing similar programs in underserved settings.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted among 269 adults residing in rural and urban medically underserved areas. Participants completed items assessing demographic characteristics, healthcare access, and perceived benefits of the "Health Equity Navigators" Program using a Likert scale. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize perceptions, and ordinal logistic regression models were applied to examine demographic predictors of agreement with the program's ability to improve healthcare-seeking efficiency.
resultsThe Majority of participants (69.1%) live in rural areas, with females (79.6%) and Black/African Americans (59.6%) being the most prevalent groups. Most participants agreed or strongly agreed that the program improved their knowledge (Mean = 4.0, SD = 0.8), awareness (Mean = 4.1, SD = 0.9), and ability to navigate healthcare services (Mean = 4.0, SD = 0.8). Perceptions were significantly more favorable when neutral responses were excluded (p < 0.0001). In adjusted models, males (OR = 2.07, 95% CI: 1.08–3.96) and unemployed individuals (OR = 2.00, 95% CI: 1.06–3.75) were significantly more likely to report high agreement, while African American/Black participants had lower odds of strong agreement compared to Non-Hispanic White participants (OR = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.34–0.92).
conclusionsThe Health Equity Navigators Program was positively perceived by community members in rural and underserved areas. Key insights suggest that tailoring outreach by gender and employment status, ensuring cultural relevance, adapting delivery for rural settings, and investing in navigator training are essential for effectiveness. Embedding Health Equity Navigators in care teams and building local partnerships are critical for long-term sustainability. These findings offer practical guidance for scaling similar programs to advance health equity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.