Trial Outcomes & Findings for The Heart of the Community Study (NCT NCT05560893)

Participants in this study (N = 84; 92% female) were recruited from 12 community service agencies that primarily serve low-income Hispanic/Latine (HL) families

No significant events occurred between enrollment and assignment to study groups. Of the 84 participants to begin the RS intervention, 80 completed all four intervention sessions; 78 completed the post-intervention assessment; and 62 completed the 3-month follow-up assessment.

The Heart of the Community Study

Cardiovascular health was assessed using heart rate variability (HRV) measured during a socially relevant stressor task administered in each intervention session. HRV data were collected using the movisens device, a wearable chest-mounted sensor that records electrocardiogram (ECG) data. Vagally mediated HRV was calculated from the variability of inter-beat (R-R) intervals derived from these ECG recordings. Mean HRV values were calculated for each assessment period, with higher mean HRV values (per minute) indicating greater autonomic regulation and improved cardiovascular health. Due to feasibility and data quality issues with the wearable ECG device, HRV data collection was discontinued after the first two assessment periods (Baseline 1 and the 4-week assessment \[post-intervention for the intervention group/Baseline 2 for the waitlist control group\]); therefore, post-intervention HRV data were not collected for the waitlist control group.

Intervention acceptability was assessed using participant self-report items evaluating frequency of use of the intervention skills, perceived value of the intervention, willingness to recommend the intervention to others, and intention to continue engaging in the intervention skills. Acceptability was assessed only after completion of the intervention and at the 3-month follow-up. Acceptability scores were summarized using mean scores reported separately at post-intervention and at the 3-month follow-up across the sample. Possible scores ranged from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating greater acceptability.

Perceived closeness to community was assessed using the Inclusion of Other in the Self-Community Version (IOS-C), a single-item visual self-report measure. Participants selected one of seven images depicting increasing overlap between two circles representing the self and the community. Greater overlap indicates greater perceived closeness to the community, whereas less overlap indicates lower perceived closeness. The measure was administered immediately before and after each intervention session (four sessions total). Scores ranged from 1 (not close at all) to 7 (very close), with higher scores indicating greater perceived closeness to the community.

Emotional valence was assessed using the valence subscale of the Self-Assessment Manikin (SAM), a nonverbal pictorial self-report measure. Participants selected one of five pictograms ranging from smiling to frowning to indicate their current emotional state. Scores ranged from 1 to 5, with lower scores indicating more positive emotional valence and higher scores indicating more negative emotional valence. The measure was administered immediately before and after each intervention session.

Sleep quality was assessed using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), a 19-item self-report questionnaire that assesses subjective sleep quality over the past month. The PSQI yields a global sleep quality score derived from seven component scores, with total scores ranging from 0 to 21. Higher scores indicate poorer sleep quality.

can you revise to make it clear that scoring was dichotomized as ither true or false and thus scores ranged from: Changes in diet-related behavior were assessed using the Emotional Eating subscale of the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ). The subscale consists of 3 items assessing the extent to which individuals eat in response to emotional states. Items are rated on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (definitely true) to 3 (definitely false). Item responses were summed to create a total emotional eating score ranging from 0 to 9, with lower scores indicating greater emotional eating and higher scores indicating less emotional eating.

Burnout related to the COVID-19 pandemic was assessed using the COVID-19 Burnout Scale, a 10-item self-report measure. Items assess feelings of emotional exhaustion and hopelessness related to the pandemic and are rated on a 7-point scale ranging from 0 (never) to 6 (all the time). Item responses are summed to create a total burnout score ranging from 0 to 60, with higher scores indicating greater burnout. The measure was administered at baseline (1 and 2), post-intervention, and at the 3-month follow-up.

Job satisfaction was assessed using the Job Satisfaction Scale, a 36-item self-report questionnaire measuring participants' overall attitudes toward their job. Items were rated on a 6-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (disagree very much) to 6 (agree very much). Item responses were summed to create a total job satisfaction score ranging from 36 to 216, with higher scores indicating greater job satisfaction. The measure was administered at baseline (1 and 2), post-intervention, and at the 3-month follow-up.

Psychological distress was assessed using the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI), a 19-item self-report measure assessing symptoms of depression, anxiety, and somatic distress. Items were rated on a 6-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 5 (extremely). Item responses were summed to create a global psychological distress score ranging from 0 to 95, with higher scores indicating greater overall distress. The measure was administered at baseline (1 and 2), post-intervention, and at the 3-month follow-up.

General health was assessed using the General Health subscale of the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). Participants completed the full SF-36 questionnaire, and the 5 items comprising the General Health subscale were scored according to standard SF-36 procedures. Item responses were recoded and summed, and the raw subscale score was transformed to a 0-100 scale, with higher scores indicating better perceived physical health. The measure was administered at baseline (1 and 2), post-intervention, and at the 3-month follow-up.

Community outreach was assessed using a composite measure of community engagement and reach in community health programming. The composite index captured the extent to which community members were reached by community health programming and was calculated using four indicators: (1) number of days community service providers (CSPs) worked, (2) number of health-related events offered by CSPs, (3) community attendance at CSP-led events, and (4) retention of community members across multi-day programs. Indicators were combined to create a total community outreach score, with higher scores reflecting greater outreach and a higher number of community members reached through community health programming.