Search

Objectives. Evidence indicates that foreign-born Latinos have a health advantage compared with US-born persons of the same socioeconomic status. An explanation for this paradox has remained elusive. We examined the extent to which this paradox exists for the prevalence of asthma and other respiratory conditions. We then explored the role of neighborhood social context in understanding any observed advantage. We invoked theories of social organization, collective efficacy, and the urban ethnic enclave. Methods. We combined data from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods Community Survey with 2 other data sources and used hierarchical generalized linear modeling techniques. Results. We found a distinctly graded effect for asthma and other breathing problems among foreign-born Latinos, depending on community composition. Foreign-born Latinos embedded in a neighborhood that had a high percentage of foreign-born residents experienced a significantly lower prevalence of asthma and other breathing problems; those in communities that had a low percentage of foreign-born residents had the highest prevalence overall (even when compared with African Americans). Conclusions. Foreign-born Latinos have a respiratory health advantage only in enclave-like settings. Contexts such as these may provide the cohesiveness critical for effective prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Residents of nursing homes remain an epidemiologically important population for COVID-19 prevention efforts, including vaccination. We aim to understand effectiveness of bivalent vaccination for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections in this population., Methods: We used a retrospective cohort of nursing home residents from November 1, 2022, through March 31, 2023, to identify new SARS-CoV-2 infections. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate hazard ratios comparing residents with a bivalent vaccination compared with residents not up to date with vaccination recommendations. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated as (1 - Hazard Ratio) * 100., Results: Among 6,916 residents residing in 76 nursing homes included in our cohort, 3,211 (46%) received a bivalent vaccine 7 or more days prior to censoring. Adjusted vaccine effectiveness against laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection comparing receipt of a bivalent vaccine versus not up to date vaccine status was 29% (95% Confidence interval 18% to 39%). Vaccine effectiveness for receipt of a bivalent vaccine against residents who were unvaccinated or vaccinated more than a year prior was 32% (95% CI: 20% to 42%,) and was 25% compared with residents who were vaccinated with a monovalent vaccine in the past 61-365 days (95% CI:10% to 37%)., Conclusions: Bivalent COVID-19 vaccines provided additional protection against SARS-CoV-2 infections in nursing home residents during our study time-period, compared to both no vaccination or vaccination more than a year ago and monovalent vaccination 60 - 365 days prior. Ensuring nursing home residents stay up to date with vaccine recommendations remains a critical tool for COVID-19 prevention efforts., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

COVID-19 vaccination provides additional protection against severe COVID-19-associated illness and death. Since September 2023, 2023-2024 Formula monovalent XBB.1-strain COVID-19 vaccines have been recommended for use in the United States for all persons aged ≥6 months. However, SARS-CoV-2 continues to evolve, and since winter 2023-2024, Omicron JN.1 lineage strains of SARS-CoV-2, including the JN.1 strain and the KP.2 strain, have been widely circulating in the United States. Further, COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness is known to wane. On June 27, 2024, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended 2024-2025 COVID-19 vaccination with a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved or authorized vaccine for all persons aged ≥6 months. On August 22, 2024, FDA approved the 2024-2025 COVID-19 vaccines by Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech (based on the KP.2 strain) for use in persons aged ≥12 years and authorized these vaccines for use in children aged 6 months-11 years under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). On August 30, 2024, FDA authorized 2024-2025 COVID-19 vaccine by Novavax (based on the JN.1 strain) for use in persons aged ≥12 years under EUA. ACIP will continue to evaluate new evidence as it becomes available and will update recommendations as needed., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

COVID-19 vaccines represent a great scientific and public health achievement in the face of overwhelming pressures from a global pandemic, preventing millions of hospitalizations and deaths due to COVID-19 vaccines in the United States. Over 675 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines have been administered in the United States, and over 80% of the U.S. population has had at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, over one million people died from COVID-19, and over six million were hospitalized. It has been estimated that COVID-19 vaccines prevented more than 18 million additional hospitalizations and more than 3 million additional deaths due to COVID-19 in the United States. From the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 through June 2023, ACIP had 35 COVID-19 focused meetings and 24 votes for COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. ACIP had the critical task of rapidly and thoroughly reviewing emerging and evolving data on COVID-19 epidemiology and vaccines, as well as making comprehensive population-based recommendations for vaccine policy and considerations for implementation through a transparent and evidence-based framework. Safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines, recommended through transparent policy discussions with ACIP, remain the best tool we have to prevent serious illness, hospitalization and death from COVID-19., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is prevalent among U.S. military personnel, but adherence to positive airway pressure (PAP) treatment is suboptimal. This study sought to identify factors that predict the adherence to PAP therapy of active duty military patients newly diagnosed with OSA., Materials and Methods: The study was a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 239 active duty military patients (94% men, mean age 40.0 ± 7.8 years), who were admitted into PAP therapy and participated in a single 90-minute behavioral intervention session. The session included a self-assessment of sleep trouble, sleep distress, impact of sleep on functioning, emotional difficulty from sleep, stress appraisal, and beliefs about OSA and PAP. PAP usage data of the patients were analyzed at 30-, 60-, and 180 days post-intervention using descriptive statistics and multivariable linear regression analysis., Results: Positive airway pressure adherence of at least 4 hours nightly usage decreased slightly over the course of the study; mean number of days used over a 30-day timeframe at the 30-, 60-, and 180-day mark were 15.6, 14.9, and 14.1 days, respectively. On nights used, PAP usage remained consistent at 4.8 to 5.0 hours over the 30-, 60-, and 180-day mark. Age, apnea-hypopnea index, readiness, self-efficacy or confidence in treatment implementation, and worries about sleep were statistically significant predictors of adherence. Furthermore, worries about sleep negatively affected PAP usage hours on nights used, regardless of meeting adherence criterion, in the early phase of treatment and in the long run at the 180-day mark., Conclusions: Readiness for therapy, self-efficacy, confidence in putting into action the treatment plan, and worries about sleep are modifiable variables that may be targeted in programs to boost PAP adherence and usage among the military population. Future studies should explore the predictive aspects of each of these variables and identify interventions to improve them., (© The Association of Military Surgeons of the United States 2024. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site–for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Police-related violence may be a source of chronic stress underlying entrenched racial inequities in reproductive health in the USA. Using publicly available data on police-related fatalities, we estimated total and victim race-specific rates of police-related fatalities (deaths per 100,000 population) in 2018-2019 for Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA) and counties within MSAs in the USA. Rates were linked to data on live births by maternal MSA and county of residence. We fit adjusted log-Poisson models with generalized estimating equations and cluster-robust standard errors to estimate the relative risk of preterm birth associated with the middle and highest tertiles of police-related fatalities compared to the lowest tertile. We included a test for heterogeneity by maternal race/ethnicity and additionally fit race/ethnicity-stratified models for associations with victim race/ethnicity-specific police-related fatality rates. Fully adjusted models indicated significant adverse associations between police-related fatality rates and relative risk of preterm birth for the total population, non-Hispanic Black, and non-Hispanic White groups separately. Results confirm the role of fatal police violence as a social determinant of population health outcomes and inequities, including preterm birth., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: The social and structural environments where people live are understudied in contraceptive research. We assessed if neighborhood measures of racialized socioeconomic deprivation are associated with contraceptive use in the United States., Methods: We used restricted geographic data from four waves of the National Survey of Family Growth (2011-2019) limited to non-pregnant women ages 15-44 who had sex in the last 12 months. We characterized respondent neighborhoods (census tracts) with the Index of Concentration at the Extremes (ICE), a measure of spatial social polarization, into areas of concentrated privilege (predominantly white residents living on high incomes) and deprivation (predominantly people of color living on low incomes). We used multivariable binary and multinomial logistic regression with year fixed effects to estimate adjusted associations between ICE tertile and contraceptive use and method type. We also assessed for an interactive effect of ICE and health insurance type., Results: Of the 14,396 respondents, 88.4% in neighborhoods of concentrated deprivation used any contraception, compared to 92.7% in the most privileged neighborhoods. In adjusted models, the predicted probability of using any contraception in neighborhoods of concentrated deprivation was 2.8 percentage points lower than in neighborhoods of concentrated privilege, 5.0 percentage points higher for barrier/coital dependent methods, and 4.3 percentage points lower for short-acting methods. Those with Medicaid were less likely to use any contraception than those with private insurance irrespective of neighborhood classification., Conclusions: This study highlights the salience of structural factors for contraceptive use and the need for continued examination of structural oppressions to inform health policy., (© 2024 The Author(s). Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of University of Ottawa.)

COVID-19 remains an important public health threat, despite overall decreases in COVID-19-related severe disease since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19-associated hospitalization rates remain higher among adults aged ≥65 years relative to rates in younger adults, adolescents, and children; during October 2023-January 2024, 67% of all COVID-19-associated hospitalizations were among persons aged ≥65 years. On September 12, 2023, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended updated (2023-2024 Formula) COVID-19 vaccination with a monovalent XBB.1.5-derived vaccine for all persons aged ≥6 months to protect against severe COVID-19-associated illness and death. Because SARS-CoV-2 continues to circulate throughout the year, and because of the increased risk for COVID-19-related severe illness in persons aged ≥65 years, the protection afforded by updated vaccines against JN.1 and other currently circulating variants, and the expected waning of vaccine-conferred protection against disease, on February 28, 2024, ACIP recommended all persons aged ≥65 years receive 1 additional dose of the updated (2023-2024 Formula) COVID-19 vaccine. Implementation of these recommendations is expected to enhance immunity that might have waned and decrease the risk for severe COVID-19-associated outcomes, including death, among persons aged ≥65 years., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Context: It is unknown if US residency applicants of different educational backgrounds (US allopathic [MD], Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine [DO], and international medical graduates [IMG]) but comparable academic performance have similar match success., Objectives: Our objective was to compare match probabilities between applicant types after adjusting for specialty choice and United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 scores., Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of published data in National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) reports from 2016, 2018, 2020, and 2022 for US MD seniors, DO seniors, and IMGs (US citizens and non-US citizens). We examined the 10 specialties with the most available spots in 2022. Average marginal effects from a multiple variable logistic regression model were utilized to estimate each non-MD senior applicant type's probability of matching into their preferred specialty compared to MD seniors adjusting for specialty choice, Step 1 score, and match year., Results: Each non-MD applicant type had a lower adjusted percent difference in matching to their preferred specialty than MD seniors, -7.1 % (95 % confidence interval [CI], -11.3 to -2.9) for DO seniors, -45.6 % (-50.6 to -40.5) for US IMGs, and -56.6 % (-61.5 to -51.6) for non-US IMGs. Similarly, each non-MD applicant type had a lower adjusted percent difference in matching than MD seniors across almost all Step 1 score ranges, except for DO seniors with Step 1 scores <200 (-2.0 % [-9.5 to 5.5])., Conclusions: After adjusting for specialty choice, Step 1 score, and match year, non-US MD applicants had lower probabilities of matching into their preferred specialties than their US MD colleagues., (© 2024 the author(s), published by De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston.)

Introduction: Food deserts are a major public health concern. Inadequate access to healthy food has been associated with poor nutrition and the development of dietary related chronic conditions., Objective: To determine the association between geographic access to nutritious food and preterm birth and whether gestational hypertension mediates this relationship., Methods: Food access data was retrieved from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Food Access Research Atlas (2019) and used to quantify the percentage of Census tracts within each county that were food deserts: low-income tracts with limited access to grocery stores, supermarkets, or other sources of healthy, nutritious foods. These data were merged with US birth records from 2018 to 2019 by using the maternal county of residence ( n = 7,533,319). We fit crude and adjusted logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations to determine the association between living in a food desert and the odds of preterm birth. We conducted a secondary within-group analysis by stratifying the fully adjusted model by race for non-Hispanic White and non-Hispanic Black birthing people., Results: In the fully adjusted model, we found a dose-response relationship. As the prevalence of tract-level food deserts within counties increased, so did the likelihood of preterm birth (mid-range: odds ratio (OR) = 1.04, 95% confidence interval (C.I.) 1.01-1.07; high: OR = 1.07, 95% C.I. 1.03-1.11). Similar results were seen in the White-Black stratified models. However, a disparity remained as Black birthing people had the highest odds for preterm birth. Lastly, gestational hypertension appears to mediate the relationship between nutritious food access and preterm birth (natural indirect effect (NIE) = 1.01, 95% CI = 1.00, 1.01)., Conclusion: It is salient, particularly for Black birthing people who experience high rates of adverse birth outcomes, that the role of food desert residency be explored within maternal and child health disparities.

COVID-19 has been associated with an increased risk for thromboembolic events, including ischemic stroke, venous thromboembolism, and myocardial infarction. Studies have reported lower rates of COVID-19-related thromboembolic events among persons who received the COVID-19 vaccine compared with persons who did not, but rigorous estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) in preventing COVID-19-related thromboembolic events are lacking. This analysis estimated the incremental benefit of receipt of a bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine after receiving an original monovalent COVID-19 vaccine. To estimate VE of a bivalent mRNA COVID-19 dose in preventing thromboembolic events compared with original monovalent COVID-19 vaccine doses only, two retrospective cohort studies were conducted among Medicare fee-for-service enrollees during September 4, 2022-March 4, 2023. Effectiveness of a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine dose against COVID-19-related thromboembolic events compared with that of original vaccine alone was 47% (95% CI = 45%-49%) among Medicare enrollees aged ≥65 years and 51% (95% CI = 39%-60%) among adults aged ≥18 years with end stage renal disease receiving dialysis. VE was similar among Medicare beneficiaries with immunocompromise: 46% (95% CI = 42%-49%) among adults aged ≥65 years and 45% (95% CI = 24%-60%) among those aged ≥18 years with end stage renal disease. To help prevent complications of COVID-19, including thromboembolic events, adults should stay up to date with COVID-19 vaccination., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Background: Many factors contribute to the decision to provide abortion in the United States. We aim to describe pre-residency experiences and decisions that contribute to choosing a career as an abortion provider in the United States., Methods: We conducted 60-min semi-structured telephone interviews with 34 current abortion care providers about their career trajectories, decision-making and planning. Interviews were transcribed and coded by three members of the research team using thematic analysis., Results: A majority of the participants considered (73.5%, n=25) and firmly committed (62.8%, n=22) to providing abortion care prior to entering residency. They described important professional experiences with women's health and reproductive rights, as well as personal experiences with abortion care, all of which inspired them to seek out abortion training during medical school and residency. Participants also described a dearth of mentors or role models until late in training, especially for family physicians., Conclusions: Our study suggests that the decision to provide abortion care is often made prior to residency training, before or during medical school, so additional support may be needed to promote exposure to abortion care during undergraduate medical education or even before. Further, there is a need for improved mentorship and role modelling during these periods, especially for family physicians. This may be especially critical after the overturn of Roe v Wade, as medical schools in restrictive states may not be able to provide abortions to patients, depriving students of role models who are abortion providers., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

To inform Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP) COVID-19 vaccine policy decisions, we developed a benefit-risk assessment framework that directly compared the estimated benefits of COVID-19 vaccination to individuals (e.g., prevention of COVID-19-associated hospitalization) with risks associated with COVID-19 vaccines. This assessment framework originated following the identification of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) after Janssen COVID-19 vaccination in April 2021. We adapted the benefit-risk assessment framework for use in subsequent policy decisions, including the adverse events of myocarditis and Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) following mRNA and Janssen COVID-19 vaccination respectively, expansion of COVID-19 vaccine approvals or authorizations to new age groups, and use of booster doses. Over the first year of COVID-19 vaccine administration in the United States (December 2020-December 2021), we used the benefit-risk assessment framework to inform seven different ACIP policy decisions. This framework allowed for rapid and direct comparison of the benefits and potential harms of vaccination, which may be helpful in informing other vaccine policy decisions. The assessments were a useful tool for decision-making but required reliable and granular data to stratify analyses and appropriately focus on populations most at risk for a specific adverse event. Additionally, careful decision-making was needed on parameters for data inputs. Sensitivity analyses were used where data were limited or uncertain; adjustments in the methodology were made over time to ensure the assessments remained relevant and applicable to the policy questions under consideration., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

COVID-19 vaccines protect against severe COVID-19-associated outcomes, including hospitalization and death. As SARS-CoV-2 has evolved, and waning vaccine effectiveness has been noted, vaccine formulations and policies have been updated to provide continued protection against severe illness and death from COVID-19. Since September 2022, bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines have been recommended in the United States, but the variants these vaccines protect against are no longer circulating widely. On September 11, 2023, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the updated (2023-2024 Formula) COVID-19 mRNA vaccines by Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech for persons aged ≥12 years and authorized these vaccines for persons aged 6 months-11 years under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). On October 3, 2023, FDA authorized the updated COVID-19 vaccine by Novavax for use in persons aged ≥12 years under EUA. The updated COVID-19 vaccines include a monovalent XBB.1.5 component, which is meant to broaden vaccine-induced immunity and provide protection against currently circulating SARS-CoV-2 XBB-sublineage variants including against severe COVID-19-associated illness and death. On September 12, 2023, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended vaccination with updated COVID-19 vaccines for all persons aged ≥6 months. These recommendations will be reviewed as new evidence becomes available or new vaccines are approved and might be updated., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is the leading cause of hospitalization among U.S. infants. Nirsevimab (Bevfortus, Sanofi and AstraZeneca) is recommended to prevent RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) in infants. In August 2023, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved RSVpreF vaccine (Abrysvo, Pfizer Inc.) for pregnant persons as a single dose during 32-36 completed gestational weeks (i.e., 32 weeks and zero days' through 36 weeks and 6 days' gestation) to prevent RSV-associated lower respiratory tract disease in infants aged <6 months. Since October 2021, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) RSV Vaccines Pediatric/Maternal Work Group has reviewed RSV epidemiology and evidence regarding safety, efficacy, and potential economic impact of pediatric and maternal RSV prevention products, including RSVpreF vaccine. On September 22, 2023, ACIP and CDC recommended RSVpreF vaccine using seasonal administration (i.e., during September through end of January in most of the continental United States) for pregnant persons as a one-time dose at 32-36 weeks' gestation for prevention of RSV-associated LRTI in infants aged <6 months. Either maternal RSVpreF vaccination during pregnancy or nirsevimab administration to the infant is recommended to prevent RSV-associated LRTI among infants, but both are not needed for most infants. All infants should be protected against RSV-associated LRTI through use of one of these products., Competing Interests: All authors and work group members have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Context: As the number of medical school graduates continues to outpace the available residency training positions, applying for residency in the United States has become a highly competitive process, often associated with a low rate of selection and invitation for interview. The National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) Program Director survey provides data assessing factors considered by Program Directors (PD) in selecting and inviting candidates for interview. Assessing the evolution of these factors over time is efficacious to inform and guide prospective applicants toward improving preparation for residency application., Objectives: We aim to synthesize NRMP data showing factors that PDs reported and rated as important in their decision to select and invite applicants for interview., Methods: Data from residency PD surveys from 2008 to 2021 were accessed, but after applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, only the data from 2016 to 2020 were reviewed and analyzed. The NRMP survey reports provided two metrics that characterized PDs' evaluation of the residency factors for interview, namely, "percent citing factor" and "average rating" on a 0 to 5 Likert-type scale. These two metrics were combined into an aggregate measure of importance (AI), and another measure of relative importance (RI) was constructed from normalizing the AI of each individual factor to the sum of the AI within each survey year., Results: The top ranked factors were United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1/Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination (COMLEX) Level 1, Letter of Recommendation (LOR) in the specialty, Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE/Dean's Letter), and USMLE Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK)/COMLEX Level 2 Cognitive Exam (CE) score, any failed attempt in USMLE/COMLEX, and perceived commitment to specialty. Factors rising in importance were Audition Elective/Rotation Within Your Department, Personal Statement (PS), Perceived Commitment to Specialty, Perceived Interest in Program, LOR in the Specialty, Other Life Experience, and Personal Prior Knowledge of the Applicant. Factors with declining importance were Interest in Academic Career, Awards or Special Honors in Basic Sciences, Graduate of Highly Regarded US Medical School, Awards or Special Honors in Clinical Clerkships, Lack of Gaps in Medical Education, Awards or Special Honors in Clerkship in Desired Specialty, and Consistency of Grades. Compared to the 2021 PD survey, our findings show continued predictive consistency, particularly related to specialty and program commitment., Conclusions: The factors identified for the selection of medical school graduates for interview into a residency program reveal that PDs move toward a more integrated approach. Specifically, PDs are placing increasing emphasis on factors that border on subjective qualities more so than the more traditional, quantitative, and objective metrics. Medical students and educators need to continually apprise themselves of the NRMP data to inform students' preparation endeavors throughout medical school to strengthen their application portfolios and enhance their competitiveness for the matching process., (© 2023 the author(s), published by De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston.)

Pregnancy-associated homicide remains an understudied yet critical issue. Using restricted use mortality files provided by the National Center for Health Statistics and the National Violent Death Reporting System, annual state-level pregnancy-associated homicide ratios were estimated as the count of deaths divided by the number of live births. The exposure, the state Gini index, was categorized into tertiles to compare states by levels of income inequality. In the final adjusted longitudinal linear model, those who experienced the greatest amount of income inequality had a significant 1.28 per 100,000 homicide rate when compared to the lowest income inequality tertile.

Nursing home residents have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic; their age, comorbidities, and exposure to a congregate setting has placed them at high risk for both infection and severe COVID-19-associated outcomes, including death (1). Receipt of a primary COVID-19 mRNA vaccination series (2) and monovalent booster doses (3) have been demonstrated to be effective in reducing COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality in this population. Beginning in October 2022, the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) defined up-to-date vaccination as receipt of a bivalent COVID-19 mRNA vaccine dose or completion of a primary series within the preceding 2 months.* The effectiveness of being up to date with COVID-19 vaccination among nursing home residents in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection is not known. This analysis used NHSN nursing home COVID-19 data reported during November 20, 2022-January 8, 2023, to describe effectiveness of up-to-date vaccination status (versus not being up to date) against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection among nursing home residents. Adjusting for calendar week, county-level COVID-19 incidence, county-level social vulnerability index (SVI), and facility-level percentage of staff members who were up to date, up-to-date vaccine effectiveness (VE) against infection was 31.2% (95% CI = 29.1%-33.2%). Nursing home residents should stay up to date with recommended age-appropriate COVID-19 vaccination, which now includes an additional bivalent vaccine dose for moderately or severely immunocompromised adults aged ≥65 years to increase protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Throughout the national public health emergency declared in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, CDC, guided by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), has offered evidence-based recommendations for the use of COVID-19 vaccines in U.S. populations after each regulatory action by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). During August 2022-April 2023, FDA amended its Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) to authorize the use of a single, age-appropriate, bivalent COVID-19 vaccine dose (i.e., containing components from the ancestral and Omicron BA.4/BA.5 strains in equal amounts) for all persons aged ≥6 years, use of bivalent COVID-19 vaccine doses for children aged 6 months-5 years, and additional bivalent doses for immunocompromised persons and adults aged ≥65 years (1). ACIP voted in September 2022 on the use of the bivalent vaccine, and CDC made recommendations after the September vote and subsequently, through April 2023, with input from ACIP. This transition to a single bivalent COVID-19 vaccine dose for most persons, with additional doses for persons at increased risk for severe disease, facilitates implementation of simpler, more flexible recommendations. Three COVID-19 vaccines are currently available for use in the United States and recommended by ACIP: 1) the bivalent mRNA Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, 2) the bivalent mRNA Moderna COVID-19 vaccine, and 3) the monovalent adjuvanted, protein subunit-based Novavax COVID-19 vaccine.* As of August 31, 2022, monovalent mRNA vaccines based on the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain are no longer authorized for use in the United States (1)., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Background: Molecular epidemiological approaches provide opportunities to characterize HIV transmission dynamics. We analyzed HIV sequences and virus load (VL) results obtained during routine clinical care, and individual’s zip-code location to determine utility of this approach. Methods: HIV-1 pol sequences aligned using ClustalW were subtyped using REGA. A maximum likelihood (ML) tree was generated using IQTree. Transmission clusters with ≤3% genetic distance (GD) and ≥90% bootstrap support were identified using ClusterPicker. We conducted Bayesian analysis using BEAST to confirm transmission clusters. The proportion of nucleotides with ambiguity ≤0.5% was considered indicative of early infection. Descriptive statistics were applied to characterize clusters and group comparisons were performed using chi-square or t-test. Results: Among 2775 adults with data from 2014−2015, 2589 (93%) had subtype B HIV-1, mean age was 44 years (SD 12.7), 66.4% were male, and 25% had nucleotide ambiguity ≤0.5. There were 456 individuals in 193 clusters: 149 dyads, 32 triads, and 12 groups with ≥ four individuals per cluster. More commonly in clusters were males than females, 349 (76.5%) vs. 107 (23.5%), p < 0.0001; younger individuals, 35.3 years (SD 12.1) vs. 44.7 (SD 12.3), p < 0.0001; and those with early HIV-1 infection by nucleotide ambiguity, 202/456 (44.3%) vs. 442/2133 (20.7%), p < 0.0001. Members of 43/193 (22.3%) of clusters included individuals in different jurisdictions. Clusters ≥ four individuals were similarly found using BEAST. HIV-1 viral load (VL) ≥3.0 log10 c/mL was most common among individuals in clusters ≥ four, 18/21, (85.7%) compared to 137/208 (65.8%) in clusters sized 2−3, and 927/1169 (79.3%) who were not in a cluster (p < 0.0001). Discussion: HIV sequence data obtained for HIV clinical management provide insights into regional transmission dynamics. Our findings demonstrate the additional utility of HIV-1 VL data in combination with phylogenetic inferences as an enhanced contact tracing tool to direct HIV treatment and prevention services. Trans-jurisdictional approaches are needed to optimize efforts to end the HIV epidemic.

In December 2020, an interim recommendation for the use of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged ≥16 years was made under Food and Drug Administration's Emergency Use Authorization. In preparation for Biologics License Application approval, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to inform the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee for Immunization Practice's (ACIP) decision-making for a standard recommendation. We conducted a rapid systematic review and meta-analysis of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic COVID-19, hospitalization due to COVID-19, death due to COVID-19, and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. We identified studies through August 20, 2021 from an ongoing systematic review conducted by the International Vaccine Access Center and the World Health Organization. We evaluated each study for risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled estimates were calculated using meta-analysis. The body of evidence for each outcome was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. We identified 80 articles, selected 35 for full-text review, and included 26. The pooled VE of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was 92.4% (95% CI: 87.5%-95.3%) against symptomatic COVID-19 with moderate evidence certainty (eight studies), 94.3% (95% CI: 87.9%-97.3%) against hospitalization due to COVID-19 with moderate certainty (eight studies), 96.1% (95% CI: 91.5%-98.2%) against death due to COVID-19 with moderate certainty (four studies), and 89.3% (88.4%-90.1%) against asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection with very low certainty (two studies). The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine demonstrated high effectiveness in all pre-specified outcomes and extended knowledge of the vaccine's benefits to outcomes and populations not informed by the RCTs. Use of an existing systematic review facilitated a rapid meta-analysis to inform an ACIP policy decision. This approach can be utilized as additional COVID-19 vaccines are considered for standard recommendations by ACIP., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.)

Four COVID-19 vaccines are currently approved for primary series vaccination in the United States under a Biologics License Application or authorized under an emergency use authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and recommended for primary series vaccination by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP): 1) the 2- or 3-dose monovalent mRNA BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech, Comirnaty) COVID-19 vaccine; 2) the 2- or 3-dose monovalent mRNA mRNA-1273 (Moderna, Spikevax) COVID-19 vaccine; 3) the single-dose adenovirus vector-based Ad26.COV.S (Janssen [Johnson & Johnson]) COVID-19 vaccine; and 4) the 2-dose adjuvanted, protein subunit-based NVX-CoV2373 (Novavax) COVID-19 vaccine. The number of doses recommended is based on recipient age and immunocompromise status (1). For additional protection, FDA has amended EUAs to allow for COVID-19 booster doses in eligible persons (1). Because COVID-19 vaccines have demonstrated decreased effectiveness during the period when the Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) of SARS-CoV-2 predominated, bivalent booster doses (i.e., vaccine with equal components from the ancestral and Omicron strains) were considered for the express purpose of improving protection conferred by COVID-19 vaccine booster doses (2). During September-October 2022, FDA authorized bivalent mRNA vaccines for use as a booster dose in persons aged ≥5 years who completed any FDA-approved or FDA-authorized primary series and removed EUAs for monovalent COVID-19 booster doses (1). Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna bivalent booster vaccines each contain equal amounts of spike mRNA from the ancestral and Omicron BA.4/BA.5 strains. After the EUA amendments, ACIP and CDC recommended that all persons aged ≥5 years receive 1 bivalent mRNA booster dose ≥2 months after completion of any FDA-approved or FDA-authorized monovalent primary series or monovalent booster doses., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

A shift in focus towards healthy reproductive outcomes may reveal opportunities for novel interventions and strategies to promote optimal health. Using variables from the National Center for Health Statistics restricted use natality files, we calculated Empirical Bayes smoothed (EBS) rates of optimal birth for the all live births-both overall and by maternal race/ethnicity-by applying the smoothing tool in GeoDa version 1.18.0.10 We defined counties achieving greater racial birth equity as those where the overall EBS optimal birth rate was greater than the national 75th percentile and the absolute difference between maternal racial/ethnic categories was smaller than the national 25th percentile difference. During the study period, 49.80% of overall births could be classified as an optimal birth according to the study definition. Of the 3140 US counties, only 282 (8.98%) appeared to advance White-Black equity in optimal births, and 205 (6.53%) appeared to advance White-Hispanic equity in optimal births. In the effort improve maternal health, we should focus not only on the absence of negative outcomes, but also the occurrence of positive outcomes. Our analytic results suggest that optimal births can be measured and that geographic inequities by race occur., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

The NVX-CoV2373 (Novavax) COVID-19 vaccine is a recombinant spike (rS) protein nanoparticle vaccine with Matrix-M adjuvant to protect against infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. On July 13, 2022, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the Novavax vaccine for primary COVID-19 immunization of unvaccinated adults aged ≥18 years, administered as 2 doses (5 μg rS and 50 μg Matrix-M adjuvant in each dose) 3 weeks apart (1). On July 19, 2022, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation for use of the Novavax vaccine in persons aged ≥18 years for the prevention of COVID-19.* In the per-protocol † efficacy analysis, vaccine efficacy (VE) against reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 was 89.6% (95% CI = 82.4%-93.8%). The Alpha variant (B.1.1.7) of SARS-CoV-2 was the predominant circulating variant during the period of case accrual for VE assessments. Cases of myocarditis or pericarditis were reported in temporal association with vaccination, suggesting a possible causal relationship. The ACIP recommendation for the use of the Novavax COVID-19 vaccine is interim and will be updated as additional information becomes available. The adjuvanted, protein subunit-based Novavax COVID-19 vaccine provides an additional option for unvaccinated adults, increasing flexibility for the public and for vaccine providers. Vaccination is important for protection against COVID-19., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

On June 17, 2022, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) amendments for the mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccine for use in children aged 6 months-5 years, administered as 2 doses (25 µg [0.25 mL] each), 4 weeks apart, and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 vaccine for use in children aged 6 months-4 years, administered as 3 doses (3 µg [0.2 mL] each), at intervals of 3 weeks between doses 1 and 2 and ≥8 weeks between doses 2 and 3. On June 18, 2022, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued separate interim recommendations for use of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 6 months-5 years and the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 6 months-4 years for the prevention of COVID-19.* Both the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines met the criteria for immunobridging, which is the comparison of neutralizing antibody levels postvaccination in young children with those in young adults in whom efficacy had been demonstrated. Descriptive efficacy analyses were also conducted for both Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines during the period when the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) predominated. No specific safety concerns were identified among recipients of either vaccine. ACIP recommendations for the use of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine and the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 6 months-5 years and 6 months-4 years, respectively, are interim and will be updated as additional information becomes available. Vaccination is important for protecting children aged 6 months-5 years against COVID-19., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

In collaboration with the American College of Veterinary Pathologists.

On February 27, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccine (Janssen Biotech, Inc., a Janssen Pharmaceutical company, Johnson & Johnson), and on February 28, 2021, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation for its use as a single-dose primary vaccination in persons aged ≥18 years (1,2). On April 13, 2021, CDC and FDA recommended a pause in the use of Janssen COVID-19 vaccine after reports of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS), a rare condition characterized by low platelets and thrombosis, including at unusual sites such as the cerebral venous sinus (cerebral venous sinus thrombosis [CVST]), after receipt of the vaccine.* ACIP rapidly convened two emergency meetings to review reported cases of TTS, and 10 days after the pause commenced, ACIP reaffirmed its interim recommendation for use of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged ≥18 years, but included a warning regarding rare clotting events after vaccination, primarily among women aged 18-49 years (3). In July, after review of an updated benefit-risk assessment accounting for risks of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) and TTS, ACIP concluded that benefits of vaccination with Janssen COVID-19 vaccine outweighed risks. Through ongoing safety surveillance and review of reports from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), additional cases of TTS after receipt of Janssen COVID-19 vaccine, including deaths, were identified. On December 16, 2021, ACIP held an emergency meeting to review updated data on TTS and an updated benefit-risk assessment. At that meeting, ACIP made a recommendation for preferential use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines over the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine, including both primary and booster doses administered to prevent COVID-19, for all persons aged ≥18 years. The Janssen COVID-19 vaccine may be considered in some situations, including for persons with a contraindication to receipt of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Allison Lale reports personal fees from the Medical Library Association, outside the submitted work. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Background: There are concerns regarding immunogenicity with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccines among persons with prior history of COVID-19 (PHC). This study was to analyze the short-term side effects of mRNA vaccines among health care workers (HCWs) with and without PHC., Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed using an independent online survey questionnaire that gathered responses from HCWs., Results: Among 1,475 HCWs, 1268 (85.97%) completed the survey, 102/1268 (44/447 in Moderna group and 58/821 in Pfizer-BioNTech group) reported PHC during pre-vaccination period. Symptoms of flushing/P = .05, brain fogging/P= .005, vertigo/P= .041, numbness/P= .023, diarrhea/P= .047, hives/P= .028, itching/P= .028, swelling of lips/mouth/P= .001, shortness of breath/P= .022, and anxiety/P= .048 have greater occurrence among Pfizer-BioNtech group with PHC when compared to Pfizer-BioNtech group with no PHC. Symptoms of chills/P= .027, flushing/P= .045, tremor/P= .05, muscle spasm/P= .039, vomiting/P= .031, diarrhea/P= .015, and cough/P= .011 have higher occurrence among Moderna group with PHC when compared to Moderna group with no PHC., Conclusions: Few short-term side effects among mRNA vaccine recipients with PHC may have necessitated transient time-off from work. The PHC can be considered as a predictor for severity of side effects. While the vaccination program continues in the United States, a future COVID legislation that mandates vaccination among employees along with paid time off provision may help with higher compliance and acceptance., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Three COVID-19 vaccines are currently approved under a Biologics License Application (BLA) or authorized under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and recommended for primary vaccination by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) in the United States: the 2-dose mRNA-based Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines and the single-dose adenovirus vector-based Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) COVID-19 vaccine (1,2) (Box 1). In August 2021, FDA amended the EUAs for the two mRNA COVID-19 vaccines to allow for an additional primary dose in certain immunocompromised recipients of an initial mRNA COVID-19 vaccination series (1). During September-October 2021, FDA amended the EUAs to allow for a COVID-19 vaccine booster dose following a primary mRNA COVID-19 vaccination series in certain recipients aged ≥18 years who are at increased risk for serious complications of COVID-19 or exposure to SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19), as well as in recipients aged ≥18 years of Janssen COVID-19 vaccine (1) (Table). For the purposes of these recommendations, an additional primary (hereafter additional) dose refers to a dose of vaccine administered to persons who likely did not mount a protective immune response after initial vaccination. A booster dose refers to a dose of vaccine administered to enhance or restore protection by the primary vaccination, which might have waned over time. Health care professionals play a critical role in COVID-19 vaccination efforts, including for primary, additional, and booster vaccination, particularly to protect patients who are at increased risk for severe illness and death., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Objective: To estimate the national pregnancy-associated homicide mortality ratio, characterize pregnancy-associated homicide victims, and compare the risk of homicide in the perinatal period (pregnancy and up to 1 year postpartum) with risk among nonpregnant, nonpostpartum females aged 10-44 years., Methods: Data from the National Center for Health Statistics 2018 and 2019 mortality files were used to identify all female decedents aged 10-44 in the United States. These data were used to estimate 2-year pregnancy-associated homicide mortality ratios (deaths/100,000 live births) for comparison with homicide mortality among nonpregnant, nonpostpartum females (deaths/100,000 population) and to mortality ratios for direct maternal causes of death. We compared characteristics and estimated homicide mortality rate ratios and 95% CIs between pregnant or postpartum and nonpregnant, nonpostpartum victims for the total population and with stratification by race and ethnicity and age., Results: There were 3.62 homicides per 100,000 live births among females who were pregnant or within 1 year postpartum, 16% higher than homicide prevalence among nonpregnant and nonpostpartum females of reproductive age (3.12 deaths/100,000 population, P<.05). Homicide during pregnancy or within 42 days of the end of pregnancy exceeded all the leading causes of maternal mortality by more than twofold. Pregnancy was associated with a significantly elevated homicide risk in the Black population and among girls and younger women (age 10-24 years) across racial and ethnic subgroups., Conclusion: Homicide is a leading cause of death during pregnancy and the postpartum period in the United States. Pregnancy and the postpartum period are times of elevated risk for homicide among all females of reproductive age., Competing Interests: Financial Disclosure Veronica Gillispie-Bell reports receiving funding from AbbVie, Inc., the Institute of Healthcare Improvement, and Lecturio GmBH. The other authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aim: Recently, the BLI Adenoma Serrated International Classification (BASIC) system was developed by European experts to differentiate colorectal polyps. Our aim was to validate the BASIC classification system among the US-based endoscopy experts., Methods: Participants utilized a web-based interactive learning system where the group was asked to characterize polyps using the BASIC criteria: polyp surface (presence of mucus, regular/irregular and [pseudo]depressed), pit appearance (featureless, round/non-round with/without dark spots; homogeneous/heterogeneous distribution with/without focal loss), and vessels (present/absent, lacy, peri-cryptal, irregular). The final testing consisted of reviewing BLI images/videos to determine whether the criteria accurately predicted the histology results. Confidence in adenoma identification (rated "1" to "5") and agreement in polyp (adenoma vs non-adenoma) identification and characterization per BASIC criteria were derived. Strength of interobserver agreement with kappa (k) value was reported for adenoma identification., Results: Ten endoscopy experts from the United States identified conventional adenoma (vs non-adenoma) with 94.4% accuracy, 95.0% sensitivity, 93.8% specificity, 93.8% positive predictive value, and 94.9% negative predictive value using BASIC criteria. Overall strength of interobserver agreement was high: kappa 0.89 (0.82-0.96). Agreement for the individual criteria was as follows: surface mucus (93.8%), regularity (65.6%), type of pit (40.6%), pit visibility (66.9%), pit distribution (57%), vessel visibility (73%), and being lacy (46%) and peri-cryptal (61%). The confidence in diagnosis was rated at high ≥4 in 67% of the cases., Conclusions: A group of US-based endoscopy experts have validated a simple and easily reproducible BLI classification system to characterize colorectal polyps with >90% accuracy and a high level of interobserver agreement., (© 2021 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (BNT162b2) is a lipid nanoparticle-formulated, nucleoside mRNA vaccine encoding the prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine consists of 2 intramuscular doses (30 μg, 0.3 mL each) administered 3 weeks apart. In December 2020, the vaccine was granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as well as an interim recommendation for use among persons aged ≥16 years by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) (1). In May 2021, the EUA and interim ACIP recommendations for Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine were extended to adolescents aged 12-15 years (2). During December 14, 2020-September 1, 2021, approximately 211 million doses of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine were administered in the United States.* On August 23, 2021, FDA approved a Biologics License Application for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, Comirnaty (Pfizer, Inc.), in persons aged ≥16 years (3). The ACIP COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group's conclusions regarding the evidence for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine were presented to ACIP at a public meeting on August 30, 2021. To guide its deliberations regarding the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, ACIP used the Evidence to Recommendation (EtR) Framework, † and incorporated a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. § In addition to initial clinical trial data, ACIP considered new information gathered in the 8 months since issuance of the interim recommendation for Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, including additional follow-up time in the clinical trial, real-world vaccine effectiveness studies, and postauthorization vaccine safety monitoring. The additional information increased certainty that benefits from prevention of asymptomatic infection, COVID-19, and associated hospitalization and death outweighs vaccine-associated risks. On August 30, 2021, ACIP issued a recommendation ¶ for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged ≥16 years for the prevention of COVID-19., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Introduction: Gastroenterologists at all levels of practice benefit from formal mentoring. Much of the current literature on mentoring in gastroenterology is based on expert opinion rather than data. In this study, we aimed to identify gender-related barriers to successful mentoring relationships from the mentor and mentee perspectives., Methods: A voluntary, web-based survey was distributed to physicians at 20 academic institutions across the United States. Overall, 796 gastroenterology fellows and faculty received the survey link, with 334 physicians responding to the survey (42% response rate), of whom 299 (90%; 129 women and 170 men) completed mentorship questions and were included in analysis., Results: Responses of women and men were compared. Compared with men, more women preferred a mentor of the same gender (38.6% women vs 4.2% men, P < 0.0001) but less often had one (45.5% vs 70.2%, P < 0.0001). Women also reported having more difficulty finding a mentor (44.4% vs 16.0%, P < 0.0001) and more often cited inability to identify a mentor of the same gender as a contributing factor (12.8% vs 0.9%, P = 0.0004). More women mentors felt comfortable advising women mentees about work-life balance (88.3% vs 63.8%, P = 0.0005). Nonetheless, fewer women considered themselves effective mentors (33.3% vs 52.6%, P = 0.03). More women reported feeling pressured to mentor because of their gender (39.5% vs 0.9% of men, P < 0.0001). Despite no gender differences, one-third of respondents reported negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their ability to mentor and be mentored., Discussion: Inequities exist in the experiences of women mentees and mentors in gastroenterology, which may affect career advancement and job satisfaction., (Copyright © 2021 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Background: Patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) have vaso-occlusive crises (VOCs). Infusion centers (ICs) are alternatives to emergency department (ED) care and may improve patient outcomes., Objective: To assess whether care in ICs or EDs leads to better outcomes for the treatment of uncomplicated VOCs., Design: Prospective cohort. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02411396)., Setting: 4 U.S. sites, with recruitment between April 2015 and December 2016., Participants: Adults with SCD living within 60 miles of a study site., Measurements: Participants were followed for 18 months after enrollment. Outcomes of interest were time to first dose of parenteral pain medication, whether pain reassessment was completed within 30 minutes after the first dose, and patient disposition on discharge from the acute care visit. Treatment effects for ICs versus EDs were estimated using a time-varying propensity score adjustment., Results: Researchers enrolled 483 participants; the 269 who had acute care visits on weekdays are included in this report. With inverse probability of treatment-weighted adjustment, the mean time to first dose was 62 minutes in ICs and 132 minutes in EDs; the difference was 70 minutes (95% CI, 54 to 98 minutes; E-value, 2.8). The probability of pain reassessment within 30 minutes of the first dose of parenteral pain medication was 3.8 times greater (CI, 2.63 to 5.64 times greater; E-value, 4.7) in the IC than the ED. The probability that a participant's visit would end in admission to the hospital was smaller by a factor of 4 (0.25 [CI, 0.18 to 0.33]) with treatment in an IC versus an ED., Limitation: The study was restricted to participants with uncomplicated VOCs., Conclusion: In adults with SCD having a VOC, treatment in an IC is associated with substantially better outcomes than treatment in an ED., Primary Funding Source: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

Background: While evidence shows considerable geographic variations in county-level racial inequities in infant mortality, the role of structural racism across urban-rural lines remains unexplored. The objective of this study was to examine the associations between county-level structural racism (racial inequity in educational attainment, median household income and jail incarceration) and infant mortality and heterogeneity between urban and rural areas., Methods: Using linked live birth/infant death data provided by the National Center for Health Statistics, we calculated overall and race-specific 2013-2017 5-year infant mortality rates (IMRs) per 1000 live births in every county. Racially stratified and area-stratified negative binomial regression models estimated IMR ratios and 95% CIs associated with structural racism indicators, adjusting for county-level confounders. Adjusted linear regression models estimated associations between structural racism indicators and the absolute and relative racial inequity in IMR., Results: In urban counties, structural racism indicators were associated with 7%-8% higher black IMR, and an overall structural racism score was associated with 9% greater black IMR; however, these findings became insignificant when adjusting for the region. In white population, structural racism indicators and the overall structural racism score were associated with a 6% decrease in urban white IMR. Both absolute and relative racial inequity in IMR were exacerbated in urban counties with greater levels of structural racism., Conclusions: Our findings highlight the complex relationship between structural racism and population health across urban-rural lines and suggest its contribution to the maintenance of health inequities in urban settings., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

In December 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 (BNT162b2) vaccine and the Moderna COVID-19 (mRNA-1273) vaccine, † and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued interim recommendations for their use in persons aged ≥16 years and ≥18 years, respectively. § In May 2021, FDA expanded the EUA for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to include adolescents aged 12-15 years; ACIP recommends that all persons aged ≥12 years receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Both Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines are mRNA vaccines encoding the stabilized prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Both mRNA vaccines were authorized and recommended as a 2-dose schedule, with second doses administered 21 days (Pfizer-BioNTech) or 28 days (Moderna) after the first dose. After reports of myocarditis and pericarditis in mRNA vaccine recipients, ¶ which predominantly occurred in young males after the second dose, an ACIP meeting was rapidly convened to review reported cases of myocarditis and pericarditis and discuss the benefits and risks of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in the United States. Myocarditis is an inflammation of the heart muscle; if it is accompanied by pericarditis, an inflammation of the thin tissue surrounding the heart (the pericardium), it is referred to as myopericarditis. Hereafter, myocarditis is used to refer to myocarditis, pericarditis, or myopericarditis. On June 23, 2021, after reviewing available evidence including that for risks of myocarditis, ACIP determined that the benefits of using mRNA COVID-19 vaccines under the FDA's EUA clearly outweigh the risks in all populations, including adolescents and young adults. The EUA has been modified to include information on myocarditis after receipt of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. The EUA fact sheets should be provided before vaccination; in addition, CDC has developed patient and provider education materials about the possibility of myocarditis and symptoms of concern, to ensure prompt recognition and management of myocarditis., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 (BNT162b2) vaccine is a lipid nanoparticle-formulated, nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccine encoding the prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine consists of 2 intramuscular doses (30 μg, 0.3 mL each) administered 3 weeks apart. On December 11, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (Pfizer, Inc; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) in persons aged ≥16 years (1); on December 12, 2020, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation for use of the vaccine in the same age group (2). As of May 12, 2021, approximately 141.6 million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine had been administered to persons aged ≥16 years.* On May 10, 2021, FDA expanded the EUA for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to include adolescents aged 12-15 years (1). On May 12, 2021, ACIP issued an interim recommendation † for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in adolescents aged 12-15 years for the prevention of COVID-19. To guide its deliberations regarding the vaccine, ACIP used the Evidence to Recommendation (EtR) Framework, § using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. ¶ The ACIP recommendation for the use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged ≥12 years under an EUA is interim and will be updated as additional information becomes available., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Background: The Diamond Princess cruise ship was the site of a large outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Of 437 Americans and their travel companions on the ship, 114 (26%) tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)., Methods: We interviewed 229 American passengers and crew after disembarkation following a ship-based quarantine to identify risk factors for infection and characterize transmission onboard the ship., Results: The attack rate for passengers in single-person cabins or without infected cabinmates was 18% (58/329), compared with 63% (27/43) for those sharing a cabin with an asymptomatic infected cabinmate, and 81% (25/31) for those with a symptomatic infected cabinmate. Whole genome sequences from specimens from passengers who shared cabins clustered together. Of 66 SARS-CoV-2-positive American travelers with complete symptom information, 14 (21%) were asymptomatic while on the ship. Among SARS-CoV-2-positive Americans, 10 (9%) required intensive care, of whom 7 were ≥70 years., Conclusions: Our findings highlight the high risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission on cruise ships. High rates of SARS-CoV-2 positivity in cabinmates of individuals with asymptomatic infections suggest that triage by symptom status in shared quarters is insufficient to halt transmission. A high rate of intensive care unit admission among older individuals complicates the prospect of future cruise travel during the pandemic, given typical cruise passenger demographics. The magnitude and severe outcomes of this outbreak were major factors contributing to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's decision to halt cruise ship travel in US waters in March 2020., (Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2020.)

Background: Clinical guidelines recommend that providers risk-stratify patients with cancer before prescribing opioids. Prior research has demonstrated that a simple cancer opioid risk score might help identify to patients with cancer at the time of diagnosis with a high likelihood of long-term posttreatment opioid use. This current project validates this cancer opioid risk score in a generalizable, population-based cohort of elderly cancer survivors., Methods: This study identified 44,932 Medicare beneficiaries with cancer who had received local therapy. Longitudinal opioid use was ascertained from Medicare Part D data. A risk score was calculated for each patient, and patients were categorized into low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups on the basis of the predicted probability of persistent opioid use. Model discrimination was assessed with receiver operating characteristic curves., Results: In the study cohort, 5.2% of the patients were chronic opioid users 1 to 2 years after the initiation of cancer treatment. The majority of the patients (64%) were at low risk and had a 1.2% probability of long-term opioid use. Moderate-risk patients (33% of the cohort) had a 5.6% probability of long-term opioid use. High-risk patients (3.5% of the cohort) had a 75% probability of long-term opioid use. The opioid risk score had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.869., Conclusions: This study found that a cancer opioid risk score could accurately identify individuals with a high likelihood of long-term opioid use in a large, generalizable cohort of cancer survivors. Future research should focus on the implementation of these scores into clinical practice and how this could affect prescriber behavior and patient outcomes., Lay Summary: A novel 5-question clinical decision tool allows physicians treating patients with cancer to accurately predict which patients will persistently be using opioid medications after completing therapy., (© 2020 American Cancer Society.)

On February 27, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the Janssen COVID-19 (Ad.26.COV2.S) vaccine (Janssen Biotech, Inc., a Janssen Pharmaceutical company, Johnson & Johnson; New Brunswick, New Jersey), and on February 28, 2021, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued interim recommendations for its use in persons aged ≥18 years (1,2). On April 13, 2021, CDC and FDA recommended a pause in the use of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine after reports of six U.S. cases of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) with thrombocytopenia, a rare thromboembolic syndrome, among Janssen COVID-19 vaccine recipients (3). Two emergency ACIP meetings were rapidly convened to review reported cases of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) and to consider updated recommendations for use of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine in the United States. On April 23, 2021, after a discussion of the benefits and risks of resuming vaccination, ACIP reaffirmed its interim recommendation for use of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine in all persons aged ≥18 years under the FDA's EUA, which now includes a warning that rare clotting events might occur after vaccination, primarily among women aged 18-49 years. Patient and provider education about the risk for TTS with the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine, especially among women aged <50 years, as well as the availability of alternative COVID-19 vaccines, is required to guide vaccine decision-making and ensure early recognition and clinical management of TTS., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Background: Maternal mortality is an issue of growing concern in the United States, where the incidence of death during pregnancy and postpartum seems to be increasing. The purpose of this analysis was to explore whether residing in a maternity care desert (defined as a county with no hospital offering obstetric care and no OB/GYN or certified nurse midwife providers) was associated with risk of death during pregnancy and up to 1 year postpartum among women in Louisiana from 2016 to 2017., Methods: Data provided by the March of Dimes were used to classify Louisiana parishes by level of access to maternity care. Using data on all pregnancy-associated deaths verified by the Louisiana Department of Health (n = 112 from 2016 to 2017) and geocoded live births occurring in Louisiana during the same time period (n = 101,484), we fit adjusted modified Poisson regression models with generalized estimating equations and exploratory spatial analysis to identify significant associations between place of residence and risk of death., Results: We found that the risk of death during pregnancy and up to 1 year postpartum owing to any cause (pregnancy-associated mortality) and in particular death owing to obstetric causes (pregnancy-related mortality) was significantly elevated among women residing in maternity care deserts compared with women in areas with greater access (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] for pregnancy-associated mortality, 1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-3.18; aRR for pregnancy-related mortality, 3.37; 95% CI, 1.71-6.65). A large racial inequity in risk persisted above and beyond differences in geographic access to maternity care (non-Hispanic Black vs. non-Hispanic White aRR for pregnancy-associated mortality, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.39-3.56; aRR for pregnancy-related mortality, 2.66; 95% CI, 1.16-6.12)., Conclusions: Ensuring access to maternity care may be an important step toward maternal mortality prevention, but may alone be insufficient for achieving maternal health equity., (Copyright © 2020 Jacobs Institute of Women's Health. All rights reserved.)

Pancreatic cancer will become the second leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States by 2030. Survival improves when it is identified at an early-stage and resected. Increasing public attention and cross-section imaging may shift detection to earlier stages. We found a small total increase in the proportion of stage-I cancer relative to all stages and a significant increase compared to distant disease in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Despite this, our ability to screen and identify early-stage disease is still lacking. Additional research and population-based interventions are necessary to improve early detection.

Since the World Health Organization launched its commission on the social determinants of health (SDOH) over a decade ago, a large body of research has proven that social determinants-defined as the conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work, and age-are significant drivers of disease risk and susceptibility within clinical care and public health systems. Unfortunately, the term has lost meaning within systems of care because of misuse and lack of context. As many disparate health outcomes remain, including higher risk of maternal mortality among Black women, a deeper understanding of the SDOH-and what forces underlie their distribution-is needed. In this article, we will expand our review of social determinants of maternal health to include the terms "structural determinants of health" and "root causes of inequities" as we assess the literature on this topic. We hypothesize that the addition of structural determinants and root causes will identify racism as a cause of inequities in maternal health outcomes, as many of the social and political structures and policies in the United States were born out of racism, classism, and gender oppression. We will conclude with proposed practice and policy solutions to end inequities in maternal health outcomes.

The first vaccines for prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the United States were authorized for emergency use by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (1) and recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) in December 2020.* However, demand for COVID-19 vaccines is expected to exceed supply during the first months of the national COVID-19 vaccination program. ACIP advises CDC on population groups and circumstances for vaccine use. † On December 1, ACIP recommended that 1) health care personnel § and 2) residents of long-term care facilities ¶ be offered COVID-19 vaccination first, in Phase 1a of the vaccination program (2). On December 20, 2020, ACIP recommended that in Phase 1b, vaccine should be offered to persons aged ≥75 years and frontline essential workers (non-health care workers), and that in Phase 1c, persons aged 65-74 years, persons aged 16-64 years with high-risk medical conditions, and essential workers not recommended for vaccination in Phase 1b should be offered vaccine.** These recommendations for phased allocation provide guidance for federal, state, and local jurisdictions while vaccine supply is limited. In its deliberations, ACIP considered scientific evidence regarding COVID-19 epidemiology, ethical principles, and vaccination program implementation considerations. ACIP's recommendations for COVID-19 vaccine allocation are interim and might be updated based on changes in conditions of FDA Emergency Use Authorization, FDA authorization for new COVID-19 vaccines, changes in vaccine supply, or changes in COVID-19 epidemiology., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

On December 18, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the Moderna COVID-19 (mRNA-1273) vaccine (ModernaTX, Inc; Cambridge, Massachusetts), a lipid nanoparticle-encapsulated, nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccine encoding the stabilized prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1). This vaccine is the second COVID-19 vaccine authorized under an EUA for the prevention of COVID-19 in the United States (2). Vaccination with the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine consists of 2 doses (100 μg, 0.5 mL each) administered intramuscularly, 1 month (4 weeks) apart. On December 19, 2020, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation* for use of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged ≥18 years for the prevention of COVID-19. To guide its deliberations regarding the vaccine, ACIP employed the Evidence to Recommendation (EtR) Framework, † using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. § Use of all COVID-19 vaccines authorized under an EUA, including the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine, should be implemented in conjunction with ACIP's interim recommendations for allocating initial supplies of COVID-19 vaccines (3). The ACIP recommendation for the use of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine under EUA is interim and will be updated as additional information becomes available., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.