Explore the vast range of titles available.

In the United States, Asian and Pacific Islander (A/PI) communities have faced significant discrimination and stigma during the COVID-19 pandemic. We assessed the association between discrimination and depression, anxiety, and loneliness symptoms among Asian or Pacific Islander adults (n = 543) using data from a 116-item nationally distributed online survey of adults (≥ 18 years old) in the United States conducted between 5/2021–1/2022. Discrimination was assessed using the 5-item Everyday Discrimination Scale. Anxiety, depression, and loneliness symptoms were assessed using the 2-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder, 2-item Patient Health Questionnaire, and UCLA Loneliness Scale—Short form, respectively. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the association between discrimination and mental health. Overall, 42.7% of participants reported experiencing discrimination once a month or more. Compared with no discrimination, experiencing discrimination once a month was associated with increased odds of anxiety (Adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] = 2.60, 95% CI = 1.38–4.77), depression (aOR = 2.58, 95% CI = 1.46–4.56), and loneliness (aOR = 2.86, 95% CI = 1.75–4.67). Experiencing discrimination once a week or more was associated with even higher odds of anxiety (aOR = 6.90, 95% CI = 3.71–12.83), depression, (aOR = 6.96, 95% CI = 3.80–12.74), and loneliness (aOR = 6.91, 95% CI = 3.38–13.00). Discrimination is detrimental to mental health, even at relatively low frequencies; however, more frequent discrimination was associated with worse mental health symptoms. Public health interventions and programs targeting anti-A/PI hate and reducing A/PI mental health burden are urgently needed.

Background Delays in health care have been observed in the U.S. during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, the prevalence of inability to get needed care and potential disparities in health care access have yet to be assessed. Methods We conducted a nationally representative, online survey of 5,500 American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black/African American, Latino (English- and Spanish-speaking), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, White, and multiracial adults between 12/2020–2/2021 (baseline) and 8/16/2021–9/9/2021 (6-month follow-up). Participants were asked “Since the start of the pandemic, was there any time when you did not get medical care that you needed?” Those who responded “Yes” were asked about the type of care and the reason for not receiving care. Poisson regression was used to estimate the association between sociodemographics and inability to receive needed care; all analyses were stratified by chronic condition status. Chronic conditions included: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), heart conditions, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease or on dialysis, sickle cell disease, cancer, and immunocompromised state (weakened immune system). Results Overall, 20.0% of participants at baseline and 22.7% at follow-up reported not getting needed care. The most common reasons for being unable to get needed care included fear of COVID-19 (baseline: 44.1%; follow-up: 47.2%) and doctors canceled appointment (baseline: 25.3%; follow-up: 14.1%). Routine care (baseline: 59.9%; follow-up: 62.6%) and chronic care management (baseline: 31.5%; follow-up: 30.1%) were the most often reported types of delayed care. Fair/poor self-reported physical health was significantly associated with being unable to get needed care despite chronic condition status (≥ 1 chronic condition: aPR = 1.36, 95%CI = 1.04–1.78); no chronic conditions: aPR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.28–1.80). The likelihood of inability to get needed care differed in some instances by race/ethnicity, age, and insurance status. For example, uninsured adults were more likely to not get needed care (≥ 1 chronic condition: aPR = 1.76, 95%CI = 1.17–2.66); no chronic conditions: aPR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.00–1.56). Conclusions Overall, about one fifth of participants reported being unable to receive needed care at baseline and follow-up. Delays in receiving needed medical care may exacerbate existing conditions and perpetuate existing health disparities among vulnerable populations who were more likely to have not received needed health care during the pandemic.

Background Despite evidence of the impact of breastfeeding information on breastfeeding rates, it is unknown if information sources and impact vary by race/ethnicity, thus this study assessed race/ethnicity-specific associations between breastfeeding information sources and breastfeeding. Methods We used data from the 2016–2019 Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System. Race/ethnicity-stratified multinomial logistic regression was used to estimate associations between information source (e.g., family/friends) and breastfeeding rates (0 weeks/none, < 10 weeks, or ≥ 10 weeks; < 10 weeks and ≥ 10 weeks = any breastfeeding). All analyses were weighted to be nationally representative. Results Among 5,945,018 women (weighted), 88% reported initiating breastfeeding (≥ 10 weeks = 70%). Information from family/friends (< 10 weeks: aORs = 1.58–2.14; ≥ 10 weeks: aORs = 1.63–2.64) and breastfeeding support groups (< 10 weeks: aORs = 1.31–1.76; ≥ 10 weeks: aORs = 1.42–2.77) were consistently associated with breastfeeding and duration across most racial/ethnic groups; effects were consistently smaller among Alaska Native, Black, and Hispanic women (vs White women). Over half of American Indian and one-quarter of Black women reported not breastfeeding/stopping breastfeeding due to return to school/work concerns. Conclusions Associations between breastfeeding information source and breastfeeding rates vary across race/ethnicity. Culturally tailored breastfeeding information and support from family/friends and support groups could help reduce breastfeeding disparities. Additional measures are needed to address disparities related to concerns about return to work/school.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic had a profound social and economic impact across the United States due to the lockdowns and consequent changes to everyday activities in social spaces. Methods The COVID-19’s Unequal Racial Burden (CURB) survey was a nationally representative, online survey of 5,500 American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black/African American, Latino (English- and Spanish-speaking), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, White, and multiracial adults living in the U.S. For this analysis, we used data from the 1,931 participants who responded to the 6-month follow-up survey conducted between 8/16/2021-9/9/2021. As part of the follow-up survey, participants were asked “What was the worst thing about the pandemic that you experienced?” and “Was there anything positive in your life that resulted from the pandemic?” Verbatim responses were coded independently by two coders using open and axial coding techniques to identify salient themes, definitions of themes, and illustrative quotes, with reconciliation across coders. Chi-square tests were used to estimate the association between sociodemographics and salient themes. Results Commonly reported negative themes among participants reflected disrupted lifestyle/routine (27.4%), not seeing family and friends (9.8%), and negative economic impacts (10.0%). Positive themes included improved relationships (16.9%), improved financial situation (10.1%), and positive employment changes (9.8%). Differences in themes were seen across race-ethnicity, gender, and age; for example, adults ≥ 65 years old, compared to adults 18–64, were more likely to report disrupted routine/lifestyle (37.6% vs. 24.2%, p  < 0.001) as a negative aspect of the pandemic, and Spanish-speaking Latino adults were much more likely to report improved relationships compared to other racial-ethnic groups (31.1% vs. 14.8–18.6%, p  = 0.03). Discussion Positive and negative experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic varied widely and differed across race-ethnicity, gender, and age. Future public health interventions should work to mitigate negative social and economic impacts and facilitate posttraumatic growth associated with pandemics.

Background Trust in the healthcare system may impact adherence to recommended healthcare practices, including willingness to test for and vaccinate against COVID-19. This study examined racial/ethnic differences in the associations between trust in the U.S. healthcare system and willingness to test for and vaccinate against COVID-19 during the first year of the pandemic. Methods This cross-sectional study used data from the REACH-US study, a nationally representative online survey conducted among a diverse sample of U.S. adults from January 26, 2021-March 3, 2021 ( N  = 5,121). Multivariable logistic regression estimated the associations between trust in the U.S. healthcare system (measured as “Always”, “Most of the time”, “Sometimes/Almost Never”, and “Never”) and willingness to test for COVID-19, and willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Racial/ethnic differences in these associations were examined using interaction terms and multigroup analyses. Results Always trusting the U.S. healthcare system was highest among Hispanic/Latino Spanish Language Preference (24.9%) and Asian (16.7%) adults and lowest among Multiracial (8.7%) and Black/African American (10.7%) adults. Always trusting the U.S. healthcare system, compared to never, was associated with greater willingness to test for COVID-19 (AOR: 3.20, 95% CI: 2.38–4.30) and greater willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine (AOR: 2.68, 95% CI: 1.97–3.65). Conclusions Trust in the U.S. healthcare system was associated with greater willingness to test for COVID-19 and receive the COVID-19 vaccine, however, trust in the U.S. healthcare system was lower among most marginalized racial/ethnic groups. Efforts to establish a more equitable healthcare system that increases trust may encourage COVID-19 preventive behaviors.

The impact of cardiovascular and neurologic complications on infective endocarditis (IE) are well studied, yet the prevalence and significance of pulmonary complications in IE is not defined. To better characterize the multifaceted nature of IE management, we aimed to describe the occurrence and significance of pulmonary complications in IE, including among persons with IE related to drug use. Hospitalizations of adult ([greater than or equal to]18 years old) patients diagnosed with IE were identified in the 2016 National Inpatient Sample using ICD-10 codes. Multivariable logistic and linear regression were used to compare IE patient outcomes between those with and without pulmonary complications and to identify predictors of pulmonary complications. Interaction terms were used to assess the impact of drug-use IE (DU-IE) and pulmonary complications on inpatient outcomes. In 2016, there were an estimated 88,995 hospitalizations of patients diagnosed with IE. Of these hospitalizations,15,490 (17%) were drug-use related. Drug-use IE (DU-IE) had the highest odds of pulmonary complications (OR 2.97, 95% CI 2.50, 3.45). At least one pulmonary complication was identified in 6,580 (7%) of IE patients. DU-IE hospitalizations were more likely to have a diagnosis of pyothorax (3% vs. 1%, p<0.001), lung abscess (3% vs. <1%, p<0.001), and septic pulmonary embolism (27% vs. 2%, p<0.001). Pulmonary complications were associated with longer average lengths of stay (CIE 7.22 days 95% CI 6.11, 8.32), higher hospital charges (CIE 78.51 thousand dollars 95% CI 57.44, 99.57), more frequent post-discharge transfers (acute care: OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.09, 1.71; long-term care: OR 2.19, 95% CI 1.83, 2.61), and increased odds of inpatient mortality (OR 1.81 95% CI 1.39, 2.35). IE with pulmonary complications is associated with worse outcomes. Patients with DU-IE have a particularly high prevalence of pulmonary complications that may require timely thoracic surgical intervention, likely owing to right-sided valve involvement. More research is needed to determine optimal management strategies for complications to improve patient outcomes.

Background In the United States (U.S.), several states have laws that allow individuals to obtain driver’s licenses regardless of their immigration status. Possession of a driver’s license can improve an individual’s access to social programs, healthcare services, and employment opportunities, which could lead to improvements in perceived mental and physical health among Latinos living in the U.S. Methods Using Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data (2011–2019) for Latinos living in the U.S. overall (immigration status was not available), we compared the average number of self-reported perceived poor mental and physical health days/month, and general health status (single-item measures) before (January 2011-June 2013) and after implementation (July 2015-December 2019) of immigrant-inclusive license policies using interrupted time-series analyses and segmented linear regression, and a control group of states in which such policies were not implemented. We also compared the average number of adults reporting any perceived poor mental or physical health days (≥ 1 day/month) using a similar approach. Results One hundred twenty-three thousand eight hundred seven Latino adults were included; 66,805 lived in states that adopted immigrant-inclusive license policies. After implementation, average number of perceived poor physical health days significantly decreased from 4.30 to 3.80 days/month (immediate change = -0.64, 95% CI = -1.10 to -0.19). The proportion reporting ≥ 1 perceived poor physical and mental health day significantly decreased from 41 to 34% (OR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.80–1.00) and from 40 to 33% (OR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.74–0.94), respectively. Conclusions Among all Latinos living in the U.S., immigrant-inclusive license policies were associated with fewer perceived poor physical health days per month and fewer adults experiencing poor physical and mental health. Because anti-immigrant policies can harm Latino communities regardless of immigration status and further widen health inequities, implementing state policies that do not restrict access to driver licenses based on immigrant status documentation could help address upstream drivers of such inequities.

Background Regulators and oncology healthcare providers are increasingly interested in using observational studies of real‐world data (RWD) to complement clinical evidence from randomized controlled trials for informed decision‐making. To generate valid evidence, RWD studies must be carefully designed to avoid systematic biases. The clone‐censor‐weight (CCW) method has been proposed to address immortal time and other time‐related biases. Methods The objective of this manuscript is to de‐mystify the CCW method for cancer researchers by describing and presenting its core components in an accessible and digestible format, using visualizations and examples from cancer‐relevant studies. The CCW method has been applied in diverse settings, including investigations of the effects of surgery within a certain time after cancer diagnosis, the continuation of annual screening mammography, and chemotherapy duration on survival. Results The method handles complex data wherein the treatment group to which an individual belongs is unknown at the start of follow‐up. The three steps of the CCW method involve cloning or duplicating the patient population and assigning one clone to each treatment strategy, artificially censoring the clones when their observed data are inconsistent with the assigned strategy and weighting the cloned and censored population to address selection bias created by the artificial censoring. Conclusions The CCW method is a powerful tool for designing RWD studies in cancer that are free from time‐related biases and successfully, to the extent possible, emulate features of a randomized clinical trial. The clone‐censor‐weight (CCW) method has been proposed to address time‐related biases in causal research using observational data. The goal of this paper is to de‐mystify the CCW method through: (1) a narrative review of current applications in the cancer literature, (2) visual presentation and description of the CCW design and analytic components, (3) application of these visuals to several cancer case studies, and (4) discussion of important considerations and future directions.

Studies have shown that financial hardship can impact weight change; however, it is unclear what the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has had on weight change in U.S. adults, or whether racial-ethnic groups were impacted differentially. We estimated the association between financial hardship and self-reported weight change using data from the cross-sectional COVID-19’s Unequal Racial Burden (CURB) survey, a nationally representative online survey of 5,500 American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black/African American, Latino (English- and Spanish-speaking), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, White, and multiracial adults conducted from 12/2020 to 2/2021. Financial hardship was measured over six domains (lost income, debt, unmet general expenses, unmet healthcare expenses, housing insecurity, and food insecurity). The association between each financial hardship domain and self-reported 3-level weight change variable were estimated using multinomial logistic regression, adjusting for sociodemographic and self-reported health. After adjustment, food insecurity was strongly associated with weight loss among American Indian/Alaska Native (aOR = 2.18, 95% CI = 1.05–4.77), Black/African American (aOR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.02–3.11), and Spanish-speaking Latino adults (aOR = 2.32, 95% CI = 1.01–5.35). Unmet healthcare expenses were also strongly associated with weight loss among Black/African American, English-speaking Latino, Spanish-speaking Latino, and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander adults (aORs = 2.00-2.14). Other domains were associated with weight loss and/or weight gain, but associations were not as strong and less consistent across race-ethnicity. In conclusion, food insecurity and unmet healthcare expenses during the pandemic were strongly associated with weight loss among racial-ethnic minority groups. Using multi-dimensional measures of financial hardship provides a comprehensive assessment of the effects of specific financial hardship domains on weight change among diverse racial-ethnic groups

Oncotype DX (ODX) recurrence score (RS) is a validated tool to guide the use of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) in hormone receptor+/HER2- breast cancer. In this analysis, we examine (1) characteristics associated with ODX testing and (2) the association between ODX RS and receipt of AC across age and nodal status. Women with HR+/HER2–, early-stage (T1-2, N0-1) breast cancers from 2010–2017 in the National Cancer Database were included. 530,125 met inclusion and 255,971 received ODX testing. Older women were less likely to receive testing; however, nodal positivity increased use of testing. High ODX RS was associated with increased mortality, though the association was not consistent across age and was most strongly associated with mortality among younger, node-negative women. Older women with high ODX RS, regardless of nodal status, were less likely to receive AC. Clinicians may be employing ODX RS to support treatment decisions against the receipt of AC.