Search

Oral nirmatrelvir/ritonavir is approved as treatment for acute COVID-19, but the effect of treatment during acute infection on risk of Long COVID is unknown. We hypothesized that nirmatrelvir treatment during acute SARS-CoV-2 infection reduces risk of developing Long COVID and rebound after treatment is associated with Long COVID. We conducted an observational cohort study within the Covid Citizen Science (CCS) study, an online cohort study with over 100 000 participants. We included vaccinated, nonhospitalized, nonpregnant individuals who reported their first SARS-CoV-2 positive test March-August 2022. Oral nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment was ascertained during acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patient-reported Long COVID symptoms, symptom rebound and test-positivity rebound were asked on subsequent surveys at least 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. A total of 4684 individuals met the eligibility criteria, of whom 988 (21.1%) were treated and 3696 (78.9%) were untreated; 353/988 (35.7%) treated and 1258/3696 (34.0%) untreated responded to the Long COVID survey (n = 1611). Among 1611 participants, median age was 55 years and 66% were female. At 5.4 ± 1.3 months after infection, nirmatrelvir treatment was not associated with subsequent Long COVID symptoms (odds ratio [OR]: 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.80-1.64; p = 0.45). Among 666 treated who answered rebound questions, rebound symptoms or test positivity were not associated with Long COVID symptoms (OR: 1.34; 95% CI: 0.74-2.41; p = 0.33). Within this cohort of vaccinated, nonhospitalized individuals, oral nirmatrelvir treatment during acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and rebound after nirmatrelvir treatment were not associated with Long COVID symptoms more than 90 days after infection.

COVID-19 increased the prevalence of clinically significant anxiety in the United States. To investigate contributing factors we analyzed anxiety, reported online via monthly Generalized Anxiety Disorders-7 (GAD-7) surveys between April 2020 and May 2022, in association with self-reported worry about the health effects of COVID-19, economic difficulty, personal COVID-19 experience, and subjective social status. 333,292 anxiety surveys from 50,172 participants (82% non-Hispanic white; 73% female; median age 55, IQR 42-66) showed high levels of anxiety, especially early in the pandemic. Anxiety scores showed strong independent associations with worry about the health effects of COVID-19 for oneself or family members (GAD-7 score +3.28 for highest vs. lowest category; 95% confidence interval: 3.24, 3.33; p

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to characterize seasonal variation in US population-based blood pressure (BP) control and BP-related metrics and evaluate the association between outdoor temperature and BP control variation. METHODS: We queried electronic health records (EHRs) from 26 health systems, representing 21 states, to summarize BP metrics by quarters of 12-month periods from January 2017 to March 2020. Patients with at least one ambulatory visit during the measurement period and a hypertension diagnosis during the first 6 months or prior to the measurement period were included. Changes in BP control, BP improvement, medication intensification, average SBP reduction after medication intensification across quarters and association with outdoor temperature were analyzed using weighted generalized linear models with repeated measures. RESULTS: Among 1 818 041 people with hypertension, the majority were more than 65 years of age (52.2%), female (52.1%), white non-Hispanic (69.8%) and had stage 1/2 hypertension (64.8%). Overall, BP control and process metrics were highest in quarters 2 and 3, and lowest in quarters 1 and 4. Quarter 2 had the highest percentage of improved BP (31.95 ± 0.90%) and average SBP reduction after medication intensification (16 ± 0.23 mmHg). Quarter 3 had the highest percentage of BP controlled (62.25 ± 2.55%) and lowest with medication intensification (9.73 ± 0.60%). Results were largely consistent in adjusted models. Average temperature was associated with BP control metrics in unadjusted models, but associations were attenuated following adjustment. CONCLUSION: In this large, national, EHR-based study, BP control and BP-related process metrics improved during spring/summer months, but outdoor temperature was not associated with performance following adjustment for potential confounders.

ObjectiveTo explore trends in blood pressure (BP) control before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.Patients and methodsHealth systems participating in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Blood Pressure Control Laboratory Surveillance System responded to data queries, producing 9 BP control metrics. Averages of the BP control metrics (weighted by numbers of observations in each health system) were calculated and compared between two 1-year measurement periods (January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019, and January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020).ResultsAmong 1,770,547 hypertensive persons in 2019, BP control to

BackgroundFew prospective studies of Long COVID risk factors have been conducted. The purpose of this study was to determine whether sociodemographic factors, lifestyle, or medical history preceding COVID-19 or characteristics of acute severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are associated with Long COVID.MethodsIn March 26, 2020, the COVID-19 Citizen Science study, an online cohort study, began enrolling participants with longitudinal assessment of symptoms before, during, and after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Adult participants who reported a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result before April 4, 2022 were surveyed for Long COVID symptoms. The primary outcome was at least 1 prevalent Long COVID symptom greater than 1 month after acute infection. Exposures of interest included age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, employment, socioeconomic status/financial insecurity, self-reported medical history, vaccination status, variant wave, number of acute symptoms, pre-COVID depression, anxiety, alcohol and drug use, sleep, and exercise.ResultsOf 13 305 participants who reported a SARS-CoV-2 positive test, 1480 (11.1%) responded. Respondents' mean age was 53 and 1017 (69%) were female. Four hundred seventy-six (32.2%) participants reported Long COVID symptoms at a median 360 days after infection. In multivariable models, number of acute symptoms (odds ratio [OR], 1.30 per symptom; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-1.40), lower socioeconomic status/financial insecurity (OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.02-2.63), preinfection depression (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.16), and earlier variants (OR = 0.37 for Omicron compared with ancestral strain; 95% CI, 0.15-0.90) were associated with Long COVID symptoms.ConclusionsVariant wave, severity of acute infection, lower socioeconomic status, and pre-existing depression are associated with Long COVID symptoms.

Background Uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) remains a leading cause of death in the United States. The American Medical Association developed a quality improvement program to improve BP control, but it is unclear how to efficiently implement this program at scale across multiple health systems. Methods and Results We conducted BP MAP (Blood Pressure Measure Accurately, Act Rapidly, and Partner With Patients), a comparative effectiveness trial with clinic-level randomization to compare 2 scalable versions of the quality improvement program: Full Support (with support from quality improvement expert) and Self-Guided (using only online materials). Outcomes were clinic-level BP control (

BackgroundLittle is known about whether people who use both tobacco and cannabis (co-use) are more or less likely to have mental health disorders than single substance users or non-users. We aimed to examine associations between use of tobacco and/or cannabis with anxiety and depression.MethodsWe analyzed data from the COVID-19 Citizen Science Study, a digital cohort study, collected via online surveys during 2020-2022 from a convenience sample of 53,843 US adults (≥ 18 years old) nationwide. Past 30-day use of tobacco and cannabis was self-reported at baseline and categorized into four exclusive patterns: tobacco-only use, cannabis-only use, co-use of both substances, and non-use. Anxiety and depression were repeatedly measured in monthly surveys. To account for multiple assessments of mental health outcomes within a participant, we used Generalized Estimating Equations to examine associations between the patterns of tobacco and cannabis use with each outcome.ResultsIn the total sample (mean age 51.0 years old, 67.9% female), 4.9% reported tobacco-only use, 6.9% cannabis-only use, 1.6% co-use, and 86.6% non-use. Proportions of reporting anxiety and depression were highest for the co-use group (26.5% and 28.3%, respectively) and lowest for the non-use group (10.6% and 11.2%, respectively). Compared to non-use, the adjusted odds of mental health disorders were highest for co-use (Anxiety: OR = 1.89, 95%CI = 1.64-2.18; Depression: OR = 1.77, 95%CI = 1.46-2.16), followed by cannabis-only use, and tobacco-only use. Compared to tobacco-only use, co-use (OR = 1.35, 95%CI = 1.08-1.69) and cannabis-only use (OR = 1.17, 95%CI = 1.00-1.37) were associated with higher adjusted odds for anxiety, but not for depression. Daily use (vs. non-daily use) of cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and cannabis were associated with higher adjusted odds for anxiety and depression.ConclusionsUse of tobacco and/or cannabis, particularly co-use of both substances, were associated with poor mental health. Integrating mental health support with tobacco and cannabis cessation may address this co-morbidity.

BackgroundIt is increasingly recognized that policies have played a role in both alleviating and exacerbating the health and economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. There has been limited systematic evaluation of variation in U.S. local COVID-19-related policies. This study introduces the U.S. COVID-19 County Policy (UCCP) Database, whose objective is to systematically gather, characterize, and assess variation in U.S. county-level COVID-19-related policies.MethodsIn January-March 2021, we collected an initial wave of cross-sectional data from government and media websites for 171 counties in 7 states on 22 county-level COVID-19-related policies within 3 policy domains that are likely to affect health: (1) containment/closure, (2) economic support, and (3) public health. We characterized the presence and comprehensiveness of policies using univariate analyses. We also examined the correlation of policies with one another using bivariate Spearman's correlations. Finally, we examined geographical variation in policies across and within states.ResultsThere was substantial variation in the presence and comprehensiveness of county policies during January-March 2021. For containment and closure policies, the percent of counties with no restrictions ranged from 0% (for public events) to more than half for public transportation (67.8%), hair salons (52.6%), and religious gatherings (52.0%). For economic policies, 76.6% of counties had housing support, while 64.9% had utility relief. For public health policies, most were comprehensive, with 70.8% of counties having coordinated public information campaigns, and 66.7% requiring masks outside the home at all times. Correlations between containment and closure policies tended to be positive and moderate (i.e., coefficients 0.4-0.59). There was variation within and across states in the number and comprehensiveness of policies.ConclusionsThis study introduces the UCCP Database, presenting granular data on local governments' responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. We documented substantial variation within and across states on a wide range of policies at a single point in time. By making these data publicly available, this study supports future research that can leverage this database to examine how policies contributed to and continue to influence pandemic-related health and socioeconomic outcomes and disparities. The UCCP database is available online and will include additional time points for 2020-2021 and additional counties nationwide.

Background The National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network Blood Pressure Control Laboratory Surveillance System was established to identify opportunities for blood pressure (BP) control improvement and to provide a mechanism for tracking improvement longitudinally. Methods and Results We conducted a serial cross-sectional study with queries against standardized electronic health record data in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) common data model returned by 25 participating US health systems. Queries produced BP control metrics for adults with well-documented hypertension and a recent encounter at the health system for a series of 1-year measurement periods for each quarter of available data from January 2017 to March 2020. Aggregate weighted results are presented overall and by race and ethnicity. The most recent measurement period includes data from 1 737 995 patients, and 11 956 509 patient-years were included in the trend analysis. Overall, 15% were Black, 52% women, and 28% had diabetes. BP control (

BackgroundThe appropriate dose of aspirin to lower the risk of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke and to minimize major bleeding in patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is a subject of controversy.MethodsUsing an open-label, pragmatic design, we randomly assigned patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease to a strategy of 81 mg or 325 mg of aspirin per day. The primary effectiveness outcome was a composite of death from any cause, hospitalization for myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for stroke, assessed in a time-to-event analysis. The primary safety outcome was hospitalization for major bleeding, also assessed in a time-to-event analysis.ResultsA total of 15,076 patients were followed for a median of 26.2 months (interquartile range [IQR], 19.0 to 34.9). Before randomization, 13,537 (96.0% of those with available information on previous aspirin use) were already taking aspirin, and 85.3% of these patients were previously taking 81 mg of daily aspirin. Death, hospitalization for myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for stroke occurred in 590 patients (estimated percentage, 7.28%) in the 81-mg group and 569 patients (estimated percentage, 7.51%) in the 325-mg group (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91 to 1.14). Hospitalization for major bleeding occurred in 53 patients (estimated percentage, 0.63%) in the 81-mg group and 44 patients (estimated percentage, 0.60%) in the 325-mg group (hazard ratio, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.77). Patients assigned to 325 mg had a higher incidence of dose switching than those assigned to 81 mg (41.6% vs. 7.1%) and fewer median days of exposure to the assigned dose (434 days [IQR, 139 to 737] vs. 650 days [IQR, 415 to 922]).ConclusionsIn this pragmatic trial involving patients with established cardiovascular disease, there was substantial dose switching to 81 mg of daily aspirin and no significant differences in cardiovascular events or major bleeding between patients assigned to 81 mg and those assigned to 325 mg of aspirin daily. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; ADAPTABLE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02697916.).

ImportanceActive SARS-CoV-2 (coronavirus) transmission continues in the US. It is unclear whether better access to coronavirus testing and more consistent use of testing could substantially reduce transmission.ObjectiveTo describe coronavirus testing in persons with new onset of febrile illness and analyze whether there are changes over time and differences by race and ethnicity.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used data from the COVID-19 Citizen Science Study, launched in March 2020, which recruited participants via press release, word-of-mouth, and partner organizations. Participants completed daily surveys about COVID-19 symptoms and weekly surveys about coronavirus testing. All adults (aged at least 18 years) with a smartphone were eligible to join. For this analysis, US participants with new onset of febrile illness from April 2020 to October 2020 were included. Data analysis was performed from November 2020 to March 2021.Main outcomes and measuresReceipt of a coronavirus test result within 7 days of febrile illness onset.ResultsOf the 2679 participants included in this analysis, the mean (SD) age was 46.3 (13.4) years, 1983 were female (74%), 2017 were college educated (75%), and a total of 3865 distinct new febrile illness episodes were reported (300 episodes [7.8%] from Hispanic participants, 71 episodes [1.8%] from Black participants, and 3494 episodes [90.4%] from not Black, not Hispanic participants) between April 2 and October 23, 2020. In weekly surveys delivered during the 14 days after fever onset, 12% overall (753 participants) indicated receipt of a test result. Using serial survey responses and parametric time-to-event modeling, it was estimated that by 7 days after onset of febrile illness, a total of 20.5% (95% CI, 19.1%-22.0%) had received a test result. This proportion increased from 9.8% (95% CI, 7.5%-12.0%) early in the epidemic to 24.1% (95% CI, 21.5%-26.7%) at the end of July, but testing rates did not substantially improve since then, increasing to 25.9% (95% CI; 21.6%-30.3%) in late October at the start of the winter surge. Black participants reported receiving a test result about half as often as others (7% [7 of 103] of survey responses vs 12% [53 of 461] for Hispanic vs 13% [693 of 5516] for not Black, not Hispanic; P = .03). This association was not statistically significant in adjusted time-to-event models (hazard ratio = 0.59 vs not Black, not Hispanic participants; 95% CI, 0.26-1.34).Conclusions and relevanceSystematic underuse of coronavirus testing was observed in this cohort study through late October 2020, at the beginning of the winter COVID-19 surge, which may have contributed to preventable coronavirus transmission.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has catalyzed a global public response and innovation in clinical study methods.ObjectiveThe COVID-19 Citizen Science study was designed to generate knowledge about participant-reported COVID-19 symptoms, behaviors, and disease occurrence.MethodsCOVID-19 Citizen Science is a longitudinal cohort study launched on March 26, 2020, on the Eureka Research Platform. This study illustrates important advances in digital clinical studies, including entirely digital study participation, targeted recruitment strategies, electronic consent, recurrent and time-updated assessments, integration with smartphone-based measurements, analytics for recruitment and engagement, connection with partner studies, novel engagement strategies such as participant-proposed questions, and feedback in the form of real-time results to participants.ResultsAs of February 2021, the study has enrolled over 50,000 participants. Study enrollment and participation are ongoing. Over the lifetime of the study, an average of 59% of participants have completed at least one survey in the past 4 weeks.ConclusionsInsights about COVID-19 symptoms, behaviors, and disease occurrence can be drawn through digital clinical studies. Continued innovation in digital clinical study methods represents the future of clinical research.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/28169.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) is a leading preventable cause of death that remains common in the US population despite the availability of effective medications. New technology and program innovation has high potential to improve BP but may be expensive and burdensome for patients, clinicians, health systems, and payers and may not produce desired results or reduce existing disparities in BP control. METHODS AND RESULTS: The PCORnet Blood Pressure Control Laboratory is a platform designed to enable national surveillance and facilitate quality improvement and comparative effectiveness research. The platform uses PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, for engagement of health systems and collection of electronic health record data, and the Eureka Research Platform for eConsent and collection of patient-reported outcomes and mHealth data from wearable devices and smartphones. Three demonstration projects are underway: BP track will conduct national surveillance of BP control and related clinical processes by measuring theory-derived pragmatic BP control metrics using electronic health record data, with a focus on tracking disparities over time; BP MAP will conduct a cluster-randomized trial comparing effectiveness of 2 versions of a BP control quality improvement program; BP Home will conduct an individual patient-level randomized trial comparing effectiveness of smartphone-linked versus standard home BP monitoring. Thus far, BP Track has collected electronic health record data from over 826 000 eligible patients with hypertension who completed ≈3.1 million ambulatory visits. Preliminary results demonstrate substantial room for improvement in BP control (

BackgroundUncontrolled blood pressure (BP) is a leading preventable cause of death that remains common in the US population despite the availability of effective medications. New technology and program innovation has high potential to improve BP but may be expensive and burdensome for patients, clinicians, health systems, and payers and may not produce desired results or reduce existing disparities in BP control.Methods and resultsThe PCORnet Blood Pressure Control Laboratory is a platform designed to enable national surveillance and facilitate quality improvement and comparative effectiveness research. The platform uses PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, for engagement of health systems and collection of electronic health record data, and the Eureka Research Platform for eConsent and collection of patient-reported outcomes and mHealth data from wearable devices and smartphones. Three demonstration projects are underway: BP track will conduct national surveillance of BP control and related clinical processes by measuring theory-derived pragmatic BP control metrics using electronic health record data, with a focus on tracking disparities over time; BP MAP will conduct a cluster-randomized trial comparing effectiveness of 2 versions of a BP control quality improvement program; BP Home will conduct an individual patient-level randomized trial comparing effectiveness of smartphone-linked versus standard home BP monitoring. Thus far, BP Track has collected electronic health record data from over 826 000 eligible patients with hypertension who completed ≈3.1 million ambulatory visits. Preliminary results demonstrate substantial room for improvement in BP control (

BackgroundPatient-centered research requires a focus on the needs and priorities of patients. Because patient engagement can result in the discovery of important topics not currently prioritized by research programs, topic generation, and prioritization activities conducted with patients, caregivers, and other stakeholders are essential. To develop patient-centered research agendas for obesity and diabetes, the Research Action for Health Network conducted topic generation and prioritization activities with multistakeholder research advisory groups.ObjectivesThe purpose of this case study was to demonstrate how methods for engaging patients in topic generation and prioritization can be implemented in practice for the development of a patient-centered research agenda.Research designFour multistakeholder groups comprising patients, clinicians, and researchers met 4-5 times between November 2014 and July 2015 to generate and prioritize topics for obesity and diabetes research. Topics were prioritized using an iterative engagement process, in which themes were identified and resulting topics were refined and ranked over multiple meetings.ParticipantsSixty-four patients, clinicians, and researchers participated in 2 obesity and 2 diabetes advisory groups. The majority of participants (64.0%) were patients, followed by clinicians (23.4%), researchers (9.4%), and parents of children with diabetes (3.1%).ResultsTen and 12 priority topics were identified for obesity and diabetes, respectively. The resulting research agendas were disseminated to patients, researchers, and clinicians.ConclusionsPatient engagement has the potential to enrich our understanding of patient priorities for research. The results from this process suggest that convening in-person multistakeholder groups can be an effective way to generate research topics that reflect patients' priorities. Engagement strategies should be focused not only on the development of patient-centered research topics but also on the implementation of these topics into research studies.

The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) launched a multi-institutional "network of networks" in 2013 - Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) - that is designed to conduct clinical research that is faster, less expensive, and more responsive to the information needs of patients and clinicians. To enhance cross-network and cross-institutional collaboration and catalyze the use of PCORnet, PCORI has supported formation of 11 Collaborative Research Groups focusing on specific disease types (e.g., cardiovascular health and cancer) or particular patient populations (e.g., pediatrics and health disparities). PCORnet's Collaborative Research Groups are establishing research priorities within these focus areas, establishing relationships with potential funders, and supporting development of specific research projects that will use PCORnet resources. PCORnet remains a complex, multilevel, and heterogeneous network that is still maturing and building a diverse portfolio of observational and interventional people-centered research; engaging with PCORnet can be daunting, particularly for outside investigators. We believe the Collaborative Research Groups are stimulating interest and helping investigators navigate the complexity, but only time will tell if these efforts will bear fruit in terms of funded multicenter PCORnet projects.

BackgroundPatient matching is a key barrier to achieving interoperability. Patient demographic elements must be consistently collected over time and region to be valuable elements for patient matching.ObjectivesWe sought to determine what patient demographic attributes are collected at multiple institutions in the United States and see how their availability changes over time and across clinical sites.MethodsWe compiled a list of 36 demographic elements that stakeholders previously identified as essential patient demographic attributes that should be collected for the purpose of linking patient records. We studied a convenience sample of 9 health care systems from geographically distinct sites around the country. We identified changes in the availability of individual patient demographic attributes over time and across clinical sites.ResultsSeveral attributes were consistently available over the study period (2005-2014) including last name (99.96%), first name (99.95%), date of birth (98.82%), gender/sex (99.73%), postal code (94.71%), and full street address (94.65%). Other attributes changed significantly from 2005-2014: Social security number (SSN) availability declined from 83.3% to 50.44% (p

BackgroundPatient matching is a key barrier to achieving interoperability. Patient demographic elements must be consistently collected over time and region to be valuable elements for patient matching.ObjectivesWe sought to determine what patient demographic attributes are collected at multiple institutions in the United States and see how their availability changes over time and across clinical sites.MethodsWe compiled a list of 36 demographic elements that stakeholders previously identified as essential patient demographic attributes that should be collected for the purpose of linking patient records. We studied a convenience sample of 9 health care systems from geographically distinct sites around the country. We identified changes in the availability of individual patient demographic attributes over time and across clinical sites.ResultsSeveral attributes were consistently available over the study period (2005-2014) including last name (99.96%), first name (99.95%), date of birth (98.82%), gender/sex (99.73%), postal code (94.71%), and full street address (94.65%). Other attributes changed significantly from 2005-2014: Social security number (SSN) availability declined from 83.3% to 50.44% (p

Adults aged ≥65 years experience the highest risk for COVID-19–related hospitalization and death, with risk increasing with increasing age; outpatient antiviral treatment reduces the risk for these severe outcomes. Despite the proven benefit of COVID-19 antiviral treatment, information on differences in use among older adults with COVID-19 by age group is limited. Nonhospitalized patients aged ≥65 years with COVID-19 during April 2022–September 2023 were identified from the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network. Differences in use of antiviral treatment among patients aged 65–74, 75–89, and ≥90 years were assessed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the association between age and nonreceipt of antiviral treatment. Among 393,390 persons aged ≥65 years, 45.9% received outpatient COVID-19 antivirals, including 48.4%, 43.5%, and 35.2% among those aged 65–75, 76–89, and ≥90 years, respectively. Patients aged 75–89 and ≥90 years had 1.17 (95% CI = 1.15–1.19) and 1.54 (95% CI = 1.49–1.61) times the adjusted odds of being untreated, respectively, compared with those aged 65–74 years. Among 12,543 patients with severe outcomes, 2,648 (21.1%) had received an outpatient COVID-19 antiviral medication, compared with 177,874 (46.7%) of 380,847 patients without severe outcomes. Antiviral use is underutilized among adults ≥65 years; the oldest adults are least likely to receive treatment. To prevent COVID-19–associated morbidity and mortality, increased use of COVID-19 antiviral medications among older adults is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Short‐term weight loss is possible in a variety of settings. However, long‐term, free‐living weight loss maintenance following structured weight loss interventions remains elusive. Objective: The purpose was to study body weight trajectories over 2 years of intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) and up to 4 years of follow‐up versus usual care (UC). Methods: Data were obtained from electronic medical records (EMRs) from participating clinics. Baseline (Day 0) was established as the EMR data point closest but prior to the baseline date of the trial. The sample included 111 ILI and 196 UC patients. The primary statistical analysis focused on differentiating weight loss trajectories between ILI and UC. Results: The ILI group experienced significantly greater weight loss compared with the UC group from Day 100 to Day 700, beyond which there were no significant differences. Intensive lifestyle intervention patients who maintained ≥5% and ≥10% weight loss at 24 months demonstrated significantly greater weight loss (p < 0.001) across the active intervention and follow‐up. Conclusions: Following 24 months of active intervention, patients with ILI regained weight toward their baseline to the point where ILI versus UC differences were no longer statistically or clinically significant. However, patients in the ILI who experienced ≥5% or ≥10% weight loss at the cessation of the active intervention maintained greater weight loss at the end of the follow‐up phase. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02561221. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Louisiana has one of the highest rates of overweight and obese children in the United States. The Healthy School Food Collaborative (HSFC) was created to allow New Orleans's schools to select their own healthy school Food Service Provider (FSP) with requirements for higher nutritional standards than traditional options. The goal of this cross-sectional study was to examine whether HSFC membership was associated with lunch consumption rates in elementary school children. Methods: An 8-week plate waste study examining 18,070 trays of food among fourth and fifth graders was conducted. Participants included 7 schools and the 3 FSPs (2 HSFC and 1 non-HSFC member) that serviced them. Mixed models analysis examined whether consumption rates of food items differed among FSPs. Results: On average, students consumed 307 cal during lunch. Analyses showed significant differences in consumption rates of entrée, vegetables, fruit, and milk between the 3 FSPs (p < 0.01). The highest consumption rate was among entrées at 65%. One HSFC provider had consumption levels consistent with the non-HSFC FSP. Conclusions: Overall, students consumed less than 60% of the US Department of Agriculture recommended calories for school lunch. While overall caloric consumption was higher among the non-HSFC schools, interventions to increase lunch consumption across all schools are needed.

Importance: The frequency and characteristics of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) may vary by SARS-CoV-2 variant. Objective: To characterize PASC-related conditions among individuals likely infected by the ancestral strain in 2020 and individuals likely infected by the Delta variant in 2021. Design: Retrospective cohort study of electronic medical record data for approximately 27 million patients from March 1, 2020-November 30, 2021. Setting: Healthcare facilities in New York and Florida. Participants: Patients who were at least 20 years old and had diagnosis codes that included at least one SARS-CoV-2 viral test during the study period. Exposure: Laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection, classified by the most common variant prevalent in those regions at the time. Main outcome(s) and measure(s): Relative risk (estimated by adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]) and absolute risk difference (estimated by adjusted excess burden) of new conditions, defined as new documentation of symptoms or diagnoses, in persons between 31–180 days after a positive COVID-19 test compared to persons without a COVID-19 test or diagnosis during the 31–180 days after the last negative test. Results: We analyzed data from 560,752 patients. The median age was 57 years; 60.3% were female, 20.0% non-Hispanic Black, and 19.6% Hispanic. During the study period, 57,616 patients had a positive SARS-CoV-2 test; 503,136 did not. For infections during the ancestral strain period, pulmonary fibrosis, edema (excess fluid), and inflammation had the largest aHR, comparing those with a positive test to those without a COVID-19 test or diagnosis (aHR 2.32 [95% CI 2.09 2.57]), and dyspnea (shortness of breath) carried the largest excess burden (47.6 more cases per 1,000 persons). For infections during the Delta period, pulmonary embolism had the largest aHR comparing those with a positive test to a negative test (aHR 2.18 [95% CI 1.57, 3.01]), and abdominal pain carried the largest excess burden (85.3 more cases per 1,000 persons). Conclusions and relevance: We documented a substantial relative risk of pulmonary embolism and a large absolute risk difference of abdomen-related symptoms after SARS-CoV-2 infection during the Delta variant period. As new SARS-CoV-2 variants emerge, researchers and clinicians should monitor patients for changing symptoms and conditions that develop after infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Satisfaction with body image is a factor related to health outcomes. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between body image satisfaction and body size perception in an urban, Black community sample in New Orleans, Louisiana. Only 42.2% of respondents were satisfied with their body image and 44.1% correctly perceived their body size. Most respondents chose an ideal image in the normal body mass index range with over half choosing an ideal image smaller than their actual size. Misperception was greatest among the heaviest respondents. Females, those who overestimated their size, those with an education beyond high school, and those who were active in order to lose weight were less likely to be satisfied (p < 0.001). Those who were active but not trying to lose weight were more likely to be satisfied (p < 0.001). This suggests that perception of and satisfaction with body size may play a role in health behavior decisions.

DNA‐encoded libraries (DELs) have become a leading technology for hit identification in drug discovery projects as large, diverse libraries can be generated. DELs are commonly synthesised via split‐and‐pool methodology; thus, chemical transformations utilised must be highly efficient, proceeding with high conversions. Reactions performed in DEL synthesis also require a broad substrate scope to produce diverse, drug‐like libraries. Many pharmaceutical compounds incorporate multiple C−N bonds, over a quarter of which are synthesised via reductive aminations. However, few on‐DNA reductive amination procedures have been developed. Herein is reported the application of the micelle‐forming surfactant, TPGS‐750‐M, to the on‐DNA reductive amination of DNA‐conjugated amines, yielding highly efficient conversions with a broad range of aldehydes, including medicinally relevant heterocyclic and aliphatic substrates. The procedure is compatible with DNA amplification and sequencing, demonstrating its applicability to DEL synthesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: While much has been written about how distributed networks address internal validity, external validity is rarely discussed. We aimed to define key terms related to external validity, discuss how they relate to distributed networks, and identify how three networks (the US Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel System, the Canadian Network for Observational Drug Effect Studies [CNODES], and the National Patient Centered Clinical Research Network [PCORnet]) deal with external validity. Methods: We define external validity, target populations, target validity, generalizability, and transportability and describe how each relates to distributed networks. We then describe Sentinel, CNODES, and PCORnet and how each approaches these concepts, including a sample case study. Results: Each network approaches external validity differently. As its target population is US citizens and it includes only US data, Sentinel primarily worries about lack of external validity by not including some segments of the population. The fact that CNODES includes Canadian, United States, and United Kingdom data forces them to seriously consider whether the United States and United Kingdom data will be transportable to Canadian citizens when they meta‐analyze database‐specific estimates. PCORnet, with its focus on study‐specific cohorts and pragmatic trials, conducts more case‐by‐case explorations of external validity for each new analytic data set it generates. Conclusions: There is no one‐size‐fits‐all approach to external validity within distributed networks. With these networks and comparisons between their findings becoming a key part of pharmacoepidemiology, there is a need to adapt tools for improving external validity to the distributed network setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]