A review of 77 studies employing self-report measures of antiretroviral adherence published 1/1996 through 8/2004 revealed great variety in adherence assessment item content, format, and response options. Recall periods ranged from 2 to 365 days (mode = 7 days). The most common cutoff for optimal adherence was 100% (21/48 studies, or 44%). In 27 of 34 recall periods (79%), self-reported adherence was associated with adherence as assessed with other indirect measures. Data from 57 of 67 recall periods (84%) indicated self-reported adherence was significantly associated with HIV-1 RNA viral load; in 16 of 26 (62%), it was associated with CD4 count. Clearly, the field would benefit from item standardization and a priori definitions and operationalizations of adherence. We conclude that even brief self-report measures of antiretroviral adherence can be robust, and recommend items and strategies for HIV research and clinical management.

US Preventive Services Task Force T he US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) makes recommendations about the effectiveness of specific preventive care services for patients without obvious related signs or symptoms.It bases its recommendations on the evidence of both the benefits and harms of the service and an assessment of the balance. The USPSTF does not consider the costs of providing a service in this assessment.The USPSTF recognizes that clinical decisions involve more considerations than evidence alone. Clinicians should understand the evidence but individualize decision making to the specific patient or situation. Similarly, the USPSTF notes that policy and coverage decisions involve considerations in addition to the evidence of clinical benefits and harms. Summary of Recommendations and EvidenceThe USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer starting at age 50 years and continuing until age 75 years (A recommendation) (Figure 1).The risks and benefits of different screening methods vary. See the Clinical Considerations section later in this article and the Table for details about screening strategies.The decision to screen for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years should be an individual one, taking into account the patient's overall health and prior screening history (C recommendation).• Adults in this age group who have never been screened for colorectal cancer are more likely to benefit. IMPORTANCE Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. In 2016, an estimated 134 000 persons will be diagnosed with the disease, and about 49 000 will die from it. Colorectal cancer is most frequently diagnosed among adults aged 65 to 74 years; the median age at death from colorectal cancer is 73 years. OBJECTIVE To update the 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for colorectal cancer. EVIDENCE REVIEWThe USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the effectiveness of screening with colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, computed tomography colonography, the guaiac-based fecal occult blood test, the fecal immunochemical test, the multitargeted stool DNA test, and the methylated SEPT9 DNA test in reducing the incidence of and mortality from colorectal cancer or all-cause mortality; the harms of these screening tests; and the test performance characteristics of these tests for detecting adenomatous polyps, advanced adenomas based on size, or both, as well as colorectal cancer. The USPSTF also commissioned a comparative modeling study to provide information on optimal starting and stopping ages and screening intervals across the different available screening methods.FINDINGS The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in average-risk, asymptomatic adults aged 50 to 75 years is of substantial net benefit. Multiple screening strategies are available to choose from, with different levels of evidence to support their effectiveness, as well as unique advantages and limitations, although there are no empirica...

heUSPreventiveServicesTaskForce(USPSTF)makesrecommendationsabouttheeffectivenessofspecificpreventivecare services for patients without related signs or symptoms. It bases its recommendations on the evidence of both the benefits and harms of the service and an assessment of the balance. The USPSTF does not consider the costs of providing a service in this assessment.The USPSTF recognizes that clinical decisions involve more considerations than evidence alone. Clinicians should understand the evidence but individualize decision making to the specific patient or situation. Similarly, the USPSTF notes that policy and coverage decisions involve considerations in addition to the evidence of clinical benefits and harms. Summary of Recommendation and EvidenceThe USPSTF recommends screening for depression in the general adult population, including pregnant and postpartum women. Screening should be implemented with adequate systems in place to ensure accurate diagnosis, effective treatment, and appropriate follow-up. (B recommendation) (Figure 1) Rationale Importance Depression is among the leading causes of disability in persons 15 years and older. It affects individuals, families, businesses, and so-DESCRIPTION Update of the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for depression in adults. METHODSThe USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for depression in adult populations, including older adults and pregnant and postpartum women; the accuracy of depression screening instruments; and the benefits and harms of depression treatment in these populations.POPULATION This recommendation applies to adults 18 years and older.RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends screening for depression in the general adult population, including pregnant and postpartum women. Screening should be implemented with adequate systems in place to ensure accurate diagnosis, effective treatment, and appropriate follow-up. (B recommendation)

Concurrent sexual partnerships may help to explain the disproportionately high prevalence of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections among African Americans. The persistence of such disparities would also require strong assortative mixing by race. We examined descriptive evidence from 4 nationally representative US surveys and found consistent support for both elements of this hypothesis. Using a data-driven network simulation model, we found that the levels of concurrency and assortative mixing observed produced a 2.6-fold racial disparity in the epidemic potential among young African American adults.