BackgroundDuring an evolving influenza pandemic, community mitigation strategies, such as social distancing, can slow down virus transmission in schools and surrounding communities. To date, research on school practices to promote social distancing in primary and secondary schools has focused on prolonged school closure, with little attention paid to the identification and feasibility of other more sustainable interventions. To develop a list and typology of school practices that have been proposed and/or implemented in an influenza pandemic and to uncover any barriers identified, lessons learned from their use, and documented impacts.MethodsWe conducted a review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature on social distancing interventions in schools other than school closure. We also collected state government guidance documents directed to local education agencies or schools to assess state policies regarding social distancing. We collected standardized information from each document using an abstraction form and generated descriptive statistics on common plan elements.ResultsThe document review revealed limited literature on school practices to promote social distancing, as well as limited incorporation of school practices to promote social distancing into state government guidance documents. Among the 38 states that had guidance documents that met inclusion criteria, fewer than half (42%) mentioned a single school practice to promote social distancing, and none provided any substantive detail about the policies or practices needed to enact them. The most frequently identified school practices were cancelling or postponing after-school activities, canceling classes or activities with a high rate of mixing/contact that occur within the school day, and reducing mixing during transport.ConclusionLittle information is available to schools to develop policies and procedures on social distancing. Additional research and guidance are needed to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of school practices to promote social distancing.
ObjectivesEvidence on adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and late-life cognitive outcomes is inconsistent, with little research among diverse racial/ethnic groups. We investigated whether ACE exposures were associated with worse late-life cognition for all racial/ethnic groups and at different ages of exposure.DesignCovariate-adjusted mixed-effects linear regression models estimated associations of: (1) total number of ACEs experienced, (2) earliest age when ACE occurred and (3) type of ACE with overall cognition.SettingKaiser Permanente Northern California members aged 65 years and older, living in Northern California.ParticipantsKaiser Healthy Aging and Diverse Life Experiences study baseline participants, aged 65 years and older (n=1661; including 403 Asian-American, 338 Latino, 427 Black and 493 white participants).ResultsMost respondents (69%) reported one or more ACE, most frequently family illness (36%), domestic violence (23%) and parental divorce (22%). ACE count was not adversely associated with cognition overall (β=0.01; 95% CI −0.01 to 0.03), in any racial/ethnic group or for any age category of exposure. Pooling across all race/ethnicities, parent’s remarriage (β=−0.11; 95% CI −0.20 to −0.03), mother’s death (β=−0.18; 95% CI −0.30 to −0.07) and father’s death (β=−0.11; 95% CI −0.20 to −0.01) were associated with worse cognition.ConclusionAdverse childhood exposures overall were not associated with worse cognition in older adults in a diverse sample, although three ACEs were associated with worse cognitive outcomes.
Implementation issues often interfere with delivery of evidence-based interventions for students exposed to trauma. To improve uptake of evidence-based techniques for such students, a partnership of interventionist scientists, research and development experts, and students created a self-paced, confidential, online curriculum. This article describes the program and results of an open trial in 5 schools that serve primarily ethnic minority youth in urban settings. Fifty-one middle and high school students completed surveys before and after the program, as well as within the program, to assess emotional and behavioral symptoms (depressive, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD] symptoms and behavior) and purported mechanisms of action (coping, cognitions, emotional self-efficacy). Results indicated the program was feasible and acceptable, with moderate satisfaction. Despite low power in this study, we observed changes in several hypothesized mechanisms of action. In addition, we observed promising improvements in PTSD symptoms, emotional problems, and total behavioral difficulties. These findings offer the promise of using a self-help web-based tool to augment and enhance usual school support services.
Background Understanding the distribution of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies from vaccination and/or prior infection is critical to the public health response to the pandemic. CalScope is a population-based serosurvey in 7 counties in California. Methods We invited 200,000 randomly sampled households to enroll up to 1 adult and 1 child between April 20, 2021 and June 16, 2021. We tested all specimen for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid and spike proteins, and each participant completed an online survey. We classified participants into categories: seronegative, antibodies from infection only, antibodies from infection and vaccination, and antibodies from vaccination only. Results 11,161 households enrolled (5.6%), with 7,483 adults and 1,375 children completing antibody testing. As of June 2021, 33% (95%CI [28%, 37%]) of adults and 57% (95%CI[48%, 66%]) of children were seronegative; 18% (95%CI[14%, 22%]) of adults and 26% (95%CI[19%, 32%]) of children had antibodies from infection alone; 9% (95%CI[6%,11%]) of adults and 5% (95%CI[1%, 8%]) of children had antibodies from infection and vaccination; and 41% (95%CI[37%, 45%]) of adults and 13% (95%CI [7%, 18%]) of children had antibodies from vaccination alone. Conclusions As of June 2021, a third of adults and most children in California were seronegative. Serostatus varied regionally and by demographic group.
Background Despite growing research on the association between discrimination and disparities in cognitive aging, an evidence gap remains on how the association varies by racial/ethnic group. This study evaluates the associations of experiences of discrimination with cognitive function and whether these associations varied by race/ethnicity and nativity. Methods Using the Kaiser Healthy Aging and Diverse Life Experiences (KHANDLE) cohort (N=1,712) with approximately equal groups of Black, White, Latino, and Asian community-dwelling older adults aged 65 years and older, we evaluated the associations between self-reported experiences of everyday and major lifetime discrimination with overall cognitive performance and domain-specific cognition (verbal episodic memory, semantic memory and executive functioning) across race/ethnicity and nativity. Linear regression models examined the cross-sectional association between self-reported experiences of everyday and major lifetime discrimination with z-standardized coefficients for cognition. We tested for effect modification by race and nativity. All models controlled for age, sex and education. Results Among KHANDLE participants (mean age: 76 years; standard deviation: 6.8), everyday discrimination was not associated with cognitive scores. Major lifetime discrimination was associated with better average cognitive scores among Black participants but not among other racial/ethnic groups. Major lifetime discrimination was associated with better average cognitive scores among US-born but not among non-US born individuals. Conclusion Our findings do not imply that discrimination improves cognition, but rather suggest that future research should include more detailed measures on discrimination and unfair treatment that could help disentangle the extent to which relationships are causal or reflect some other underlying factor.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.