Introduction The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in an unprecedented expansion in telehealth, but little is known about differential use of telehealth according to demographics, rurality, or insurance status. Methods We performed a cross-sectional analysis of 7742 family medicine encounters at a single USA institution in the initial month of the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE). We compared the demographics of those using telehealth during the PHE to those with face-to-face visits during the same time period; we also compared the demographics of those using full audio-video to those using audio-only. Results The likelihood of any telehealth visit in the first 30 days of telehealth expansion was higher for women, those age 65 years and older, self-pay patients, and those with Medicaid and Medicare as primary payers. The likelihood of a telehealth visit was reduced for rural residence and Black or other races. Among all telehealth visits, the likelihood of a full audio-video telehealth visit was reduced for patients who were older, Black, from urban areas, or who were self-pay, Medicaid, or Medicare payer status. Discussion Significant disparities exist in telehealth use during the COVID-19 PHE by age, race, residence and payer.

IMPORTANCE Colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer death for both men and women, with an estimated 52 980 persons in the US projected to die of colorectal cancer in 2021. Colorectal cancer is most frequently diagnosed among persons aged 65 to 74 years. It is estimated that 10.5% of new colorectal cancer cases occur in persons younger than 50 years. Incidence of colorectal cancer (specifically adenocarcinoma) in adults aged 40 to 49 years has increased by almost 15% from 2000-2002 to 2014-2016. In 2016, 26% of eligible adults in the US had never been screened for colorectal cancer and in 2018, 31% were not up to date with screening.OBJECTIVE To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for colorectal cancer in adults 40 years or older. The review also examined whether these findings varied by age, sex, or race/ethnicity. In addition, as in 2016, the USPSTF commissioned a report from the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network Colorectal Cancer Working Group to provide information from comparative modeling on how estimated life-years gained, colorectal cancer cases averted, and colorectal cancer deaths averted vary by different starting and stopping ages for various screening strategies.POPULATION Asymptomatic adults 45 years or older at average risk of colorectal cancer (ie, no prior diagnosis of colorectal cancer, adenomatous polyps, or inflammatory bowel disease; no personal diagnosis or family history of known genetic disorders that predispose them to a high lifetime risk of colorectal cancer [such as Lynch syndrome or familial adenomatous polyposis]). EVIDENCE ASSESSMENTThe USPSTF concludes with high certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 50 to 75 years has substantial net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 45 to 49 years has moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years who have been previously screened has small net benefit. Adults who have never been screened for colorectal cancer are more likely to benefit. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer in all adults aged 50 to 75 years. (A recommendation) The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 45 to 49 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians selectively offer screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years. Evidence indicates that the net benefit of screening all persons in this age group is small. In determining whether this service is appropriate in individual cases, patients and clinicians should consider the patient's overall health, prior screening history, and preferences.

ung cancer is the second most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death in the US. In 2020, an estimated 228 820 persons were diagnosed with lung cancer, and 135 720 persons died of the disease. 1 Themostimportantriskfactorforlungcancerissmoking. 2,3 Smok-ingisestimatedtoaccountforabout90%ofalllungcancercases, 2 with a relative risk of lung cancer approximately 20-fold higher in smokers than in nonsmokers. 3 Increasing age is also a risk factor for lung cancer. The median age of diagnosis of lung cancer is 70 years. 4,5 Lung cancer has a generally poor prognosis, with an overall 5-year survival rate of 20.5%. 1 However, early-stage lung cancer has a better prognosis and is more amenable to treatment. IMPORTANCE Lung cancer is the second most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death in the US. In 2020, an estimated 228 820 persons were diagnosed with lung cancer, and 135 720 persons died of the disease. The most important risk factor for lung cancer is smoking. Increasing age is also a risk factor for lung cancer. Lung cancer has a generally poor prognosis, with an overall 5-year survival rate of 20.5%. However, early-stage lung cancer has a better prognosis and is more amenable to treatment.OBJECTIVE To update its 2013 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the accuracy of screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and on the benefits and harms of screening for lung cancer and commissioned a collaborative modeling study to provide information about the optimum age at which to begin and end screening, the optimal screening interval, and the relative benefits and harms of different screening strategies compared with modified versions of multivariate risk prediction models.POPULATION This recommendation statement applies to adults aged 50 to 80 years who have a 20 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENTThe USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT has a moderate net benefit in persons at high risk of lung cancer based on age, total cumulative exposure to tobacco smoke, and years since quitting smoking.RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT in adults aged 50 to 80 years who have a 20 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. Screening should be discontinued once a person has not smoked for 15 years or develops a health problem that substantially limits life expectancy or the ability or willingness to have curative lung surgery. (B recommendation) This recommendation replaces the 2013 USPSTF statement that recommended annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT in adults aged 55 to 80 years who have a 30 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years.

ImportancePreeclampsia is one of the most serious health problems that affect pregnant persons. It is a multisystem inflammatory syndrome that is often progressive but has an unclear etiology. Worldwide, preeclampsia is the second most common cause of maternal morbidity and mortality. It is a complication in approximately 4% of pregnancies in the US and contributes to both maternal and infant morbidity and mortality. 1 Preeclampsia also accounts for 6% of preterm births and 19% of medically indicated preterm births in the US. 1 There are racial and ethnic disparities in the prevalence of and mortality from preeclampsia. Non-Hispanic Black women are at greater risk for developing preeclampsia than other women and experience higher rates of maternal and infant morbidity and perinatal mortality than other racial and ethnic groups. In the US, the rate of maternal death from preeclampsia is higher among non-Hispanic Black women than non-Hispanic White women. 1,2 Disparities in risk factors for preeclampsia, access to early prenatal care, and obstetric interventions may account for some of the differences in prevalence and clinical outcomes. 1 These disparities largely result from historical and current manifestations of IMPORTANCE Preeclampsia is one of the most serious health problems that affect pregnant persons. It is a complication in approximately 4% of pregnancies in the US and contributes to both maternal and infant morbidity and mortality. Preeclampsia also accounts for 6% of preterm births and 19% of medically indicated preterm births in the US. There are racial and ethnic disparities in the prevalence of and mortality from preeclampsia. Non-Hispanic Black women are at greater risk for developing preeclampsia than other women and experience higher rates of maternal and infant morbidity and perinatal mortality.OBJECTIVE To update its 2014 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of low-dose aspirin use to prevent preeclampsia.POPULATION Pregnant persons at high risk for preeclampsia who have no prior adverse effects with or contraindications to low-dose aspirin.EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that there is a substantial net benefit of daily low-dose aspirin use to reduce the risk for preeclampsia, preterm birth, small for gestational age/intrauterine growth restriction, and perinatal mortality in pregnant persons at high risk for preeclampsia.RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends the use of low-dose aspirin (81 mg/d) as preventive medication for preeclampsia after 12 weeks of gestation in persons who are at high risk for preeclampsia. (B recommendation)

No abstract