Importance: A surge in severe cases of COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) in children would present unique challenges for hospitals and public health preparedness efforts in the United States. Objective: To provide evidence-based estimates of children infected with SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) and projected cumulative numbers of severely ill pediatric COVID-19 cases requiring hospitalization during the US 2020 pandemic. Design: Empirical case projection study. Main Outcomes and Measures: Adjusted pediatric severity proportions and adjusted pediatric criticality proportions were derived from clinical and spatiotemporal modeling studies of the COVID-19 epidemic in China for the period January-February 2020. Estimates of total children infected with SARS-CoV-2 in the United States through April 6, 2020, were calculated using US pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) cases and the adjusted pediatric criticality proportion. Projected numbers of severely and critically ill children with COVID-19 were derived by applying the adjusted severity and criticality proportions to US population data, under several scenarios of cumulative pediatric infection proportion (CPIP). Results: By April 6, 2020, there were 74 children who had been reported admitted to PICUs in 19 states, reflecting an estimated 176 190 children nationwide infected with SARS-CoV-2 (52 381 infants and toddlers younger than 2 years, 42 857 children aged 2-11 years, and 80 952 children aged 12-17 years). Under a CPIP scenario of 5%, there would be 3.7 million children infected with SARS-CoV-2, 9907 severely ill children requiring hospitalization, and 1086 critically ill children requiring PICU admission. Under a CPIP scenario of 50%, 10 865 children would require PICU admission, 99 073 would require hospitalization for severe pneumonia, and 37.0 million would be infected with SARS-CoV-2. Conclusions and Relevance: Because there are 74.0 million children 0 to 17 years old in the United States, the projected numbers of severe cases could overextend available pediatric hospital care resources under several moderate CPIP scenarios for 2020 despite lower severity of COVID-19 in children than in adults.

BackgroundDiabetes (DM) is estimated to affect 10–15% of the adult population in the Caribbean. Preventive efforts require population wide measures to address its social determinants. We undertook a systematic review to determine current knowledge about the social distribution of diabetes, its risk factors and major complications in the Caribbean. This paper describes our findings on the distribution by gender.MethodsWe searched Medline, Embase and five databases through the Virtual Health Library, for Caribbean studies published between 2007 and 2013 that described the distribution by gender for: known risk factors for Type 2 DM, prevalence of DM, and DM control or complications. PRISMA guidance on reporting systematic reviews on health equity was followed. Only quantitative studies (n>50) were included; each was assessed for risk of bias. Meta-analyses were performed, where appropriate, on studies with a low or medium risk of bias, using random effects models.ResultsWe found 50 articles from 27 studies, yielding 118 relationships between gender and the outcomes. Women were more likely to have DM, obesity, be less physically active but less likely to smoke. In meta-analyses of good quality population-based studies odds ratios for women vs. men for DM, obesity and smoking were: 1.65 (95% CI 1.43, 1.91), 3.10 (2.43, 3.94), and 0.24 (0.17, 0.34). Three studies found men more likely to have better glycaemic control but only one achieved statistical significance.Conclusion and ImplicationsFemale gender is a determinant of DM prevalence in the Caribbean. In the vast majority of world regions women are at a similar or lower risk of type 2 diabetes than men, even when obesity is higher in women. Caribbean female excess of diabetes may be due to a much greater excess of risk factors in women, especially obesity. These findings have major implications for preventive policies and research.

BackgroundDepressive disorder is the largest contributor to years lived with disability in the Caribbean, adding 948 per 100,000 in 2013. Depression is also a major risk factor for suicidal behaviour. Social inequalities influence the occurrence of depression, yet little is known about the social inequalities of this condition in the Caribbean. In support of the 2011 Rio Political Declaration on addressing health inequities, this article presents a systematic review of the role of social determinants on depression and its suicidal behaviours in the Caribbean.MethodsEight databases were searched for observational studies reporting associations between social determinants and depression frequency, severity, or outcomes. Based on the PROGRESS-plus checklist, we considered 9 social determinant groups (of 15 endpoints) for 6 depression endpoints, totalling 90 possible ways (‘relationship groups’) to explore the role of social determinants on depression. Studies with ≥50 participants conducted in Caribbean territories between 2004 and 2014 were eligible. The review was conducted according to STROBE and PRISMA guidelines. Results were planned as a narrative synthesis, with meta-analysis if possible.ResultsFrom 3951 citations, 55 articles from 45 studies were included. Most were classified as serious risk of bias. Fifty-seven relationship groups were reported by the 55 included articles, leaving 33 relationship groups (37%) without an evidence base. Most associations were reported for gender, age, residence, marital status, and education. Depression, its severity, and its outcomes were more common among females (except suicide which was more common among males), early and middle adolescents (among youth), and those with lower levels of education. Marriage emerged as both a risk and protective factor for depression score and prevalence, while several inequality relationships in Haiti were in contrast to typical trends.ConclusionThe risk of bias and few numbers of studies within relationship groups restricted the synthesis of Caribbean evidence on social inequalities of depression. Along with more research focusing on regional social inequalities, attempts at standardizing reporting guidelines for observational studies of inequality and studies examining depression is necessitated. This review offers as a benchmark to prioritize future research into the social determinants of depression frequency and outcomes in the Caribbean.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-017-4371-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Over a half of medical staff surveyed reported experiencing some type of violence in the past year, female gender being a significant predictor of abuse. Adequate documentation and implementing clear policies and violence prevention programmes in health institutions are crucial steps towards addressing this issue.

Background Small island developing states (SIDS) have limited absolute resources for responding to national disasters, including health emergencies. Since the first confirmed case of COVID-19 in the Caribbean on 1st March 2020, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) have been widely used to control the resulting COVID-19 outbreak. We document the variety of government measures introduced across the Caribbean and explore their impact on aspects of outbreak control. Methods Drawing on publically available information, we present confirmed cases and confirmed deaths to describe the extent of the Caribbean outbreak. We document the range of outbreak containment measures implemented by national Governments, focussing on measures to control movement and gatherings. We explore the temporal association of containment measures with the start of the outbreak in each country, and with aggregated information on human movement, using smartphone positioning data. We include a set of comparator countries to provide an international context. Results As of 25th May, the Caribbean reported 18,755 confirmed cases and 631 deaths. There have been broad similarities but also variation in the number, the type, the intensity, and particularly the timing of the NPIs introduced across the Caribbean. On average, Caribbean governments began controlling movement into countries 27 days before their first confirmed case and 23 days before comparator countries. Controls on movement within country were introduced 9 days after the first case and 36 days before comparators. Controls on gatherings were implemented 1 day before the first confirmed case and 30 days before comparators. Confirmed case growth rates and numbers of deaths have remained low across much the Caribbean. Stringent Caribbean curfews and stay-at-home orders coincided with large reductions in community mobility, regularly above 60%, and higher than most international comparator countries. Conclusion Stringent controls to limit movement, and specifically the early timing of those controls has had an important impact on containing the spread of COVID-19 across much of the Caribbean. Very early controls to limit movement into countries may well be particularly effective for small island developing states. With much of the region economically reliant on international tourism, and with steps to open borders now being implemented, it is critical that the region draws on a solid evidence-base to balance the competing demands of economic wellbeing and public health.

BackgroundBreast cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths among women in the Caribbean and accounts for >1 million disability adjusted life years. Little is known about the social inequalities of this disease in the Caribbean. In support of the Rio Political Declaration on addressing health inequities, this article presents a systematic review of evidence on the distribution, by social determinants, of breast cancer risk factors, frequency, and adverse outcomes in Caribbean women.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, SciELO, CINAHL, CUMED, LILACS, and IBECS were searched for observational studies reporting associations between social determinants and breast cancer risk factors, frequency, or outcomes. Based on the PROGRESS-plus checklist, we considered 8 social determinant groups for 14 breast cancer endpoints, which totalled to 189 possible ways (‘relationship groups’) to explore the role of social determinants on breast cancer. Studies with >50 participants conducted in Caribbean territories between 2004 and 2014 were eligible for inclusion. The review was conducted according to STROBE and PRISMA guidelines and results were planned as a narrative synthesis, with meta-analysis if possible.ResultsThirty-four articles were included from 5,190 screened citations. From these included studies, 75 inequality relationships were reported examining 30 distinct relationship groups, leaving 84% of relationship groups unexplored. Most inequality relationships were reported for risk factors, particularly alcohol and overweight/obesity which generally showed a positive relationship with indicators of lower socioeconomic position. Evidence for breast cancer frequency and outcomes was scarce. Unmarried women tended to have a higher likelihood of being diagnosed with breast cancer when compared to married women. While no association was observed between breast cancer frequency and ethnicity, mortality from breast cancer was shown to be slightly higher among Asian-Indian compared to African-descent populations in Trinidad (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1–1.4) and Guyana (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0–1.6).ConclusionStudy quantity, quality, and variability in outcomes and reporting limited the synthesis of evidence on the role of social determinants on breast cancer in the Caribbean. This report represents important current evidence on the region, and can guide future research priorities for better describing and understanding of Caribbean breast cancer inequalities.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12939-017-0540-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objectives To conduct an analysis of the most recent data on diabetes and its risk factors by gender and other social determinants of health to understand why its prevalence is higher among women than men in the Caribbean; to inform policy agenda-setting for diabetes prevention and control in the Caribbean; and to identify gaps in the evidence that require further research. Methods A previous systematic review of the literature describing studies conducted in the Caribbean that presented the distribution of diabetes, its outcomes, and risk factors, by one or more social determinants, was updated to include sources from 1 January 2007 – 31 December 2016. Surveys by the World Health Organization (WHO) were also included. Where data were sufficient, meta-analyses were undertaken. Results A total of 8 326 manuscripts were identified. Of those, 282 were selected for full text review, and 114, for abstraction. In all, 36 papers, including WHO-related surveys, had sufficient information for meta-analysis. More women compared to men were obese (OR: 2.1; 95%CI = 1.65 – 2.69), physically inactive (OR: 2.18; 95%CI = 1.75 – 2.72), and had diabetes (OR: 1.48; 95%CI = 1.25 – 1.76). More men smoked (OR: 4.27; 95%CI = 3.18 – 5.74) and had inadequate fruit and vegetable intake (OR: 1.37; 95%CI = 1.21 – 1.57) Conclusion Thirty-six papers were added to the previously conducted systematic review; of those, 13 were added to the meta-analysis. Diabetes and its risk factors (primarily obesity and physical inactivity) continue to disproportionately affect women in the Caribbean. Smoking interventions should be targeted at men in this geographic area.

Introduction: Due to increased exposure risk and the potential impact of COVID-19 infection, health care professionals (HCP) are a target group for COVID-19 vaccination.