Purpose This study described participant adherence to wearing the accelerometer and accelerometer performance in a cohort study of adults. Methods From 2008-2011, 16,415 United States (US) Hispanic/Latino adults age 18-74 years enrolled in the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos. Immediately following the baseline visit, participants wore an Actical accelerometer for one week. This study explored correlates of accelerometer participation and adherence, defined as wearing it for at least 3 of a possible days for >=10 hours/day. Accelerometer performance was assessed by exploring the number of different values of accelerometer counts/minute for each participant. Results Overall, 92.3% (n=15,153) had at least one day with accelerometer data and 77.7% (n=12,750) were adherent. Both accelerometer participation and adherence were higher among participants who were married or partnered, reported a higher household income, were first generation immigrants, or reported lower sitting time. Participation was also higher among those with no stair limitations. Adherence was higher among participants who were male, older, employed or retired, not US born, preferred Spanish over English, reported higher work activity or lower recreational activity, and those with a lower body mass index. Among the sample that met the adherence definition, the maximum recorded count/minute was 12,000, and there were a total of 5,846 different counts/minute. On average, participants had 112.5 different counts/minute over 6 days (median 106, interquartile range 91-122). The number of different counts/minute were higher among men, younger ages, normal weight, and those with higher accelerometer assessed physical activity. Conclusion Several correlates differed between accelerometer participation and adherence. These characteristics could be targeted in future studies to improve accelerometer wear. The performance of the accelerometer provided insight into creating a more accurate non-wear algorithm.

Empirical studies examining perceived ethnic discrimination in Latinos of diverse background groups are limited. This study examined prevalence and correlates of discrimination in a diverse sample of U.S. Latinos (N=5,291) from the multi-site Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos (HCHS/SOL) and HCHS/SOL Sociocultural Ancillary Study. The sample permitted an examination of differences across seven groups (Central American, Cuban, Dominican, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South American, and Other/Multiple Background). Most participants (79.5%) reported lifetime discrimination exposure and prevalence rates ranged from 64.9% to 98% across groups. Structural Equation Models (SEM) indicated that after adjusting for sociodemographic covariates most group differences in reports of discrimination were eliminated. However, Cubans reported the lowest levels of discrimination, overall among all groups. Furthermore, regional effects were more important than group effects. Participants from Chicago reported the highest levels of discrimination in comparison to other regions. Group differences among Latinos appear to be primarily a function of sociodemographic differences in education, income, and acculturation. In addition, differences in exposure to discrimination may be tied to variables associated with both immigration patterns and integration to U.S. culture. Results highlight the importance of considering historical context and the intersection of discrimination and immigration when evaluating the mental health of Latinos.

Background Using imaging techniques to diagnose malignant and inflammatory lesions in the lung can be challenging. Purpose To compare intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) analysis in their ability to discriminate lung cancer from focal inflammatory lung lesions. Material and Methods Thirty-eight patients with lung masses were included: 30 lung cancers and eight inflammatory lesions. Patients were imaged with 3.0T MRI diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) using 10 b values (range, 0-1000 s/mm). Tissue diffusivity ( D), pseudo-diffusion coefficient ( D*), and perfusion fraction ( f) were calculated using segmented biexponential analysis. ADC (total) was calculated with monoexponential fitting of the DWI data. D, D*, f, and ADC were compared between lung cancer and inflammatory lung lesions. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed for all DWI parameters. Results The ADC was significantly higher for inflammatory lesions than for lung cancer ([1.21 ± 0.20] × 10 mm/s vs. [0.97 ± 0.15] × 10 mm/s; P = 0.004). By IVIM, f was found to be significantly higher in inflammatory lesions than lung cancer ([46.10 ± 12.92] % vs. [29.29 ± 10.89] %; P = 0.005). There was no difference in D and D* between lung cancer and inflammatory lesions ( P = 0.747 and 0.124, respectively). f showed comparable diagnostic performance with ADC in differentiating lung cancer from inflammatory lung lesions, with areas under the curve of 0.833 and 0.826, sensitivity 80.0% and 73.3%, and specificity 75.0% and 87.5%, respectively. Conclusion The IVIM parameter f value provides comparable diagnostic performance with ADC and could be used as a surrogate marker for differentiating lung cancer from inflammatory lesions.