Gender-inclusive clinical screeners: Using CBCLs and YSRs in a clinic-based sample of transgender/gender-diverse youth.

This study examines differences in score profiles on the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and Youth Self-Report (YSR) for transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) youth in a clinical setting. Data were collected from youth receiving services at a gender care clinic in the Midwestern United States. Inclusion criteria were youth that identify as transgender, nonbinary, or another gender-diverse identity label between the ages of 6 and 18 and received services between October 2017 and November 2021. The analytic sample (N = 177) included 51.4% transmasculine, 17.5% transfeminine, 22.6% nonbinary/gender-expansive, and 8.5% questioning youth. 88.1% of youth were White. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests compared differences in mean T scores when using male versus female scoring templates for YSR and CBCL separately. Statistically significant differences were found on the majority of scales, particularly for TGD adolescents. For example, significant differences were found on the YSR for 10 of 11 scales for transmasculine and transfeminine youth ages 11-18 and 9 of 11 scales for nonbinary/gender-expansive youth. McNemar's test revealed significant differences in the number of clinical range scores for transmasculine YSR respondents on Anxious/Depressed, Somatic Complaints, Thought Problems, and Internalizing scales. For CBCL comparison of clinical significance, significant differences were found for Anxious/Depressed, Attention Problems, and Total Problems scales for transmasculine youth ages 12-18. Selecting a scoring template is contextually relevant; however, template selection appears to matter less when examining clinical relevance. Results suggest that clinicians using the CBCL and YSR with TGD youth have flexibility in scoring template selection. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Risk Factors for Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant among Previously Infected Frontline Workers.

In a cohort of essential workers in the United States previously infected with SARS-CoV-2, risk factors for reinfection included being unvaccinated, infrequent mask use, time since first infection, and being non-Hispanic Black. Protecting workers from reinfection requires a multipronged approach including up-to-date vaccination, mask use as recommended, and reduction in underlying health disparities.

Association of Sun Safety Behaviors and Barriers with Sunburn History in College Students in a Region with High UV Exposure.

Over five million cases of skin cancer are diagnosed each year in the United States with melanoma the third most common cancer in young adults. While publications have shown that sunburns increase the risk of developing melanoma throughout the lifetime including in adolescence and adulthood showing the importance of altering sun exposing behaviors throughout the lifetime, use of sun protection in college students remails low. In Fall 2019, an online survey of undergraduate students living on campus at a large southwestern university was conducted to determine the frequency of recent sunburns as well as sun protective behaviors and perceived knowledge of and barriers to sun protection. Associations between knowledge, behaviors, and barriers with self-reported sunburn were evaluated using logistic regression. Over 46% of 458 students reported at least one sunburn in the past three months and 21% reported having multiple sunburns in that period. Furthermore, 53% reported that they intentionally tanned their skin outdoors occasionally or more frequently, while 6.4% reported using an indoor tanning bed occasionally or more. Adjusted for skin sensitivity, recent sunburn history was associated with higher tanning activity scores and with high agreement that tanning was attractive (p < 0.01). This information can inform a more targeted series of intervention programming on the university campus.

COVID-19 vaccine perceptions and uptake in a national prospective cohort of essential workers.

INTRODUCTION: In a multi-center prospective cohort of essential workers, we assessed knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) by vaccine intention, prior SARS-CoV-2 positivity, and occupation, and their impact on vaccine uptake over time. METHODS: Initiated in July 2020, the HEROES-RECOVER cohort provided socio-demographics and COVID-19 vaccination data. Using two follow-up surveys approximately three months apart, COVID-19 vaccine KAP, intention, and receipt was collected; the first survey categorized participants as reluctant, reachable, or endorser. RESULTS: A total of 4,803 participants were included in the analysis. Most (70%) were vaccine endorsers, 16% were reachable, and 14% were reluctant. By May 2021, 77% had received at least one vaccine dose. KAP responses strongly predicted vaccine uptake, particularly positive attitudes about safety (aOR = 5.46, 95% CI: 1.4-20.8) and effectiveness (aOR = 5.0, 95% CI: 1.3-19.1). Participants' with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection were 22% less likely to believe the COVID-19 vaccine was effective compared with uninfected participants (aOR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64-0.96). This was even more pronounced in first responders compared with other occupations, with first responders 42% less likely to believe in COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (aOR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.40-0.84). Between administrations of the two surveys, 25% of reluctant, 56% reachable, and 83% of endorser groups received the COVID-19 vaccine. The reachable group had large increases in positive responses for questions about vaccine safety (10% of vaccinated, 34% of unvaccinated), and vaccine effectiveness (12% of vaccinated, 27% of unvaccinated). DISCUSSION: Our study demonstrates attitudes associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake and a positive shift in attitudes over time. First responders, despite potential high exposure to SARS-CoV-2, and participants with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection were more vaccine reluctant. CONCLUSIONS: Perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine can shift over time. Targeting messages about the vaccine's safety and effectiveness in reducing SARS-CoV-2 virus infection and illness severity may increase vaccine uptake for reluctant and reachable participants.

Interim Estimate of Vaccine Effectiveness of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) Vaccine in Preventing SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Adolescents Aged 12-17 Years - Arizona, July-December 2021.

The BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) mRNA COVID-19 vaccine has demonstrated high efficacy in preventing infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) in randomized placebo-controlled Phase III trials in persons aged 12-17 years (referred to as adolescents in this report) (1); however, data on real-word vaccine effectiveness (VE) among adolescents are limited (1-3). As of December 2021, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for adolescents aged 16-17 years and under FDA emergency use authorization for those aged 12-15 years. In a prospective cohort in Arizona, 243 adolescents aged 12-17 years were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) each week, irrespective of symptoms, and upon onset of COVID-19-like illness during July 25-December 4, 2021; the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant was the predominant strain during this study period. During the study, 190 adolescents contributed fully vaccinated person-time (≥14 days after receiving 2 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine), 30 contributed partially vaccinated person-time (receipt of 1 dose or receipt of 2 doses but with the second dose completed <14 days earlier), and 66 contributed unvaccinated person-time. Using the Cox proportional-hazards model, the estimated VE of full Pfizer-BioNTech vaccination for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection was 92% (95% CI = 79%-97%), adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, health information, frequency of social contact, mask use, location, and local virus circulation. These findings from a real-world setting indicate that 2 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine are highly effective in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection among Arizona adolescents. CDC recommends COVID-19 vaccination for all eligible persons in the United States, including persons aged 12-17 years.

COVID-19 Infection, Reinfection, and Vaccine Effectiveness in a Prospective Cohort of Arizona Frontline/Essential Workers: The AZ HEROES Research Protocol.

BACKGROUND: The Arizona Healthcare, Emergency Response, and Other Essential workers Study (AZ HEROES) aims to examine the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 illness among adults with high occupational exposure risk. OBJECTIVE: Study objectives include estimating incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in essential workers by symptom presentation and demographic factors, determining independent effects of occupational and community exposures on incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, establishing molecular and immunologic characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 infection in essential workers, describing the duration and patterns of rRT-PCR-positivity, and examining post-vaccine immunologic response. METHODS: Eligible participants include Arizona residents aged 18-85 years who work at least 20 hours per week in an occupation involving regular direct contact (within three feet) with others. Recruitment goals are stratified by demographic characteristics (50% aged 40 or older, 50% women, and 50% Hispanic or American Indian), by occupation (40% healthcare personnel, 30% first responders, and 30% other essential workers), and by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (with up to 50% seropositive at baseline). Information on sociodemographics, health and medical history, vaccination status, exposures to individuals with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, use of personal protective equipment, and perceived risks are collected at enrollment and updated through quarterly surveys. Every week, participants complete active surveillance for COVID-19-like illness (CLI) and self-collect nasal swabs. Additional self-collected nasal swab and saliva specimens are collected in the event of CLI onset. Respiratory specimens are sent to Marshfield Laboratories and tested for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) assay. CLI symptoms and impact on work and productivity are followed through illness resolution. Serum specimens are collected every 3 months and additional sera are collected following incident rRT-PCR positivity and after each COVID-19 vaccine dose. Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections will be calculated by person-weeks at risk and compared by occupation and demographic characteristics and by seropositivity status and infection and vaccination history. RESULTS: The AZ HEROES study was funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Enrollment began July 27, 2020 and as of May 1, 2021 a total of 3,165 participants have been enrolled in the study. CONCLUSIONS: AZ HEROES is unique in aiming to recruit a diverse sample of essential workers and prospectively following strata of SARS-CoV-2 seronegative and seropositive adults. Survey results combined with active surveillance data on exposure, CLI, weekly molecular diagnostic testing, and periodic serology will be used to estimate the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, assess the intensity and durability of immune responses to natural infection and COVID-19 vaccination, and contribute to the evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT: DERR1-10.2196/28925.

Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Health Care Personnel, First Responders, and Other Essential Workers During a Prevaccination COVID-19 Surge in Arizona.

Importance: Understanding the relative risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection across occupations can inform guidance to protect workers and communities. Less is known about infection risk for first responders and other essential workers than for health care personnel. Objective: To compare the prevaccination incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among first responders and other essential workers with incidence among health care personnel. Design Setting and Participants: This was a prospective cohort study of health care personnel, first responders, and other essential workers in Arizona from July 20, 2020, to March 14, 2021. Participants were seronegative at enrollment, had frequent direct contact with others at work, worked at least 20 hours per week, and submitted weekly nasal swab specimens for real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction analysis. Data analyses were performed from April 19, 2021, to June 4, 2021. Exposures: Occupation was the primary exposure of interest. Confounders assessed were sociodemographic characteristics, health status, community exposure, and work exposure. Main Outcomes and Measures: Crude incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was defined as the sum of first positive SARS-CoV-2 infections in participants divided by person-weeks at risk. Negative binomial regression was used to model SARS-CoV-2 infection by occupation to estimate unadjusted and adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs). The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) method was used to generate a parsimonious multivariable model. Results: The study cohort comprised 1766 Arizona workers (mean age [SD], 43.8 [11.1] years; 1093 [61.9%] female; 401 [22.7%] were Hispanic and 1530 [86.6%] were White individuals) of whom 44.2% were health care personnel, 22.4% first responders, and 33.4% other essential workers. The cohort was followed up for 23 393 person-weeks. Crude incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 6.7, 13.2, and 7.4 per 1000 person-weeks at risk for health care personnel, first responders, and other essential workers, respectively. In unadjusted models, first responders had twice the incidence of infection as health care personnel (IRRs, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.44-2.79). While attenuated, this risk remained elevated in adjusted LASSO-optimized models (IRR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.07-2.38). Risk of infection among other essential workers was no different than for health care personnel in unadjusted or adjusted models. Conclusions and Relevance: This prospective cohort study found that first responders had a higher incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection than health care personnel, even after adjusting for potential confounding factors. Given their frequent contact with each other and with the public and their high rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the safety challenges for first responders warrant greater public health attention and research.