Causal Inference About the Effects of Interventions From Observational Studies in Medical Journals.

Importance: Many medical journals, including JAMA, restrict the use of causal language to the reporting of randomized clinical trials. Although well-conducted randomized clinical trials remain the preferred approach for answering causal questions, methods for observational studies have advanced such that causal interpretations of the results of well-conducted observational studies may be possible when strong assumptions hold. Furthermore, observational studies may be the only practical source of information for answering some questions about the causal effects of medical or policy interventions, can support the study of interventions in populations and settings that reflect practice, and can help identify interventions for further experimental investigation. Identifying opportunities for the appropriate use of causal language when describing observational studies is important for communication in medical journals. Observations: A structured approach to whether and how causal language may be used when describing observational studies would enhance the communication of research goals, support the assessment of assumptions and design and analytic choices, and allow for more clear and accurate interpretation of results. Building on the extensive literature on causal inference across diverse disciplines, we suggest a framework for observational studies that aim to provide evidence about the causal effects of interventions based on 6 core questions: what is the causal question; what quantity would, if known, answer the causal question; what is the study design; what causal assumptions are being made; how can the observed data be used to answer the causal question in principle and in practice; and is a causal interpretation of the analyses tenable? Conclusions and Relevance: Adoption of the proposed framework to identify when causal interpretation is appropriate in observational studies promises to facilitate better communication between authors, reviewers, editors, and readers. Practical implementation will require cooperation between editors, authors, and reviewers to operationalize the framework and evaluate its effect on the reporting of empirical research.

Youth Experiencing Parental Death Due to Drug Poisoning and Firearm Violence in the US, 1999-2020.

Importance: Youth (those aged <18 years) parental death has been associated with negative health outcomes. Understanding the burden of parental death due to drug poisoning (herein, drugs) and firearms is essential for informing interventions. Objective: To estimate the incidence of youth parental death due to drugs, firearms, and all other causes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional observational study was conducted using vital registration, including all US decedents, and census data from January 1990 through December 2020. Data were analyzed from May 30, 2023, to March 28, 2024. Exposures: Parental death due to drug poisoning or firearms. Main Outcomes and Measures: A demographic matrix projection model was used to estimate the number and incidence of youth experiencing parental death, defined as the death of 1 or more parents, per 1000 population aged less than 18 years. Analyses evaluated parental deaths by drugs, firearms, and all other causes from 1999 through 2020 by race and ethnicity. Results: Between 1999 and 2020, there were 931 785 drug poisoning deaths and 736 779 firearm-related deaths with a mean (SD) age of 42.6 (16.3) years. Most deaths occurred among males (73.8%) and White decedents (70.8%) followed by Black (17.5%) and Hispanic (9.5%) decedents. An estimated 759 000 (95% CI, 722 000-800 000) youth experienced parental death due to drugs and an estimated 434 000 (95% CI, 409 000-460 000) youth experienced parental death due to firearms, accounting for 17% of all parental deaths. From 1999 to 2020, the estimated number of youth who experienced parental death increased 345% (95% CI, 334%-361%) due to drugs and 39% (95% CI, 37%-41%) due to firearms compared with 24% (95% CI, 23%-25%) due to all other causes. Black youth experienced a disproportionate burden of parental deaths, based primarily on firearm deaths among fathers. In 2020, drugs and firearms accounted for 23% of all parental deaths, double the proportion in 1999 (12%). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this modeling study suggest that US youth are at high and increasing risk of experiencing parental death by drugs or firearms. Efforts to stem this problem should prioritize averting drug overdoses and firearm violence, especially among structurally marginalized groups.

Virtual BUILD Research Collaboratory: A biomedical data science training using innovative pedagogy to address structures of racism and inequitable stress for undergraduates of color.

OBJECTIVE: The unprecedented events of 2020 required a pivot in scientific training to better prepare the biomedical research workforce to address global pandemics, structural racism, and social inequities that devastate human health individually and erode it collectively. Furthermore, this pivot had to be accomplished in the virtual environment given the nation-wide lockdown. METHODS: These needs and context led to leveraging of the San Francisco Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (SF BUILD) theories of change to innovate a Virtual BUILD Research Collaboratory (VBRC). The purpose of VBRC was to train Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) students to apply their unique perspectives to biomedical research. These training activities were evaluated using a pre-post survey design that included both validated and new psychosocial scales. A new scale was piloted to measure culturally relevant pedagogy. RESULTS: VBRC scholars increased science identity on two items: thinking of myself as a scientist (+1point, p = 0.006) and belonging to a community of scientists (+1point, p = 0.069). Overall, scholars perceived stress also decreased over VBRC (-2.35 points, p = 0.02). Post VBRC, scholars had high agency scores (µ = 11.02, Md = 12, range = 6-12, σ = 1.62) and cultural humility scores (µ = 22.11, Md = 23, range = 12-24, σ = 2.71). No notable race/ethnic differences were found in any measures. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, our innovative approach to data science training for BIPOC in unprecedented times shows promise for better preparing the workforce critically needed to address the fundamental gaps in knowledge at the intersection of public health, structural racism, and biomedical sciences.

Lessons learned from implementing a diversity, equity, and inclusion curriculum for health research professionals at a large academic research institution.

Objective: Despite advances in incorporating diversity and structural competency into medical education curriculum, there is limited curriculum for public health research professionals. We developed and implemented a four-part diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) training series tailored for academic health research professionals to increase foundational knowledge of core diversity concepts and improve skills. Methods: We analyzed close- and open-ended attendee survey data to evaluate within- and between-session changes in DEI knowledge and perceived skills. Results: Over the four sessions, workshop attendance ranged from 45 to 82 attendees from our 250-person academic department and represented a mix of staff (64%), faculty (25%), and trainees (11%). Most identified as female (74%), 28% as a member of an underrepresented racial and ethnic minority (URM) group, and 17% as LGBTQI. During all four sessions, attendees increased their level of DEI knowledge, and within sessions two through four, attendees' perception of DEI skills increased. We observed increased situational DEI awareness as higher proportions of attendees noted disparities in mentoring and opportunities for advancement/promotion. An increase in a perceived lack of DEI in the workplace as a problem was observed; but only statistically significant among URM attendees. Discussion: Developing applied curricula yielded measurable improvements in knowledge and skills for a diverse health research department of faculty, staff, and students. Nesting this training within a more extensive program of departmental activities to improve climate and address systematic exclusion likely contributed to the series' success. Additional research is underway to understand the series' longer-term impact on applying skills for behavior change.