Associations of intimate partner violence and maternal comorbidities: a cross-sectional analysis of the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System.

CONTEXT: Intimate partner violence (IPV) occurs when an intimate partner inflicts physical, sexual, and/or emotional assault with coercive control and is a traumatic experience with repercussions that can be exacerbated when a woman is pregnant. While screening for IPV during pregnancy is recommended to occur regardless of risk, less than 50% of pregnant women are screened. OBJECTIVES: Identifying clinical factors commonly associated with IPV during pregnancy may improve screening rates, thus our primary objective was to examine associations between IPV and maternal comorbidities. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) Phase 8 spanning 2016 through 2019. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression was utilized to calculate adjusted odds ratios (AORs) to determine associations between IPV and diabetes, anxiety, hypertension, depression, asthma, polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), and thyroid disease. RESULTS: More than 40% of women experiencing IPV reported a history of depression or anxiety. The occurrence of IPV was higher among women with depression (AOR 3.48, CI 3.14-3.85), anxiety (AOR 2.98, CI 2.64-3.37), hypertension (AOR 1.21, CI 1.02-1.44), and asthma (AOR 1.37; CI 1.17-1.59) than women without those respective conditions, but not among diagnoses of diabetes, PCOS, or thyroid disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that pregnant individuals reporting having experienced IPV were more likely to report having certain comorbidities compared to those who did not report experiencing IPV. Given the low rates of screening, knowing clinically relevant associations may increase screening sensitivity among clinicians and, in turn, increase the likelihood that individuals experiencing IPV receive supportive care.

Person-centered language and pediatric ADHD research: a cross-sectional examination of stigmatizing language within medical literature.

CONTEXT: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders in children and often goes untreated. A major barrier to treatment is the stigma surrounding the disorder, including from the educational and scientific community. Person-centered language (PCL) is associated with positive health outcomes, and its implementation is recommended by multiple professional groups, but its use has not been quantified for ADHD. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study is to quantify the adherence to PCL among ADHD-related journal publications utilizing a cross-sectional study design. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional examination including a systematic search of PubMed, which encompasses MEDLINE, for ADHD-related articles from January 2014 to March 2021. All journals with at least 20 ADHD-related search returns, human research, and in the English language were included, totaling 5,308 articles from 88 journals. Articles were randomized, and the first 500 were screened for inclusion of prespecified, non-PCL terminology. After exclusion, 311 articles were retained. RESULTS: Of the 311 retained articles, 131 (42.1%) adhered to PCL guidelines. Among articles with non-PCL, stigmatizing language such as "problem(s) with [the/a] child or problem child" and "suffers from" was found most frequently- occurring in 47.6% (148/311) and 5.8% (18/311) of the articles, respectively. We found no significant association between PCL adherence and study characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings revealed that over half of the current ADHD literature did not adhere to PCL guidelines. Adherence to PCL by the scientific and medical community will increase the overall efforts to mitigate stigma and increase support for individuals with ADHD.

Cancer Screening Among Current and Former U.S. Military Personnel Compared to Civilians: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 3% of invasive U.S. cancer diagnoses are made among veterans in a Veterans Affairs (VA) clinic each year, while VA patients only comprise about 1.9% of the U.S. population. Although some research has shown that veterans have higher incidence rates of cancer compared to civilians, evidence is sparse regarding possible disparities in rates of cancer screening between these populations. Thus, the purpose of this study is to compare differences in rates of screening for colorectal, lung, breast, and cervical cancers between current and former U.S. Military service members and civilians. METHODS: Using the data extracted from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, we assessed the rates of cancer screening among current and former U.S. Military service members compared to civilians from self-reported surveys assessing when individuals had been screened for colorectal or lung cancer among all participants and breast and cervical cancer among women participants. Persons greater than 25 years of age were included in the cervical cancer screening, 50 years of age for colon cancer screening, and 40 years of age for the breast cancer screening-the latter based on recommendations from the American Cancer Society. We used multivariate logistic regression models to determine the adjusted risk ratios (ARRs) of current and former U.S. Military service members receiving screening compared to civilians, adjusting for age, gender, race, education, and health care coverage. RESULTS: Current and former U.S. Military service members accounted for 2.6% of individuals included for the cervical cancer screening analysis, 2.2% for the breast cancer screening analyses, nearly 10% of the lung cancer screening, and 15% of the colorectal cancer (CRC) screening analyses. Prevalence of screening was higher for current and former U.S. Military service members among lung cancer and CRC. When controlling for age, race, education, and health care coverage, current and former U.S. Military service members were statistically more likely to be screened for CRC (ARR: 1.05; 95% confidence interval: 1.04-1.07) and lung cancer (ARR: 1.32; 95% confidence interval: 1.15-1.52). The odds of having completed a cervical or breast cancer screening were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that current and former U.S. Military service members were more likely to complete CRC and lung cancer screenings, while no significant difference existed between each population with regard to cervical and breast cancer screenings. This is one of the few studies that have directly compared cancer screening usage among civilians and current and former U.S. Military service members. Although current and former U.S. Military service members were more likely to receive several cancer screenings, improvements can still be made to remove barriers and increase screening usage due to the disproportionate rates of cancer mortality in this population. These solutions should be comprehensive-addressing personal, organizational, and societal barriers-to improve prognosis and survival rates among current and former U.S. Military service members.

Oxone®-Mediated TEMPO-Oxidized Cellulose Nanomaterial Ultrafiltration and Dialysis Mixed-Matrix Hollow Fiber Membranes.

Recent exploration of cellulose nanomaterials has resulted in the creation of Oxone®-Mediated TEMPO-Oxidized Cellulose Nanomaterials (OTO-CNMs). These materials, when incorporated into a polymer matrix, have properties showing increased flux, decreased membrane resistance, and improved clearance, making them an ideal material for dialysis. This study is the first to focus on the implementation of OTO-CNMs into hollow fiber membranes and a comparison of these membranes for ultrafiltration and dialysis. Ultrafiltration and dialysis were performed using bovine serum albumin (BSA), lysozyme, and urea to analyze various properties of each hollow fiber membrane type. The results presented in this study provide the first quantitative evaluation of the clearance and sieving characteristics of Oxone®-Mediated TEMPO-Oxidized Cellulose-Nanomaterial-doped cellulose triacetate mixed-matrix hemodialyzers. While the cellulose nanomaterials increased flux (10-30%) in ultrafiltration mode, this was offset by increased removal of albumin. However, in dialysis mode, these materials drastically increased the mass transfer of components (50-100%), which could lead to significantly lower dialysis times for patients. This change in the performance between the two different modes is most likely due to the increased porosity of the cellulose nanomaterials.