Menstrual Cycle Characteristics of U. S. Adolescents According to Gynecologic Age and Age at Menarche.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To characterize typical menstrual cycle characteristics in adolescents and determine how these differ with age at menarche or years since menarche (gynecologic age). METHODS: We surveyed 13 to 18-year-old U.S. users of the Clue app (N = 6,486) and linked their responses to app-recorded cycle data (N=38,916 cycles). We analyzed cycle characteristics including cycle length, cycle variability, period length, experience of heavy flow, and dysmenorrhea in relation to gynecologic age and menarcheal age using mixed effects models. RESULTS: With increasing gynecologic age, we observed dose-dependent associations of lower odds of cycle irregularity (defined as cycles that were highly variable, short, or long) and higher odds of reporting ≥1 day of heavy flow. Individuals <1 year post-menarche had lower odds of heavy flow (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.3; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.1, 0.6), and increased odds of having a highly variable cycle (OR = 2.6; 95% CI: 1.3, 5.2) or short cycles (OR = 5.0; 95% CI: 2.3, 11.0) compared to those who were 6+ years post-menarche. We also found associations with early and late age at menarche. Compared to menarcheal age of 14+ years, menarcheal age ≤10 years was associated with shorter cycle length (ß = -1.63 days; 95% CI: -2.51, -0.75), increased odds of dysmenorrhea (OR = 3.2; 95% CI: 2.3, 4.6), and decreased odds of high cycle variability (OR = 0.8; 95% CI: 0.6, 1.0). CONCLUSION: Cycle characteristics in adolescence are associated with menarcheal age and gynecologic age. Notably, highly variable cycles are common, especially among those with younger gynecologic age or older menarcheal age.

Educational Intervention Among Adolescents and Young Adults on Emergency Contraception Options.

PURPOSE: Emergency contraception (EC), the 'last chance' contraceptive method, has gained significance post-Roe, but most young people do not know their options. METHODS: We conducted an educational intervention on EC among 1,053 students aged 18-25 years. We assessed changes in knowledge of key aspects of EC using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: At baseline, virtually no one was aware of the intrauterine device for EC (4%), but postintervention, 89% correctly identified intrauterine devices as the most effective EC (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 116.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] 62.4, 217.8). Knowledge that levonorgestrel pills could be accessed without a prescription grew (60%-90%; aOR = 9.7, 95% CI 6.7-14.0), as did knowledge that pills work best when taken as soon as possible (75%-95%; aOR = 9.6, 95% CI 6.1-14.9). Multivariate results showed adolescent and young adult participants absorbed these key concepts across age, gender, and sexual orientation. DISCUSSION: Timely interventions are needed to empower youth with knowledge of EC options.

Concern that contraception affects future fertility: How common is this concern among young people and does it stop them from using contraception?

Objectives: This study examines the concern that contraception affects future fertility among community college students and its association with contraceptive use. Study design: We used baseline data from a randomized controlled trial with 2060 community college students assigned female at birth. We used mixed-effects multivariate logistic regression adjusted for clustered data to assess sociodemographic factors associated with concerns about contraception affecting future fertility and to test the association between this concern and contraceptive use. Results: Most participants (69%) worried about contraception affecting their future fertility. Multivariable results indicated that first-generation college students (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.55) and non-English speakers at home (aOR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.04-1.64) were more concerned. Racial and ethnic differences were significant, with Black non-Hispanic (aOR, 2.83; 95% CI, 1.70-4.70), Asian/Pacific Islander non-Hispanic (aOR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.43-3.14), and Hispanic (aOR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.17-2.02) participants more likely to be concerned than White non-Hispanic counterparts. Participants who received contraceptive services in the past year had lower odds of this concern (aOR, 0.72; 95% CI 0.59-0.88). Furthermore, participants with this concern had lower odds of using contraception (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.49-0.91), especially hormonal contraception (aOR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.97). Conclusions: Most students feared contraception's impact on fertility, and this fear was associated with not using contraception. Disparities in this concern may be tied to discrimination, reproductive coercion, and limited reproductive health care access. Addressing concerns about contraception affecting future fertility is crucial to person-centered contraceptive counseling. Implications: This study examines the concern that contraception affects future fertility among sexually active female community college students and its impact on contraceptive use. Most participants expressed concerns about contraception affecting future fertility. Addressing future fertility concerns in patient-centered contraceptive counseling is crucial for reaching young people.

Preventing COVID-19 Transmission in Education Settings.

OBJECTIVES: In fall 2020, community hubs opened in San Francisco, California, to support vulnerable groups of students in remote learning. Our objectives were to (1) describe adherence to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mitigation policies in these urban, low-income educational settings; (2) assess associations between policy adherence and in-hub COVID-19 transmission; and (3) identify barriers to and facilitators of adherence. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study from November 2020 to February 2021. We obtained COVID-19 case data from the San Francisco Department of Public Health, conducted field observations to observe adherence to COVID-19 mitigation policies, and surveyed hub leaders about barriers to and facilitators of adherence. We summarized quantitative data using descriptive statistics and qualitative data using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1738 children were enrolled in 85 hubs (39% Hispanic, 29% Black). We observed 54 hubs (n = 1175 observations of children and 295 observations of adults). There was high community-based COVID-19 incidence (2.9-41.2 cases per 100 000 residents per day), with 36 cases in hubs and only 1 case of hub-based transmission (adult to adult). Sixty-seven percent of children and 99% of adults were masked. Fifty-five percent of children and 48% of adults were distanced ≥6 ft. Facilitators of mitigation policies included the following: for masking, reminders, adequate supplies, and "unmasking zones"; for distancing, reminders and distanced seating. CONCLUSIONS: We directly observed COVID-19 mitigation in educational settings, and we found variable adherence. However, with promotion of multiple policies, there was minimal COVID-19 transmission (despite high community incidence). We detail potential strategies for increasing adherence to COVID-19 mitigation.