Screening for Breast Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Among all US women, breast cancer is the second most common cancer and the second most common cause of cancer death. In 2023, an estimated 43 170 women died of breast cancer. Non-Hispanic White women have the highest incidence of breast cancer and non-Hispanic Black women have the highest mortality rate. Objective: The USPSTF commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different mammography-based breast cancer screening strategies by age to start and stop screening, screening interval, modality, use of supplemental imaging, or personalization of screening for breast cancer on the incidence of and progression to advanced breast cancer, breast cancer morbidity, and breast cancer-specific or all-cause mortality, and collaborative modeling studies to complement the evidence from the review. Population: Cisgender women and all other persons assigned female at birth aged 40 years or older at average risk of breast cancer. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that biennial screening mammography in women aged 40 to 74 years has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of screening mammography in women 75 years or older and the balance of benefits and harms of supplemental screening for breast cancer with breast ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), regardless of breast density. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends biennial screening mammography for women aged 40 to 74 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening mammography in women 75 years or older. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of supplemental screening for breast cancer using breast ultrasonography or MRI in women identified to have dense breasts on an otherwise negative screening mammogram. (I statement).

Multilevel perceptions of the virtual delivery of the University of California Diabetes Prevention Program on RE-AIM domains due to COVID-19 mandates.

Background: The University of California's Diabetes Prevention Program (UC DPP) Initiative was implemented across all 10 UC campuses in 2018. The COVID-19 pandemic and accompanying mandates required swift changes to program delivery, including pivoting from in-person to virtual delivery (i.e., Zoom). Our goal was to assess multilevel constituent perceptions of the use of a virtual platform to deliver UC DPP due to COVID-19 mandates. Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews with 68 UC DPP participants, coordinators, and leaders to examine the use of virtual platform delivery on the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance (RE-AIM) of UC DPP. Transcripts were analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis and emergent themes were categorized using domains corresponding to RE-AIM framework. Results: Among UC DPP participants (n = 42), virtual delivery primarily impacted perceptions of UC DPP effectiveness and implementation. Some participants perceived program effectiveness to be negatively impacted, given their preference for in-person sessions, which they felt provided more engagement, peer support, and accountability. Implementation challenges included problems with virtual format (e.g., "Zoom fatigue"); however, several benefits were also noted (e.g., increased flexibility, maintenance of DPP connections during campus closures). UC DPP coordinators (n = 18) perceived virtual delivery as positively impacting UC DPP reach, since virtual platforms provided access for some who could not participate in-person, and negatively impacting effectiveness due to reduced engagement and lower peer support. UC leaders (n = 8) perceived that use of the virtual format had a positive impact on reach (e.g., increased availability, accessibility) and negatively impacted effectiveness (e.g., less intensive interactions on a virtual platform). Across constituent levels, the use of a virtual platform had little to no impact on perceptions of adoption and maintenance of UC DPP. Conclusion: Perceptions of the reach, effectiveness, and implementation of UC DPP using a virtual platform varied across constituents, although all groups noted a potential negative impact on overall program effectiveness. Unanticipated program adaptations, including virtual delivery, present potential benefits as well as perceived drawbacks, primarily across the effectiveness domain. Understanding differential constituent perceptions of the impact of virtual delivery can help maximize RE-AIM and inform future UC DPP delivery strategies.

Screening for Speech and Language Delay and Disorders in Children: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Speech and language delays and disorders can pose significant problems for children and their families. Evidence suggests that school-aged children with speech or language delays may be at increased risk of learning and literacy disabilities, including difficulties with reading and writing. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children 5 years or younger. Population: Asymptomatic children 5 years or younger whose parents or clinicians do not have specific concerns about their speech, language, hearing, or development. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children who do not present with signs or symptoms or parent/caregiver concerns. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children 5 years or younger without signs or symptoms. (I statement).

Twelve-Month Reach and Effectiveness of a University-Based Diabetes Prevention Initiative.

INTRODUCTION: The University of California (UC) implemented the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) to address diabetes and obesity risk. This project examined the reach and effectiveness of this university-based DPP delivery approach. METHODS: This project compared 12-month weight change among three groups of UC beneficiaries with overweight/obesity: (1) those who received invitation letters and enrolled in UC DPP, (2) those mailed invitation letters but did not enroll, and (3) those who were not mailed letters and did not enroll (controls). Using 2012-2022 EHR, administrative and DPP cohort data, an interrupted time series was conducted in 2022-2023 to compare group differences in rate of weight change. RESULTS: Among 6,231 beneficiaries (132 UC DPP aware enrollees, 1,750 DPP aware non-enrollees, 4,349 controls), UC DPP enrollees were older (mean age 49), mostly women (76%), and more diverse (33% Asian, 8% Black, 20% Hispanic, 4% Multi/Other). Over 12 months of follow-up, UC DPP enrollee postenrollment rate of weight loss was -0.68 lbs./month. UC DPP enrollees had significantly greater weight change from pre- to post-enrollment than DPP aware non-enrollees (adjusted Δ-1.02 vs. Δ-0.07 lbs./month, difference= -0.95, p<0.001). Weight change among all participants who received letters with/without DPP enrollment was similar to controls. CONCLUSIONS: UC DPP reached a diverse group and was effective for weight loss at 12-month follow-up. However, UC DPP invitation letters to raise prediabetes and DPP awareness were not associated with significant weight change in the absence of DPP enrollment. University-based approaches to DPP delivery are effective and may enhance reach of DPP among at-risk adults.

Aligning Prevention Evidence Gaps With Prevention Research.

This Viewpoint describes the development of tools to communicate actionable steps to address research needs and gaps for USPSTF recommendations that have insufficient evidence to make definitive guidance.

Exploring the Relationship Between Medication Adherence and Diabetes Disparities among Hispanic Patients in a Large Health System.

BACKGROUND: Sub-optimal HbA1c control is a driver of disparities in diabetes outcomes among Hispanic patients. Differences in medication adherence may underlie racial/ethnic differences in HbA1c level. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between medication adherence and disparities in HbA1c level among Hispanic patients, relative to other racial/ethnic groups, obtaining care in the University of California Health System (UC Health). DESIGN: This study used clinical, administrative, and prescription dispensing data (January-December 2021) derived from the electronic health records of 5 Academic Medical Centers in UC Health, and linear regression models (LRMs) to conduct a cross-sectional analysis of the association between medication adherence, race/ethnicity, and HbA1c level. Adjusted LRMs were run with and without the measure of medication adherence to assess this relationship. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with a UC Health primary care physician (PCP), with ≥ 1 PCP visit within the last 3 years, ages 18-75, reporting Asian, Hispanic, or White race/ethnicity, and who had ≥ 2 encounters with an ICD diagnosis of diabetes or had a prescription for a diabetes medication within the last 2 years, as of 12/31/21 (N = 27, 542; Asian = 6253, Hispanic = 7216, White = 14,073). MAIN MEASURES: Our measure of medication adherence was the proportion of days covered (PDC) for diabetes medications in 2021. Our outcome was the most recent HbA1c value. KEY RESULTS: In the LRM excluding the PDC, Hispanic ethnicity was positively associated with HbA1c level (ß = 0.31, p = < 0.001). In the LRM model including PDC, PDC was negatively associated with HbA1c level (ß = - 0.18, p = < 0.001). However, the positive relationship between Hispanic ethnicity and HbA1c level did not change (ß = 0.31, p = < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest that the relationship between Hispanic ethnicity, HbA1c level, and factors outside of medication adherence should be explored among primary care patients receiving care in Academic Medical Centers.

Pharmacist-Led Diabetes Control Intervention and Health Outcomes in Hispanic Patients With Diabetes.

Importance: Among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), Hispanic individuals are more likely than non-Hispanic White individuals to develop diabetes-related complications. Objective: To examine the association of a pharmacist-led intervention (UCMyRx) with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) among Hispanic patients with T2D. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study used electronic health record data and a difference-in-differences study design to evaluate the association of UCMyRx exposure with changes in HbA1c concentration and SBP among Hispanic patients with T2D, relative to usual care, at University of California, Los Angeles primary care clinics between February and April of 2023. The study population included patients with an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision/International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision diagnosis of T2D, self-reporting Hispanic ethnicity, age 18 years or older, with 1 or more visits with a UCMyRx pharmacist (treatment) or 2 or more visits, 2 or more years apart, during the study window (comparison). Additionally, patients had to have the following observations during the study window (March 2, 2013-December 31, 2018): (1) a HbA1c 8% or higher, anywhere between 365 days before and 14 days after the index date (date of the first UCMyRx visit or a randomly generated index date) and a follow-up HbA1c measure within 120 to 365 days after the index date (n = 396) and/or (2) a SBP 140 mm Hg or higher between 365 days before and 14 days after the index date, and a follow-up SBP measure within 120 to 450 days after the index date (n = 795). Exposure: Pharmacists review laboratory results/vital signs, perform medication reconciliation, and develop personally tailored interventions to address adherence barriers and increase guideline-concordant care. Main Outcomes and Measures: Pre- to post-index date changes in HbA1c and SBP. Results: Of the 931 unique patients with T2D analyzed, the mean (SD) age was 64 (14.1) years, and 552 (59.3%) were female. In adjusted analyses, having 1 or more UCMyRx visits was associated with a reduction in HbA1c concentration (ß = -0.46%; 95% CI, -0.84% to -0.07%) but no change in SBP (ß = -1.71 mm Hg; 95% CI, -4.00 to 0.58 mm Hg). Conclusions and Relevance: In this quality improvement study of UCMyRx among Hispanic patients with T2D, a negative association was observed between UCMyRx exposure and HbA1c concentration but not SBP. Pharmacist-led intervention may be a strategy for improving outcomes among Hispanic patients with T2D.

The Effectiveness of Shared Decision-making for Diabetes Prevention: 24- and 36-Month Results From the Prediabetes Informed Decision and Education (PRIDE) Trial.

OBJECTIVE: We conducted a cluster-randomized, shared decision-making (SDM) trial offering lifestyle change, metformin, or both options, to adults at risk for diabetes in a primary care network (n = 20 practices). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We used propensity score matching to identify control patients and used electronic health record data to compare weight loss at 24 and 36 months of follow-up and diabetes incidence at 36 months of follow-up. RESULTS: In adjusted post hoc analyses, SDM participants (n = 489) maintained modestly greater 24-month weight loss of -3.1 lb and 36-month weight loss of -2.7 lb versus controls (n = 1,430, both comparisons P < 0.001). SDM participants who chose both lifestyle change and metformin sustained weight loss at 36 months of -4.1 lb (P < 0.001 vs. controls). We found no differences in incident diabetes (15% of SDM participants, 14% of control participants; P = 0.64). CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the first studies to demonstrate weight loss maintenance up to 36 months after diabetes prevention SDM.

Screening for Latent Tuberculosis Infection in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: In the US, tuberculosis remains an important preventable disease, including active tuberculosis, which may be infectious, and latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI), which is asymptomatic and not infectious but can later progress to active disease. The precise prevalence rate of LTBI in the US is difficult to determine; however, estimated prevalence is about 5.0%, or up to 13 million persons. Incidence of tuberculosis varies by geography and living accommodations, suggesting an association with social determinants of health. Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on LTBI screening and treatment in asymptomatic adults seen in primary care, as well as the accuracy of LTBI screening tests. Population: Asymptomatic adults 18 years or older at increased risk for tuberculosis. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that there is a moderate net benefit in preventing active tuberculosis disease by screening for LTBI in persons at increased risk for tuberculosis infection. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for LTBI in populations at increased risk. (B recommendation).

Screening for Skin Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Skin cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in the US. There are different types of skin cancer varying in disease incidence and severity. Basal and squamous cell carcinomas are the most common types of skin cancer but infrequently lead to death or substantial morbidity. Melanomas represent about 1% of skin cancer and cause the most skin cancer deaths. Melanoma is about 30 times more common in White persons than in Black persons. However, persons with darker skin color are often diagnosed at later stages, when skin cancer is more difficult to treat. Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the benefits and harms of screening for skin cancer in asymptomatic adolescents and adults. Population: Asymptomatic adolescents and adults who do not have a history of premalignant or malignant skin lesions. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of visual skin examination by a clinician to screen for skin cancer in asymptomatic adolescents and adults. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of visual skin examination by a clinician to screen for skin cancer in adolescents and adults. (I statement).

Differential Impact of a Plan-Led Standardized Complex Care Management Intervention on Subgroups of High-Cost High-Need Medicaid Patients.

Interventions to better coordinate care for high-need high-cost (HNHC) Medicaid patients frequently fail to demonstrate changes in hospitalizations or emergency department (ED) use. Many of these interventions are modeled after practice-level complex care management (CCM) programs. The authors hypothesized that a national CCM program may be effective for some subgroups of HNHC patients, and the overall null effect may obfuscate subgroup-level impact. They used a previously published typology defining 6 subgroups of high-cost Medicaid patients and evaluated program impact by subgroup. The analysis used an individual-level interrupted time series with a comparison group. Intervention subjects were high-cost adult Medicaid patients who enrolled in 1 of 2 national CCM programs implemented by UnitedHealthcare (UHC) (n = 39,687). The comparators were patients who met CCM program criteria but were ineligible due to current enrollment in another UHC/Optum led program (N = 26,359). The intervention was a CCM program developed by UHC/Optum to provide "whole person care" delivering standardized interventions to address medical, behavioral, and social needs for HNHC Medicaid patients, and the outcome was probability of hospitalization or ED use in a given month, estimated at 12 months postenrollment. A reduction in risk of ED utilization for 4 of 6 subgroups was found. A reduction in risk of hospitalization for 1 of 6 subgroups was also found. The authors conclude that standardized health plan led CCM programs demonstrate effectiveness for certain subgroups of HNHC patients in Medicaid. This effectiveness is principally in reducing ED risk and may extend to the risk of hospitalization for a small number of patients.

Putting Evidence Into Practice: An Update on the US Preventive Services Task Force Methods for Developing Recommendations for Preventive Services.

PURPOSE: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is an independent body that makes evidence-based recommendations regarding preventive services to improve health for people nationwide. Here, we summarize current USPSTF methods, describe how methods are evolving to address preventive health equity, and define evidence gaps for future research. METHODS: We summarize current USPSTF methods as well as ongoing methods development. RESULTS: The USPSTF prioritizes topics on the basis of disease burden, extent of new evidence, and whether the service can be provided in primary care and going forward will increasingly consider health equity. Analytic frameworks specify the key questions and linkages connecting the preventive service to health outcomes. Contextual questions provide information on natural history, current practice, health outcomes in high-risk groups, and health equity. The USPSTF assigns a level of certainty to the estimate of net benefit of a preventive service (high, moderate, or low). The magnitude of net benefit is also judged (substantial, moderate, small, or zero/negative). The USPSTF uses these assessments to assign a letter grade from A (recommend) to D (recommend against). I statements are issued when evidence is insufficient. CONCLUSIONS: The USPSTF will continue to evolve its methods for simulation modeling and to use evidence to address conditions for which there are limited data for population groups who bear a disproportionate burden of disease. Additional pilot work is underway to better understand the relations of the social constructs of race, ethnicity, and gender with health outcomes to inform the development of a USPSTF health equity framework.

Serologic Screening for Genital Herpes Infection: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Genital herpes is a common sexually transmitted infection caused by 2 related viruses, herpes simplex type 1 (HSV-1) and herpes simplex type 2 (HSV-2). Infection is lifelong; currently, there is no cure for HSV infection. Antiviral medications may provide clinical benefits to symptomatic persons. Transmission of HSV from a pregnant person to their infant can occur, most commonly during delivery; when genital lesions or prodromal symptoms are present, cesarean delivery can reduce the risk of transmission. Neonatal herpes infection is uncommon yet can result in substantial morbidity and mortality. Objective: To reaffirm its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update on targeted key questions to systematically evaluate the evidence on accuracy, benefits, and harms of routine serologic screening for HSV-2 infection in asymptomatic adolescents, adults, and pregnant persons. Population: Adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons, without known history, signs, or symptoms of genital HSV infection. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the harms outweigh the benefits for population-based screening for genital HSV infection in asymptomatic adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends against routine serologic screening for genital HSV infection in asymptomatic adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons. (D recommendation).

"Positive Kidney Health": Implementation and design of a pharmacist-led intervention for patients at risk for development or progression of chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients with early chronic kidney disease (CKD) or underlying risk factors are often unaware of their kidney test results, common causes of CKD, and ways to lower risk of disease onset/progression. OBJECTIVE: To test feasibility of a pharmacist-led intervention targeting patient education and risk factors in patients with early CKD and those at risk for CKD. PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: Ambulatory care pharmacists in community-based primary care clinics delivered kidney health education, ordered labs, and recommended medication adjustments. PRACTICE INNOVATION: We identified patients with a moderate rate of decline (≥2 mL/min/1.73 m2 per year) in estimated glomerular filtration (eGFR) at-risk for CKD or early stage CKD. An interactive workbook was designed to teach patients about kidney test results and self-management of risk factors including hypertension, type 2 diabetes, cigarette smoking, and chronic oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use. EVALUATION METHODS: Outcomes included visit uptake, completion of annual albuminuria screening, and initiation of guideline-directed medications for CKD. Patients were surveyed pre- and post-intervention for kidney health knowledge and perceptions regarding pharmacist-provided information. RESULTS: Our sample of 20 participants had a mean eGFR of 59 mL/min/1.73 m2 and the mean eGFR decline was -4.6 mL/min/1.73 m2 per year. There were 47 visits during the pilot period from February 2021 to October 2021. Thirteen patients were missing albuminuria screening within 12 months; 2 of 9 patients with resulting labs had new microalbuminuria and were started on renoprotective medications. Patients had improved understanding of their kidney function test results and most did not consider the information scary or confusing. CONCLUSION: Barriers to enrollment included fewer participants with multiple risk factors for CKD. The pharmacists were able to engage patients in learning the importance of monitoring and self-management of kidney health. A collaborative practice agreement may enhance a similar intervention that includes initiation of renoprotective medications.

The Diabetes Health Plan and Healthcare Utilization Among Beneficiaries with Low Incomes.

BACKGROUND: The socioeconomic status (SES) gradient in hospital and emergency room utilization among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is partially driven by cost-related non-adherence. OBJECTIVE: To test the impact of the Diabetes Health Plan (DHP), a diabetes-specific health plan incorporating value-based insurance design principles on healthcare utilization among low-income adults with T2DM. DESIGN: To examine the impact of the DHP on healthcare utilization, we employed a difference-in-differences (DID) study design with a propensity-matched comparison group. We modeled count and dichotomous outcomes using Poisson and logit models, respectively. PARTICIPANTS: Cohort of adults (18-64) with T2DM, with an annual household income <$ 30,000, and who were continuously enrolled in an employer-sponsored UnitedHealthcare plan for at least 2 years between 2009 and 2014. INTERVENTIONS: The DHP reduces or eliminates out-of-pocket costs for disease management visits, diabetes-related medicines, and diabetes self-monitoring supplies. The DHP also provides access to diabetes-specific telephone case management as well as other online resources. MAIN MEASURES: Number of disease management visits (N = 1732), any emergency room utilization (N = 1758), and any hospitalization (N = 1733), within the year. KEY RESULTS: DID models predicting disease management visits suggested that DHP-exposed beneficiaries had 1.7 fewer in-person disease management visits per year (- 1.70 [95% CI: - 2.19, - 1.20], p < 0.001), on average, than comparison beneficiaries. Models for emergency room (0.00 [95% CI: - 0.06, 0.06], p = 0.966) and hospital utilization (- 0.03 [95% CI: - 0.08, - 0.01], p = 0.164) did not demonstrate statistically significant changes associated with DHP exposure. CONCLUSIONS: While no relationship between DHP exposure and high-cost utilization was observed in the short term, fewer in-person disease management visits were observed. Future studies are needed to determine the clinical implications of these findings.

Screening for Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Current prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in the US is not well established; however, based on cohort and survey data, in 2007-2010 the estimated prevalence of at least mild OSA (defined as an apnea-hypoxia index [AHI] ≥5) plus symptoms of daytime sleepiness among adults aged 30 to 70 years was 14% for men and 5% for women, and the estimated prevalence of moderate to severe OSA (defined as AHI ≥15) was 13% for men and 6% for women. Severe OSA is associated with increased all-cause mortality. Other adverse health outcomes associated with untreated OSA include cardiovascular disease and cerebrovascular events, type 2 diabetes, cognitive impairment, decreased quality of life, and motor vehicle crashes. Objective: To update its 2017 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for OSA in adults. Population: Asymptomatic adults (18 years or older) and adults with unrecognized symptoms of OSA. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for OSA in the general adult population. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for OSA in the general adult population. (I statement).

Hormone Therapy for the Primary Prevention of Chronic Conditions in Postmenopausal Persons: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Menopause is defined as the cessation of a person's menstrual cycle. It is defined retrospectively, 12 months after the final menstrual period. Perimenopause, or the menopausal transition, is the few-year time period preceding a person's final menstrual period and is characterized by increasing menstrual cycle length variability and periods of amenorrhea, and often symptoms such as vasomotor dysfunction. The prevalence and incidence of most chronic diseases (eg, cardiovascular disease, cancer, osteoporosis, and fracture) increase with age, and US persons who reach menopause are expected on average to live more than another 30 years. Objective: To update its 2017 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of systemic (ie, oral or transdermal) hormone therapy for the prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons and whether outcomes vary by age or by timing of intervention after menopause. Population: Asymptomatic postmenopausal persons who are considering hormone therapy for the primary prevention of chronic medical conditions. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the use of combined estrogen and progestin for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons with an intact uterus has no net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the use of estrogen alone for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons who have had a hysterectomy has no net benefit. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends against the use of combined estrogen and progestin for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons. (D recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against the use of estrogen alone for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons who have had a hysterectomy. (D recommendation).

Screening for Anxiety in Children and Adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Anxiety disorder, a common mental health condition in the US, comprises a group of related conditions characterized by excessive fear or worry that present as emotional and physical symptoms. The 2018-2019 National Survey of Children's Health found that 7.8% of children and adolescents aged 3 to 17 years had a current anxiety disorder. Anxiety disorders in childhood and adolescence are associated with an increased likelihood of a future anxiety disorder or depression. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for anxiety disorders in children and adolescents. This is a new recommendation. Population: Children and adolescents 18 years or younger who do not have a diagnosed anxiety disorder or are not showing recognized signs or symptoms of anxiety. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for anxiety in children and adolescents aged 8 to 18 years has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on screening for anxiety in children 7 years or younger. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for anxiety in children and adolescents aged 8 to 18 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for anxiety in children 7 years or younger. (I statement).

Screening for Depression and Suicide Risk in Children and Adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Depression is a leading cause of disability in the US. Children and adolescents with depression typically have functional impairments in their performance at school or work as well as in their interactions with their families and peers. Depression can also negatively affect the developmental trajectories of affected youth. Major depressive disorder (MDD) in children and adolescents is strongly associated with recurrent depression in adulthood; other mental disorders; and increased risk for suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and suicide completion. Suicide is the second-leading cause of death among youth aged 10 to 19 years. Psychiatric disorders and previous suicide attempts increase suicide risk. Objective: To update its 2014 and 2016 recommendations, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening, accuracy of screening, and benefits and harms of treatment of MDD and suicide risk in children and adolescents that would be applicable to primary care settings. Population: Children and adolescents who do not have a diagnosed mental health condition or are not showing recognized signs or symptoms of depression or suicide risk. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for MDD in adolescents aged 12 to 18 years has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on screening for MDD in children 11 years or younger. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on the benefit and harms of screening for suicide risk in children and adolescents owing to a lack of evidence. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for MDD in adolescents aged 12 to 18 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for MDD in children 11 years or younger. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for suicide risk in children and adolescents. (I statement).