An intersectional analysis of historical and contemporary structural racism on non-fatal shootings in Baltimore, Maryland.

Introduction Non-fatal shooting rates vary tremendously within cities in the USA. Factors related to structural racism (both historical and contemporary) could help explain differences in non-fatal shooting rates at the neighbourhood level. Most research assessing the relationship between structural racism and firearm violence only includes one dimension of structural racism. Our study uses an intersectional approach to examine how the interaction of two forms of structural racism is associated with spatial non-fatal shooting disparities in Baltimore, Maryland. Methods We present three additive interaction measures to describe the relationship between historical redlining and contemporary racialized economic segregation on neighbourhood-level non-fatal shootings. Results Our findings revealed that sustained disadvantage census tracts (tracts that experience contemporary socioeconomic disadvantage and were historically redlined) have the highest burden of non-fatal shootings. Sustained disadvantage tracts had on average 24 more non-fatal shootings a year per 10 000 residents compared with similarly populated sustained advantage tracts (tracts that experience contemporary socioeconomic advantage and were not historically redlined). Moreover, we found that between 2015 and 2019, the interaction between redlining and racialized economic segregation explained over one-third of non-fatal shootings (approximately 650 shootings) in sustained disadvantage tracts. Conclusion These findings suggest that the intersection of historical and contemporary structural racism is a fundamental cause of firearm violence inequities in Baltimore. Intersectionality can advance injury prevention research and practice by (1) serving as an analytical tool to expose inequities in injury-related outcomes and (2) informing the development and implementation of injury prevention interventions and policies that prioritise health equity and racial justice.

National- and state-level impact and cost-effectiveness of nonavalent HPV vaccination in the United States.

Every year in the United States more than 12,000 women are diagnosed with cervical cancer, a disease principally caused by human papillomavirus (HPV). Bivalent and quadrivalent HPV vaccines protect against 66% of HPV-associated cervical cancers, and a new nonavalent vaccine protects against an additional 15% of cervical cancers. However, vaccination policy varies across states, and migration between states interdependently dilutes state-specific vaccination policies. To quantify the economic and epidemiological impacts of switching to the nonavalent vaccine both for individual states and for the nation as a whole, we developed a model of HPV transmission and cervical cancer incidence that incorporates state-specific demographic dynamics, sexual behavior, and migratory patterns. At the national level, the nonavalent vaccine was shown to be cost-effective compared with the bivalent and quadrivalent vaccines at any coverage despite the greater per-dose cost of the new vaccine. Furthermore, the nonavalent vaccine remains cost-effective with up to an additional 40% coverage of the adolescent population, representing 80% of girls and 62% of boys. We find that expansion of coverage would have the greatest health impact in states with the lowest coverage because of the decreasing marginal returns of herd immunity. Our results show that if policies promoting nonavalent vaccine implementation and expansion of coverage are coordinated across multiple states, all states benefit both in health and in economic terms.