Vaping cessation support recommendations from adolescents who vape: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Youth vaping is a serious public health concern, being more prevalent than any other tobacco use. To inform cessation interventions, we explored what adolescents perceive as their reasons for quitting and strategies to help them quit. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of 11 adolescents reporting vaping in the past 90 days and recruited from a high school in Massachusetts. Interviews were transcribed and dual-coded. Inductive thematic analysis was employed, and thematic summaries were prepared. RESULTS: Reasons adolescents reported for quitting included cost, experiencing "nic-sick" from nicotine withdrawal or excess intake, negative impacts on mood, concentration, or health, and experiencing symptoms of nicotine dependence. Nearly all tried to quit multiple times. Barriers to quitting included exposure to vaping, access to vape products, stress, and "cool" new products or flavors. Quit strategies included avoiding others vaping, seeking social support to quit, addressing peer pressure to continue vaping, learning successful quit strategies from peers, and using distraction strategies or alternatives to vaping. CONCLUSION: Many adolescents who vape want to quit, and most have tried multiple times. Interventions need to engage adolescents with varying reasons to quit, barriers, and quit strategy preferences. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered through ClinicalTrials.gov. The trial registration number is NCT05140915. The trial registration date is 11/18/2021.

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.

Characterizing Pandemic-Related Changes in Smoking Over Time in a Cohort of Current and Former Smokers.

INTRODUCTION: We used a longitudinal cohort of US adults who were current or former smokers to explore how three participant-reported factors-general stress, coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) distress, and perceived risk of complications from COVID-19 related to smoking-were associated with changes in smoking status. METHODS: Smoking status was assessed at three time points. Timepoint 1 status was assessed at a prior study completion (2018-2020). Timepoint 2 (start of the pandemic), and Timepoint 3 (early phase of the pandemic) statuses were assessed using an additional survey in 2020. After classifying participants into eight groups per these time points, we compared the means of participant-reported factors and used a linear regression model to adjust for covariates. RESULTS: Participants (n = 392) were mostly female (73.9%) and non-Hispanic White (70.1%). Between Timepoints 2 and 3, abstinence rates decreased by 11%, and 40% of participants reported a smoking status change. Among those reporting a change and the highest general stress levels, newly abstinent participants had higher perceived risk of complications from COVID-19 related to smoking than those who relapsed during pandemic (mean (SD): 14.2 (3.3) vs. 12.6 (3.8)). Compared to participants who sustained smoking, those who sustained abstinence, on average, scored 1.94 less on the general stress scale (ßeta Coefficient (ß): -1.94, p-value < .01) and 1.37 more on the perceived risk of complications from COVID-19 related to smoking scale (ß: 1.37, p-value .02). CONCLUSIONS: Decreased abstinence rates are concerning. Patterns of reported factors were as expected for individuals who sustained their smoking behavior but not for those who changed. IMPLICATIONS: We observed an increase in smoking rates during the COVID-19 pandemic. In exploring how combinations of general stress levels, COVID-19 distress levels, and perceived risk of complications from COVID-19 related to smoking were associated with changes in smoking, we observed expected patterns of these factors among individuals who sustained abstinence or smoking. Among individuals who changed smoking status and reported high stress levels, those who reported a higher perceived risk of complications from COVID-19 related to smoking abstained from smoking. In contrast, those who reported a lower perceived risk of complications from COVID-19 related to smoking, started smoking. An intersectional perspective may be needed to understand smokers' pandemic-related behavior changes.

Screening and Preventive Interventions for Oral Health in Children and Adolescents Aged 5 to 17 Years: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Oral health is fundamental to health and well-being across the lifespan. Oral health conditions affect the daily lives of school-age children and adolescents, leading to loss of more than 51 million school hours every year. Untreated oral health conditions in children can lead to serious infections and affect growth, development, and quality of life. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate screening and preventive interventions for oral health conditions in children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. Population: Asymptomatic children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. Recommendations: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of routine screening performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries, in children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries, in children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. (I statement).

Screening and Preventive Interventions for Oral Health in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Oral health is fundamental to health and well-being across the life span. Dental caries (cavities) and periodontal disease (gum disease) are common and often untreated oral health conditions that affect eating, speaking, learning, smiling, and employment potential. Untreated oral health conditions can lead to tooth loss, irreversible tooth damage, and other serious adverse health outcomes. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate screening and preventive interventions for oral health conditions in adults. Population: Asymptomatic adults 18 years or older. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries or periodontal disease) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic adults. The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries or periodontal disease) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic adults. Recommendations: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of routine screening performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries or periodontal-related disease, in adults. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries or periodontal-related disease, in adults. (I statement).

Screening for Anxiety Disorders in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Anxiety disorders are commonly occurring mental health conditions. They are often unrecognized in primary care settings and substantial delays in treatment initiation occur. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for anxiety disorders in asymptomatic adults. Population: Asymptomatic adults 19 years or older, including pregnant and postpartum persons. Older adults are defined as those 65 years or older. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for anxiety disorders in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons, has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on screening for anxiety disorders in older adults. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for anxiety disorders in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for anxiety disorders in older adults. (I statement).

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

Importance: Major depressive disorder (MDD), a common mental disorder in the US, may have substantial impact on the lives of affected individuals. If left untreated, MDD can interfere with daily functioning and can also be associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events, exacerbation of comorbid conditions, or increased mortality. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate benefits and harms of screening, accuracy of screening, and benefits and harms of treatment of MDD and suicide risk in asymptomatic adults that would be applicable to primary care settings. Population: Asymptomatic adults 19 years or older, including pregnant and postpartum persons. Older adults are defined as those 65 years or older. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for MDD in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults, has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on the benefit and harms of screening for suicide risk in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for depression in the adult population, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for suicide risk in the adult population, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults. (I statement).

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).

Experiences Using Family or Peer Support for Smoking Cessation and Considerations for Support Interventions: A Qualitative Study in Persons With Mental Health Conditions.

Background: The current study aimed to understand how people with mental health conditions who currently smoke or recently quit engaged with family members or peers when quitting and assessed interest in involving family or peers in cessation interventions. Methods: Adults with mental health conditions who smoke or had quit within the past 5 years were recruited from publicly funded mental health programs (N = 24). We conducted virtual qualitative interviews between November 2020 and August 2021 and analyzed the data using the rapid thematic analytic approach. Results: Most participants were men (62%), and 71% were current smokers. We found that: having family/peers who were interested in quitting presented communal quitting opportunities, communication that facilitated quitting tended to be encouraging, and strong relationships with family members increased willingness to involve them in cessation interventions. But family or peer support was less helpful for individuals who were not ready to quit. Conclusion: Training family and peers to engage in supportive behaviors may promote cessation in this population. Cessation interventions may benefit from recruiting support partners who share a strong relationship with the smoker.

Examining pathways between family or peer factors and smoking cessation in a nationally representative US sample of adults with mental health conditions who smoke: a structural equation analysis.

BACKGROUND: Supportive family or peer behaviors positively impact smoking cessation in people with mental health problems who smoke. However, the limited understanding of the pathways through which family or peer factors impact quitting limits the development of effective support interventions. This study examined pathways through which family or peer views on tobacco use, family or peer smoking status, and rules against smoking in the home influenced quitting in adults with mental health problems who smoke. METHODS: We used data from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study, a national longitudinal survey. Baseline data were collected in 2015, and follow-up data in 2016. We included adults' current smokers who had experienced two or more mental health symptoms in the past year (unweighted n = 4201). Structural equation modeling was used to test the relationships between family and peer factors, mediating factors, and smoking cessation. RESULTS: We found that having family or peers with negative views on tobacco use had a positive indirect effect on smoking cessation, mediated through the individual's intention to quit (regression coefficient: 0.19) and the use of evidence-based approaches during their past year quit attempt (regression coefficient: 0.32). Having rules against smoking in the home (regression coefficient: 0.33) and having non-smoking family members or peers (regression coefficient: 0.11) had a positive indirect effect on smoking cessation, mediated through smoking behaviors (regression coefficient: 0.36). All paths were statistically significant (p <  0.01). The model explained 20% of the variability in smoking outcomes. CONCLUSION: Family or peer-based cessation interventions that systematically increase intentions to quit and monitor smoking behavior may be able to assess the efficacy of family and peer support on quitting in people with mental health problems who smoke.

Video-based communication assessment for weight management counseling training in medical residents: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Physician delivered weight management counseling (WMC) occurs infrequently and physicians report lack of training and poor self-efficacy. The purpose of this study was to develop and test the Video-based Communication Assessment (VCA) for weight management counseling (WMC) training in medical residents. METHODS: This study was a mixed methods pilot conducted in 3 phases. First, we created five vignettes based on our prior data and expert feedback, then administered the vignettes via the VCA to Internal Medicine categorical residents (n = 16) from a University Medical School. Analog patients rated responses and also provided comments. We created individualized feedback reports which residents were able to view on the VCA. Lastly, we conducted debriefing interviews with the residents (n = 11) to obtain their feedback on the vignettes and personalized feedback. Interviews were transcribed, and we used thematic analysis to generate and apply codes, followed by identifying themes. RESULTS: Descriptive statistics were calculated and learning points were created for the individualized feedback reports. In VCA debriefing interviews with residents, five themes emerged: 1) Overall the VCA was easy to use, helpful and more engaging than traditional learning and assessment modes, 2) Patient scenarios were similar to those encountered in the clinic, including diversity, health literacy and different stages of change, 3) The knowledge, skills, and reminders from the VCA can be transferred to practice, 4) Feedback reports were helpful, to the point and informative, including the exemplar response of how to best respond to the scenario, and 5) The VCA provide alternatives and practice scenarios to real-life patient situations when they aren't always accessible. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of the VCA, a technology delivered platform, for delivering WMC to residents. The VCA exposed residents to diverse patient experiences and provided potential opportunities to tailor providers responses to sociological and cultural factors in WMC scenarios. Future work will examine the effect of the VCA on WMC in actual clinical practice.

Screening for Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Glaucoma affects an estimated 2.7 million people in the US. It is the second-leading cause of irreversible blindness in the US and the leading cause of blindness in Black and Hispanic/Latino persons. Objective: To update its 2013 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for glaucoma in adults. Population: Adults 40 years or older who present in primary care and do not have signs or symptoms of open-angle glaucoma. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for glaucoma in adults. The benefits and harms of screening for glaucoma in adults are uncertain. More research is needed. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for primary open-angle glaucoma in adults. (I statement).

Screening for Impaired Visual Acuity in Older Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Impairment of visual acuity is a serious public health problem in older adults. The number of persons 60 years or older with impaired visual acuity (defined as best corrected visual acuity worse than 20/40 but better than 20/200) was estimated at 2.91 million in 2015, and the number who are blind (defined as best corrected visual acuity of 20/200 or worse) was estimated at 760 000. Impaired visual acuity is consistently associated with decreased quality of life in older persons, including reduced ability to perform activities of daily living, work, and drive safely, as well as increased risk of falls and other unintentional injuries. Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for impaired visual acuity in older adults. Population: Asymptomatic adults 65 years or older who present in primary care without known impaired visual acuity and are not seeking care for vision problems. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for impaired visual acuity in asymptomatic older adults. The evidence is lacking, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. More research is needed. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for impaired visual acuity in older adults. (I statement).

Screening for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an irreversible reduction of airflow in the lungs. Progression to severe disease can prevent participation in normal activities because of deterioration of lung function. In 2020 it was estimated that approximately 6% of US adults had been diagnosed with COPD. Chronic lower respiratory disease, composed mainly of COPD, is the sixth leading cause of death in the US. Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update that focused on targeted key questions for benefits and harms of screening for COPD in asymptomatic adults and treatment in screen-detected or screen-relevant adults. Population: Asymptomatic adults who do not recognize or report respiratory symptoms. Evidence Assessment: Using a reaffirmation process, the USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for COPD in asymptomatic adults has no net benefit. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends against screening for COPD in asymptomatic adults. (D recommendation).

Aspirin Use to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality in the US, accounting for more than 1 in 4 deaths. Each year, an estimated 605 000 people in the US have a first myocardial infarction and an estimated 610 000 experience a first stroke. Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the effectiveness of aspirin to reduce the risk of CVD events (myocardial infarction and stroke), cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality in persons without a history of CVD. The systematic review also investigated the effect of aspirin use on colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality in primary CVD prevention populations, as well as the harms (particularly bleeding) associated with aspirin use. The USPSTF also commissioned a microsimulation modeling study to assess the net balance of benefits and harms from aspirin use for primary prevention of CVD and CRC, stratified by age, sex, and CVD risk level. Population: Adults 40 years or older without signs or symptoms of CVD or known CVD (including history of myocardial infarction or stroke) who are not at increased risk for bleeding (eg, no history of gastrointestinal ulcers, recent bleeding, other medical conditions, or use of medications that increase bleeding risk). Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD events in adults aged 40 to 59 years who have a 10% or greater 10-year CVD risk has a small net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that initiating aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD events in adults 60 years or older has no net benefit. Recommendation: The decision to initiate low-dose aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD in adults aged 40 to 59 years who have a 10% or greater 10-year CVD risk should be an individual one. Evidence indicates that the net benefit of aspirin use in this group is small. Persons who are not at increased risk for bleeding and are willing to take low-dose aspirin daily are more likely to benefit. (C recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against initiating low-dose aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD in adults 60 years or older. (D recommendation).

Vitamin, Mineral, and Multivitamin Supplementation to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease and Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: According to National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data, 52% of surveyed US adults reported using at least 1 dietary supplement in the prior 30 days and 31% reported using a multivitamin-mineral supplement. The most commonly cited reason for using supplements is for overall health and wellness and to fill nutrient gaps in the diet. Cardiovascular disease and cancer are the 2 leading causes of death and combined account for approximately half of all deaths in the US annually. Inflammation and oxidative stress have been shown to have a role in both cardiovascular disease and cancer, and dietary supplements may have anti-inflammatory and antioxidative effects. Objective: To update its 2014 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on the efficacy of supplementation with single nutrients, functionally related nutrient pairs, or multivitamins for reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and mortality in the general adult population, as well as the harms of supplementation. Population: Community-dwelling, nonpregnant adults. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the harms of beta carotene supplementation outweigh the benefits for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. The USPSTF also concludes with moderate certainty that there is no net benefit of supplementation with vitamin E for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of supplementation with multivitamins for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. Evidence is lacking and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of supplementation with single or paired nutrients (other than beta carotene and vitamin E) for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. Evidence is lacking and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends against the use of beta carotene or vitamin E supplements for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. (D recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of the use of multivitamin supplements for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of the use of single- or paired-nutrient supplements (other than beta carotene and vitamin E) for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. (I statement).

Collaboration and Shared Decision-Making Between Patients and Clinicians in Preventive Health Care Decisions and US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations.

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) works to improve the health of people nationwide by making evidence-based recommendations for preventive services. Patient-centered care is a core value in US health care. Shared decision-making (SDM), in which patients and clinicians make health decisions together, ensures patients' rights to be informed and involved in preventive care decisions and that these decisions are patient-centered. SDM has a role across the spectrum of USPSTF recommendations. For A or B recommendations (judged by the USPSTF to have high or moderate certainty of a moderate or substantial net benefit at the population level), SDM allows individual patients to decide whether to accept such services based on their personal values and preferences. For C recommendations (indicating at least moderate certainty of a small net benefit at the population level), SDM is critical for individual patients to decide whether the net benefit for them is worthwhile. For D recommendations (reflecting at least moderate certainty of a zero or negative net benefit) or I statements (low certainty of net benefit), clinicians should be prepared to discuss these services if patients ask. More evidence is needed to determine if, in addition to promoting patient-centeredness, SDM reduces inequities in preventive care, as well as to define new strategies to find time for discussion of preventive services in primary care.

Screening for Eating Disorders in Adolescents and Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Eating disorders (eg, binge eating disorder, bulimia nervosa, and anorexia nervosa) are a group of psychiatric conditions defined as a disturbance in eating or eating-related behaviors that impair physical or psychosocial functioning. According to large US cohort studies, estimated lifetime prevalences for anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, and binge eating disorder in adult women are 1.42%, 0.46%, and 1.25%, respectively, and are lower in adult men (anorexia nervosa, 0.12%; bulimia nervosa, 0.08%; binge eating disorder, 0.42%). Eating disorder prevalence ranges from 0.3% to 2.3% in adolescent females and 0.3% to 1.3% in adolescent males. Eating disorders are associated with short-term and long-term adverse health outcomes, including physical, psychological, and social problems. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for eating disorders in adolescents and adults with a normal or high body mass index. Evidence limited to populations who are underweight or have other physical signs or symptoms of eating disorders was not considered. The USPSTF has not previously made a recommendation on this topic. Population: Adolescents and adults (10 years or older) who have no signs or symptoms of eating disorders (eg, rapid weight loss, weight gain, or pronounced deviation from growth trajectory; pubertal delay; bradycardia; oligomenorrhea; and amenorrhea). Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for eating disorders in adolescents and adults. The evidence is limited and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for eating disorders in adolescents and adults. (I statement).

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).

Screening for Syphilis Infection in Nonpregnant Adolescents and Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Syphilis is a sexually transmitted infection that can progress through different stages (primary, secondary, latent, and tertiary) and cause serious health problems if left untreated. Reported cases of primary and secondary syphilis in the US increased from a record low of 2.1 cases per 100 000 population in 2000 and 2001 to 11.9 cases per 100 000 population in 2019. Men account for the majority of cases (83% of primary and secondary syphilis cases in 2019), and rates among women nearly tripled from 2015 to 2019. Objective: To reaffirm its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update focusing on targeted key questions evaluating the performance of risk assessment tools and the benefits and harms of screening for syphilis in nonpregnant adolescents and adults. Population: Asymptomatic, nonpregnant adolescents and adults who have ever been sexually active and are at increased risk for syphilis infection. Evidence Assessment: Using a reaffirmation process, the USPSTF concludes with high certainty that there is a substantial net benefit of screening for syphilis infection in nonpregnant persons who are at increased risk for infection. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for syphilis infection in persons who are at increased risk for infection. (A recommendation).