COVID-19 Vaccination and Intent for Vaccination of Adults With Reported Medical Conditions.

INTRODUCTION: Individuals with certain medical conditions are at substantially increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19. The purpose of this study is to assess COVID-19 vaccination among U.S. adults with reported medical conditions. METHODS: Data from the National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module collected during August 1-September 25, 2021 were analyzed in 2022 to assess COVID-19 vaccination status, intent, vaccine confidence, behavior, and experience among adults with reported medical conditions. Unadjusted and age-adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs and APRs) were generated using logistic regression and predictive marginals. RESULTS: Overall, COVID-19 vaccination coverage with ≥1 dose was 81.8% among adults with reported medical conditions, and coverage was significantly higher compared with those without such conditions (70.3%) Among adults aged ≥18 years with medical conditions, COVID-19 vaccination coverage was significantly higher among those with a provider recommendation (86.5%) than those without (76.5%). Among all respondents, 9.2% of unvaccinated adults with medical conditions reported they were willing or open to vaccination. Adults who reported high risk medical conditions were more likely to report receiving a provider recommendation, often or always wearing masks during the last 7 days, concerning about getting COVID-19, thinking the vaccine is safe, and believing a COVID-19 vaccine is important for protection from COVID-19 infection than those without such conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 18.0% of those with reported medical conditions were unvaccinated. Receiving a provider recommendation was significantly associated with vaccination, reinforcing that provider recommendation is an important approach to increase vaccination coverage. Ensuring access to vaccine, addressing vaccination barriers, and increasing vaccine confidence can improve vaccination coverage among unvaccinated adults.

Disparities in COVID-19 Vaccination Status, Intent, and Perceived Access for Noninstitutionalized Adults, by Disability Status - National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module, United States, May 30-June 26, 2021.

Estimates from the 2019 American Community Survey (ACS) indicated that 15.2% of adults aged ≥18 years had at least one reported functional disability (1). Persons with disabilities are more likely than are those without disabilities to have chronic health conditions (2) and also face barriers to accessing health care (3). These and other health and social inequities have placed persons with disabilities at increased risk for COVID-19-related illness and death, yet they face unique barriers to receipt of vaccination (4,5). Although CDC encourages that considerations be made when expanding vaccine access to persons with disabilities,* few public health surveillance systems measure disability status. To describe COVID-19 vaccination status and intent, as well as perceived vaccine access among adults by disability status, data from the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM) were analyzed. Adults with a disability were less likely than were those without a disability to report having received ≥1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine (age-adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] = 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.84-0.93) but more likely to report they would definitely get vaccinated (aPR = 1.86; 95% CI = 1.43-2.42). Among unvaccinated adults, those with a disability were more likely to report higher endorsement of vaccine as protection (aPR = 1.29; 95% CI = 1.16-1.44), yet more likely to report it would be or was difficult to get vaccinated than did adults without a disability (aPR = 2.69; 95% CI = 2.16-3.34). Reducing barriers to vaccine scheduling and making vaccination sites more accessible might improve vaccination rates among persons with disabilities.

Preventive care services and health behaviors in children with fragile X syndrome.

BACKGROUND: This is the first description of preventive care services specifically received by children and young adults with fragile X syndrome (FXS). We compare these rates to those of other pediatric populations and identify care disparities within our cohort. OBJECTIVE: Describe the frequency of preventive care services and health behaviors by young people with FXS, and identify disparities in care. METHODS: We assessed four preventive care outcomes and the total number of preventive care guidelines met among individuals under 21 years from the ongoing Fragile X Online Registry with Accessible Research Database (N = 406) using data from 2012 to 2015. We used adjusted odds ratios (AORs) from multiple logistic regression models to describe associations between demographic factors and preventive care outcomes. RESULTS: Seventy-five percent of our sample met dental care guidelines, 55.4% met influenza vaccination guidelines, 92.1% met immunization guidelines, and 24.4% met physical activity (PA) guidelines. Compared to children six to 10 years, younger children were less likely to have seen a dentist as recommended (AOR: 0.26) and young adults aged 16-20 were less likely to have received immunizations (AOR: 0.14) or to have engaged in recommended PA (AOR: 0.29). Black participants (AOR: 0.25) were less likely to have received an influenza vaccination than white participants. Individuals with autism (AOR: 0.25) were less likely to have sufficient PA, while individuals with hypersensitivity were more likely to have sufficient PA (AOR: 2.37) than unaffected individuals. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of young people with FXS that meet basic recommendations in preventive care guidelines varies according to health condition and demographic characteristics. This proportion could be increased for some groups, particularly in the cases of influenza vaccination and physical activity.

A Sex-Specific Analysis of Nutrition Label Use and Health, Douglas County, Nebraska, 2013.

INTRODUCTION: In 2014 the US Food and Drug Administration proposed a series of changes to its 1992 guidelines on nutrition facts labeling to help consumers make informed food choices. To date, few studies have examined the association between consumers' use of the nutrition label and health. The objective of this study was to assess the association between nutrition label use and health and to determine whether the association differs by sex. METHODS: Using data from a population-based, random sample survey of 1,503 participants conducted in Nebraska in 2013, we performed χ(2) tests to examine bivariate associations between selected health variables and nutrition label use, followed by logistic regression analysis to estimate these associations in a multivariate framework. RESULTS: A U-shaped relationship between self-rated health (SRH) and nutrition label use was observed. Both excellent and poor SRH were associated with a higher likelihood of nutrition label use than the 3 SRH categories in between. Being obese or having 1 of 4 chronic conditions (hypertension, diabetes, heart disease, high cholesterol) were both associated with higher odds of nutrition label use (odds ratio [OR] = 2.63, P < .001; OR = 1.71, P < .05, respectively) among men. These associations, however, were not significant among women. CONCLUSION: A close association existed between health and nutritional label use. This association was more pronounced among men than among women. Nutrition education may benefit from factoring in the association between health and use of nutrition labels and the differences in these associations by sex.

Implicit policies about relations between personality traits and behavioral effectiveness in situational judgment items.

This paper develops the concept of implicit trait policy (ITP), which is a variant of the accentuation effect described by Tajfel (1957). ITPs are implicit beliefs about causal relations between personality traits and behavioral effectiveness. Studies reported here tested the hypotheses (a) that personality traits affect ITPs so that agreeable people, for instance, believe the relation between agreeableness and effectiveness is more strongly positive than disagreeable people do and (b) that ITPs can predict behavior that expresses associated personality traits. Two studies with undergraduate research participants supported the first hypothesis for traits of agreeableness and extraversion (the average correlation between traits and associated ITPs was .31 for agreeableness and .37 for extraversion) but not for conscientiousness. A 3rd study with student participants found that individual differences in ITPs for agreeableness predicted agreeable behavior (the average correlation was .33) in simulated work settings. These results suggest that ITPs may be useful for predicting work behavior that expresses personality traits even though ITPs may not be strongly correlated with the personality traits themselves.