The Impact of Immigration Policy Changes on Preterm Birth Rates in Texas: An Examination of Border and Nonborder Regions.

BACKGROUND: Our study examined the acute and sustained impact of immigration policy changes announced in January 2017 on preterm birth (PTB) rates among Hispanic and non-Hispanic white women in Texas's border and nonborder regions. METHODS: Using Texas birth certificate data for years 2008 through 2020, we used a multiple group interrupted time series approach to explore changes in PTB rates. RESULTS: In the nonborder region, the PTB rate among Hispanic women of any race was 8.64% in 2008 and was stable each year before 2017 but increased by .29% (95% CI [.12, .46]) annually between 2017 and 2020. This effect remained statistically significant even when compared with that of non-Hispanic white women (p = .014). In the border areas, the PTB rate among Hispanic women of any race was 11.67% in 2008 and remained stable each year before and after 2017. No significant changes were observed when compared with that of non-Hispanic white women (p = .897). In Texas as a whole, the PTB rate among Hispanic women of any race was 10.16% in 2008 and declined by .07% (95% CI [-.16, -.03]) per year before 2017, but increased by .16% (95% CI [.05, .27]) annually between 2017 and 2020. The observed increase was not statistically significant when compared with that of non-Hispanic white women (p = .326). CONCLUSIONS: The January 2017 immigration policies were associated with a sustained increase in PTB among Hispanic women in Texas's nonborder region, suggesting that geography plays an important role in perceptions of immigration enforcement. Future research should examine the impact of immigration policies on maternal and child health, considering geography and sociodemographic factors.

Data Sharing in a Decentralized Public Health System: Lessons From COVID-19 Syndromic Surveillance.

The COVID-19 pandemic revealed that data sharing challenges persist across public health information systems. We examine the specific challenges in sharing syndromic surveillance data between state, local, and federal partners. These challenges are complicated by US federalism, which decentralizes public health response and creates friction between different government units. The current policies restrict federal access to state and local syndromic surveillance data without each jurisdiction's consent. These policies frustrate legitimate federal governmental interests and are contrary to ethical guidelines for public health data sharing. Nevertheless, state and local public health agencies must continue to play a central role as there are important risks in interpreting syndromic surveillance data without understanding local contexts. Policies establishing a collaborative framework will be needed to support data sharing between federal, state, and local partners. A collaborative framework would be enhanced by a governance group with robust state and local involvement and policy guardrails to ensure the use of data is appropriate. These policy and relational challenges must be addressed to actualize a truly national public health information system.

Case study on communicating with research ethics committees about minimizing risk through software: an application for record linkage in secondary data analysis.

Objective: In retrospective secondary data analysis studies, researchers often seek waiver of consent from institutional Review Boards (IRB) and minimize risk by utilizing complex software. Yet, little is known about the perspectives of IRB experts on these approaches. To facilitate effective communication about risk mitigation strategies using software, we conducted two studies with IRB experts to co-create appropriate language when describing a software to IRBs. Materials and Methods: We conducted structured focus groups with IRB experts to solicit ideas on questions regarding benefits, risks, and informational needs. Based on these results, we developed a template IRB application and template responses for a generic study using privacy-enhancing software. We then conducted a three-round Delphi study to refine the template IRB application and the template responses based on expert panel feedback. To facilitate participants' deliberation, we shared the revisions and a summary of participants' feedback during each Delphi round. Results: 11 experts in two focus groups generated 13 ideas on risks, benefits, and informational needs. 17 experts participated in the Delphi study with 13 completing all rounds. Most agreed that privacy-enhancing software will minimize risk, but regardless all secondary data studies have an inherent risk of unexpected disclosures. The majority (84.6%) noted that subjects in retrospective secondary data studies experience no greater risks than the risks experienced in ordinary life in the modern digital society. Hence, all retrospective data-only studies with no contact with subjects would be minimal risk studies. Conclusion: First, we found fundamental disagreements in how some IRB experts view risks in secondary data research. Such disagreements are consequential because they can affect determination outcomes and might suggest IRBs at different institutions might come to different conclusions regarding similar study protocols. Second, the highest ranked risks and benefits of privacy-enhancing software in our study were societal rather than individual. The highest ranked benefits were facilitating more research and promoting responsible data governance practices. The highest ranked risks were risk of invalid results from systematic user error or erroneous algorithms. These societal considerations are typically more characteristic of public health ethics as opposed to the bioethical approach of research ethics, possibly reflecting the difficulty applying a bioethical approach (eg, informed consent) in secondary data studies. Finally, the development of privacy-enhancing technology for secondary data research depends on effective communication and collaboration between the privacy experts and technology developers. Privacy is a complex issue that requires a holistic approach that is best addressed through privacy-by-design principles. Privacy expert participation is important yet often neglected in this design process. This study suggests best practice strategies for engaging the privacy community through co-developing companion documents for software through participatory design to facilitate transparency and communication. In this case study, the final template IRB application and responses we released with the open-source software can be easily adapted by researchers to better communicate with their IRB when using the software. This can help increase responsible data governance practices when many software developers are not research ethics experts.

Maternal exposure to SSRIs or SNRIs and the risk of congenital abnormalities in offspring: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The association of maternal exposure to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) with the risk of system-specific congenital malformations in offspring remains unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis to examine this association and the risk difference between these two types of inhibitors. METHODS: A literature search was performed from January 2000 to May 2023 using PubMed and Web of Science databases. Cohort and case-control studies that assess the association of maternal exposure to SSRIs or SNRIs with the risk of congenital abnormalities were eligible for the study. RESULTS: Twenty-one cohort studies and seven case-control studies were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to non-exposure, maternal exposure to SNRIs is associated with a higher risk of congenital cardiovascular abnormalities (pooled OR: 1.64 with 95% CI: 1.36, 1.97), anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract (pooled OR: 1.63 with 95% CI: 1.21, 2.20), malformations of nervous system (pooled OR: 2.28 with 95% CI: 1.50, 3.45), anomalies of digestive system (pooled OR: 2.05 with 95% CI: 1.60, 2.64) and abdominal birth defects (pooled OR: 2.91 with 95%CI: 1.98, 4.28), while maternal exposure to SSRIs is associated with a higher risk of congenital cardiovascular abnormalities (pooled OR: 1.25 with 95%CI: 1.20, 1.30), anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract (pooled OR: 1.14 with 95%CI: 1.02, 1.27), anomalies of digestive system (pooled OR: 1.11 with 95%CI: 1.01, 1.21), abdominal birth defects (pooled OR: 1.33 with 95%CI: 1.16, 1.53) and musculoskeletal malformations (pooled OR: 1.44 with 95%CI: 1.32, 1.56). CONCLUSIONS: SSRIs and SNRIs have various teratogenic risks. Clinicians must consider risk-benefit ratios and patient history when prescribing medicines.

Public Attitudes, Inequities, and Polarization in the Launch of the 988 Lifeline.

CONTEXT: To address the considerable burden of mental health need in the United States, Congress passed the National Suicide Hotline Designation Act in 2020. The Act rebranded the national suicide prevention lifeline as 988 - a 3-digit number akin to 911 for individuals to call in the case of a mental health emergency. Surprisingly little is known about American attitudes towards this new lifeline. METHODS: We rely on a demographically representative sample of 5,482 US adults conducted from June 24-28, 2022. We examine the influence of mental health status, partisan identification, and demographic characteristics on public awareness, public support, and intended use of the new 988 lifeline. FINDINGS: We find that while only a quarter of Americans are aware of the lifeline, support for the 988 lifeline is widespread, with over 75% of Americans indicating they would be likely to use the new number if needed. We identify key disparities in awareness, support, and intended use, with Republicans, individuals with low socio-economic status, and Blacks less supportive and in some cases less likely to use the 988 lifeline. CONCLUSIONS: Our results point to the need for additional interventions that increase public awareness of 988 and reduce disparities in program knowledge, support, and intended use.

Travel for medical or dental care by race/ethnicity and rurality in the U.S.: Findings from the 2001, 2009 and 2017 National Household Travel Surveys.

The travel burden for medical or dental care is a well-documented barrier to healthcare access, particularly in rural areas. There is limited research providing national estimates of the travel trends for medical/dental care, particularly among racial/ethnic groups, and among rural and urban populations. We analyzed data from the 2001, 2009, and 2017 National Household Travel Surveys. Main outcomes were the average travel distance (in miles), average travel time (in minutes), and travel burden, characterized as the percentage of trips lasting ≥ 30 miles or minutes for medical/dental care. We used ordinary least squares and multivariable logistic regressions to examine trends in the travel time/distance and travel burden, controlling for socio-demographic and travel dynamics. Among rural residents, the average travel distance for medical/dental care increased by 17.8% between 2001 and 2017, while no increase was observed among urban residents. Thirty-six percent of trips among rural residents lasted ≥ 30 minutes in 2001 but increased to 47.4% in 2017. Logistic regression estimates show that though Blacks experienced higher odds of a travel time burden compared to Whites, the burden lessened over time. In 2017, urban Blacks (OR = 0.41, 95% C.I. = 0.26,0.66), and rural Blacks (OR = 0.16, 95% C.I. = 0.05,0.55) were less likely to spend ≥ 30 minutes traveling for medical/dental care compared to Whites, using the year 2001 as the baseline. The travel distance and time for medical/dental care have increased in rural areas. However, the travel burden among rural and urban Black residents has decreased. Continuing to alleviate excess burdens of transportation may be beneficial.

Factors associated with hospitalizations for co-occurring HIV and opioid-related diagnoses: Evidence from the national inpatient sample, 2009-2017.

There has been evidence of rising HIV incidence attributable to opioid misuse within some areas of the U.S. The purpose of our study was to explore national trends in co-occurring HIV and opioid-related hospitalizations and to identify their risk factors. We used the 2009-2017 National Inpatient Sample to indicate hospitalizations with co-occurring HIV and opioid misuse diagnoses. We estimated the frequency of such hospitalizations per year. We fitted a linear regression to the annual HIV-opioid co-occurrences with year as a predictor. The resulting regression did not reveal any significant temporal changes. We used multivariable logistic regression to determine the adjusted odds (AOR) of hospitalization for co-occurring HIV and opioid-related diagnoses. The odds of hospitalization were lower for rural residents (AOR = 0.28; CI = 0.24-0.32) than urban. Females (AOR = 0.95, CI = 0.89-0.99) had lower odds of hospitalization than males. Patients identifying as White (AOR = 1.23, CI = 1.00-1.50) and Black (AOR = 1.27, CI = 1.02-1.57) had higher odds of hospitalization than other races. When compared to co-occuring hospitalizations in the Midwest, the odds were higher in the Northeast. (AOR = 2.56, CI = 2.07-3.17) Future research should explore the extent to which similar findings occur in the context of mortality and targeted interventions should intesify for subpopulations at highest risk of co-occuring HIV and opioid misuse diagnoses.

Rural healthy people 2030: New decade, new challenges.

Rural Healthy People is a companion piece to the federal Healthy People initiative released once a decade to identify the most important Healthy People priorities for rural America, as identified by rural stakeholders, for the current decade. This study reports on the findings of Rural Healthy People 2030. The study relied on a survey of rural health stakeholders collected from July 12, 2021, to February 14, 2022, and: 1) identified the 20 Healthy People priorities most frequently selected as priorities for rural America, 2) studied the priorities that were most frequently selected as a "top 3" priority within each Healthy People 2030 category, and 3) investigated Healthy People 2030 priorities in terms of ranked importance for rural Americans. The analysis finds that for the first time across 3 decades of Rural Healthy People, a greater proportion of respondents selected "Mental Health and Mental Disorders" and "Addiction" as Healthy People priorities for rural America, than did "Health Care Access and Quality". Even still, respondents ranked "Health Care Access and Quality" as the single-most important rural priority. "Economic Stability," a new priority within the Social Determinant of Health category, debuted within the 10 most frequently selected priorities for rural America for the coming decade. As public health practitioners, researchers, and policymakers work toward closing the urban-rural divide, the most important rural priorities to address in the coming decade are mental health and substance use disorders, access to high quality health care services, and social determinants of health, such as economic stability.

Dental hygienists' scope of practice regulations and preventable non-traumatic dental emergency department visits: A cross-sectional study of 10 U.S. states.

OBJECTIVES: As emergency department (ED) visits for non-traumatic dental complaints continue to rise in the United States (U.S.), some states are implementing initiatives to expand access to the oral health workforce. This study examines the associations between the 2014 Dental Hygiene Professional Practice Index (DHPPI) and preventable dental ED visits. METHODS: In 2020, we used ED data from 10 U.S. states and ordinary least squares models to examine the relationship between the states' DHPPI scores and preventable dental ED use. We stratified regressions by age to examine this relationship across different age cohorts and introduced interaction terms to assess the same relationship among rural and urban residents. RESULTS: On average, 23.8% of all non-traumatic dental ED visits were identified as preventable. Controlling for other factors, a one-point increase in DHPPI scores was associated with a decrease of 0.01 (95% CI -0.03, -0.02) preventable dental ED visits per 1000 county population in each year-quarter. In the age-stratified models, the strength of the association between DHPPI scores and preventable dental ED visits was higher in the 20 to 34 (-0.03, 95% CI -0.04, -0.02), and the 35 to 50 age cohorts (-0.17, 95% CI -0.00, -0.00). U.S. states with DHPPI scores below 60 saw significantly higher preventable dental ED visits among rural residents. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that stringent state policies regarding the dental hygienist workforce are associated with higher preventable dental ED visits in the U.S. Policy makers and stake holders must address the scope of practice policies to alleviate the burden of access to oral healthcare.

Uncertainty, scarcity and transparency: Public health ethics and risk communication in a pandemic.

Communicating public health guidance is key to mitigating risk during disasters and outbreaks, and ethical guidance on communication emphasizes being fully transparent. Yet, communication during the pandemic has sometimes been fraught, due in part to practical and conceptual challenges around being transparent. A particular challenge has arisen when there was both evolving scientific knowledge on COVID-19 and reticence to acknowledge that resource scarcity concerns were influencing public health recommendations. This essay uses the example of communicating public health guidance on masking in the United States to illustrate ethical challenges of developing and conveying public health guidance under twin conditions of uncertainty and resource scarcity. Such situations require balancing two key principles in public health ethics: the precautionary principle and harm reduction. Transparency remains a bedrock value to guide risk communication, but optimizing transparency requires consideration of additional ethical values in developing and implementing risk communication strategies.

Racial, Rural, and Regional Disparities in Diabetes-Related Lower-Extremity Amputation Rates, 2009-2017.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the racial/ethnic, rural-urban, and regional variations in the trends of diabetes-related lower-extremity amputations (LEAs) among hospitalized U.S. adults from 2009 to 2017. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We used the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) (2009-2017) to identify trends in LEA rates among those primarily hospitalized for diabetes in the U.S. We conducted multivariable logistic regressions to identify individuals at risk for LEA based on race/ethnicity, census region location (North, Midwest, South, and West), and rurality of residence. RESULTS: From 2009 to 2017, the rates of minor LEAs increased across all racial/ethnic, rural/urban, and census region categories. The increase in minor LEAs was driven by Native Americans (annual percent change [APC] 7.1%, P < 0.001) and Asians/Pacific Islanders (APC 7.8%, P < 0.001). Residents of non-core (APC 5.4%, P < 0.001) and large central metropolitan areas (APC 5.5%, P < 0.001) experienced the highest increases over time in minor LEA rates. Among Whites and residents of the Midwest and non-core and small metropolitan areas there was a significant increase in major LEAs. Regression findings showed that Native Americans and Hispanics were more likely to have a minor or major LEA compared with Whites. The odds of a major LEA increased with rurality and was also higher among residents of the South than among those of the Northeast. A steep decline in major-to-minor amputation ratios was observed, especially among Native Americans. CONCLUSIONS: Despite increased risk of diabetes-related lower-limb amputations in underserved groups, our findings are promising when the major-to-minor amputation ratio is considered.

Identifying and prioritizing benefits and risks of using privacy-enhancing software through participatory design: a nominal group technique study with patients living with chronic conditions.

OBJECTIVE: While patients often contribute data for research, they want researchers to protect their data. As part of a participatory design of privacy-enhancing software, this study explored patients' perceptions of privacy protection in research using their healthcare data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted 4 focus groups with 27 patients on privacy-enhancing software using the nominal group technique. We provided participants with an open source software prototype to demonstrate privacy-enhancing features and elicit privacy concerns. Participants generated ideas on benefits, risks, and needed additional information. Following a thematic analysis of the results, we deployed an online questionnaire to identify consensus across all 4 groups. Participants were asked to rank-order benefits and risks. Themes around "needed additional information" were rated by perceived importance on a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Participants considered "allowance for minimum disclosure" and "comprehensive privacy protection that is not currently available" as the most important benefits when using the privacy-enhancing prototype software. The most concerning perceived risks were "additional checks needed beyond the software to ensure privacy protection" and the "potential of misuse by authorized users." Participants indicated a desire for additional information with 6 of the 11 themes receiving a median participant rating of "very necessary" and rated "information on the data custodian" as "essential." CONCLUSIONS: Patients recognize not only the benefits of privacy-enhancing software, but also inherent risks. Patients desire information about how their data are used and protected. Effective patient engagement, communication, and transparency in research may improve patients' comfort levels, alleviate patients' concerns, and thus promote ethical research.

Rural and Urban Differences in COVID-19 Prevention Behaviors.

PURPOSE: To examine whether the adoption of COVID-19-related preventive health behaviors vary in rural versus urban communities of the United States while accounting for the influence of political ideology, demographic factors, and COVID-19 experiences. METHODS: We rely on a representative survey of 5009 American adults collected from May 28 to June 8, 2020. We analyze the influence of rural status, political ideology, demographic factors, and COVID-19 experiences on self-reported adoption of 8 COVID-19-related preventive health behaviors. FINDINGS: Rural residents are significantly less likely to have worn a mask in public, sanitized their home or workplace with disinfectant, avoided dining at restaurants or bars, or worked from home. These findings, with the exception of dining out, are robust to the inclusion of measures accounting for political ideology, demographic factors, and COVID-19 experiences. CONCLUSIONS: Rural residents are significantly less likely to participate in several COVID-19-related preventive health behaviors. This reality could exacerbate existing disparities in health access and outcomes for rural Americans. Health messaging targeted at improving COVID-19 preventive behavior adoption in rural America is warranted.

Communicating With Patients About Software for Enhancing Privacy in Secondary Database Research Involving Record Linkage: Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: There is substantial prior research on the perspectives of patients on the use of health information for research. Numerous communication barriers challenge transparency between researchers and data participants in secondary database research (eg, waiver of informed consent and knowledge gaps). Individual concerns and misconceptions challenge the trust in researchers among patients despite efforts to protect data. Technical software used to protect research data can further complicate the public's understanding of research. For example, MiNDFIRL (Minimum Necessary Disclosure For Interactive Record Linkage) is a prototype software that can be used to enhance the confidentiality of data sets by restricting disclosures of identifying information during the record linkage process. However, software, such as MiNDFIRL, which is used to protect data, must overcome the aforementioned communication barriers. One proposed solution is the creation of an interactive web-based frequently asked question (FAQ) template that can be adapted and used to communicate research issues to data subjects. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to improve communication with patients and transparency about how complex software, such as MiNDFIRL, is used to enhance privacy in secondary database studies to maintain the public's trust in researchers. METHODS: A Delphi technique with 3 rounds of the survey was used to develop the FAQ document to communicate privacy issues related to a generic secondary database study using the MiNDFIRL software. The Delphi panel consisted of 38 patients with chronic health conditions. We revised the FAQ between Delphi rounds and provided participants with a summary of the feedback. We adopted a conservative consensus threshold of less than 10% negative feedback per FAQ section. RESULTS: We developed a consensus language for 21 of the 24 FAQ sections. Participant feedback demonstrated preference differences (eg, brevity vs comprehensiveness). We adapted the final FAQ into an interactive web-based format that 94% (31/33) of the participants found helpful or very helpful. The template FAQ and MiNDFIRL source code are available on GitHub. The results indicate the following patient communication considerations: patients have diverse and varied preferences; the tone is important but challenging; and patients want information on security, identifiers, and final disposition of information. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study provide insights into what research-related information is useful to patients and how researchers can communicate such information. These findings align with the current understanding of health literacy and its challenges. Communication is essential to transparency and ethical data use, yet it is exceedingly challenging. Developing FAQ template language to accompany a complex software may enable researchers to provide greater transparency when informed consent is not possible.

Emergency department visits for nontraumatic dental conditions: a systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the literature on factors associated with emergency department (ED) use for nontraumatic dental conditions (NTDCs). METHODS: Following a database search, empirical studies were included if they examined factors associated with ED visits for NTDCs. The factors identified in these studies were further categorized using the Andersen Behavioral Model. Where appropriate, odds ratios (ORs) predicting the likelihood of NTDC ED visits were extracted to obtain summary estimates using random effects models. RESULTS: Sixty-three articles were included. Nontraumatic dental ED visits made up about 2.2 percent of all ED visits. Having public health insurance coverage such as Medicaid [OR = 2.17, 95 percent confidence interval (CI) = 1.79-2.64], and being uninsured (OR = 2.80, 95 percent CI = 2.39-3.39) were predictive of ED visits for NTDCs. Adults were more likely to use the ED for NTDCs compared to children and older adults. Rural adults had increased odds of ED use for NTDCs compared to urban adults (OR = 1.31, 95 percent CI = 1.12-1.52). Among younger children, regular dental care without sealant placement was associated with increased ED use for NTDCs. In the United States, both expansion and restriction of Medicaid dental coverage for adults were associated with increased ED visits for NTDCs. CONCLUSIONS: Policy makers and health care providers should address modifiable factors such as accessible dental care for the uninsured, and comprehensive dental coverage for those with public dental benefits. Targeted interventions should focus on young adults, children with special needs, and subpopulations with low socioeconomic status and chronic health conditions.

High impact nutrition and dietetics journals' use of publication procedures to increase research transparency.

BACKGROUND: The rigor and integrity of the published research in nutrition studies has come into serious question in recent years. Concerns focus on the use of flexible data analysis practices and selective reporting and the failure of peer review journals to identify and correct these practices. In response, it has been proposed that journals employ editorial procedures designed to improve the transparency of published research. OBJECTIVE: The present study examines the adoption of editorial procedures designed to improve the reporting of empirical studies in the field of nutrition and dietetics research. DESIGN: The instructions for authors of 43 journals included in Quartiles 1 and 2 of the Clarivate Analytics' 2018 Journal Citation Report category Nutrition and Dietetics were reviewed. For journals that published original research, conflict of interest disclosure, recommendation of reporting guidelines, registration of clinical trials, registration of other types of studies, encouraging data sharing, and use of the Registered Reports were assessed. For journals that only published reviews, all of the procedures except clinical trial registration were assessed. RESULTS: Thirty-three journals published original research and 10 published only reviews. Conflict of interest disclosure was required by all 33 original research journals. Use of guidelines, trial registration and encouragement of data sharing were mentioned by 30, 27 and 25 journals, respectively. Registration of other studies was required by eight and none offered Registered Reports as a publication option at the time of the review. All 10 review journals required conflict of interest disclosure, four recommended data sharing and three the use of guidelines. None mentioned the other two procedures. CONCLUSIONS: While nutrition journals have adopted a number of procedures designed to improve the reporting of research findings, their limited effects likely result from the mechanisms through which they influence analytic flexibility and selective reporting and the extent to which they are properly implemented and enforced by journals.

Factors affecting the likelihood of a hospitalization following a diabetes-related emergency department visit: A regional and urban-rural analysis.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to examine place-based and individual-level predictors of diabetes-related hospitalizations that stem from emergency department (ED) visits. METHODS: We conducted a pooled cross-sectional analysis of the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) for 2009 to 2014 to identify ED-initiated hospitalizations that were driven by the need for diabetes care. The odds of an ED-initiated diabetes-related hospitalization were assessed for the United States as a whole and separately for each census region. RESULTS: Nationally, residents of noncore areas (odds ratio [OR] 1.10; CI 1.08, 1.12), the South (OR 8.03; CI 6.84, 9.42), Blacks (OR 2.49; CI 2.47, 2.52), Hispanics (OR 2.32; CI 2.29, 2.35), Asians or Pacific Islanders (OR 1.20; CI 1.16, 1.23), Native Americans (OR 2.18; CI 2.10, 2.27), and the uninsured (OR 2.14; CI 2.11, 2.27) were significantly more likely to experience an ED-initiated hospitalization for diabetes care. Census region-stratified models showed that noncore residents of the South (OR 1.17; CI 1.14, 1.20) and Midwest (OR 1.06; CI 1.02, 1.11) had higher odds of a diabetes-related ED-initiated hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: As continued efforts are made to reduce place-based disparities in diabetes care and management, targeted focus should be placed on residents of noncore areas in the South and Midwest, racial and ethnic minorities, as well as the uninsured population.

The Changing Landscape of Diabetes Mortality in the United States Across Region and Rurality, 1999-2016.

PURPOSE: This brief report examines place-based differences in diabetes mortality in order to understand whether disparities in diabetes mortality have changed across United States Census regions and levels of rurality over time. METHODS: We use data from the National Center for Health Statistics from 1999 to 2016 to analyze changes in diabetes mortality over time and across geographical regions of the United States. FINDINGS: We find evidence that diabetes mortality has declined in the United States over the past 2 decades, but that improvements in mortality vary considerably by place. Improvements are observed in urban America and in the Northeast and Midwest while diabetes mortality has remained largely unchanged in rural areas, particularly in the rural South. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes is one of the leading causes of death in the United States, but important differences have emerged in the burden of this disease. Reductions in diabetes mortality are lagging in rural areas, and the rural South in particular, relative to other areas of the country. Continued innovations in care and targeted interventions in rural areas are warranted.

Healthy People 2020: Rural Areas Lag In Achieving Targets For Major Causes Of Death.

For the period 2007-17 rural death rates were higher than urban rates for the seven major causes of death analyzed, and disparities widened for five of the seven. In 2017 urban areas had met national targets for three of the seven causes, while rural areas had met none of the targets.