What Predicts Graduate Public Health Student Success? Evidence for Admission Committees in a Post-Affirmative Action Landscape.

OBJECTIVE: A severe staff shortage and a dearth of professionals from underrepresented backgrounds in the public health workforce are contributing to poor health outcomes in the United States. Schools and programs can mitigate these problems by admitting more graduate public health students overall and from underrepresented backgrounds. We identified predictors of foundational graduate public health course grades and graduate grade point average (GPA), sharing evidence to remove application factors that are admission barriers and do not predict student outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a linear regression analysis on demographic and academic factors from 564 graduate public health applications for students at the University at Buffalo who received their degree from January 1, 2016, to February 1, 2021, analyzing age, race and ethnicity, sex, income, undergraduate degree, verbal and quantitative Graduate Record Examination (GRE) percentiles, and undergraduate GPA. Outcomes were grades in foundational public health courses and cumulative graduate GPA. RESULTS: Undergraduate GPA was the best predictor of graduate public health student success, explaining nearly 7% of foundational public health course grades and 29% of graduate GPA. Higher undergraduate GPA contributed to higher course grades and graduate GPA. GRE scores explained <1% of student outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings add to the growing body of research showing that standardized test scores may not predict graduate student outcomes and provide further evidence for the field of public health to consider removing this admission barrier. By doing so, institutions could admit more students to graduate public health programs who can bring needed skills to the market, further diversifying the workforce and public health faculty, to better meet population health needs.

Association of masking policies with mask adherence and distancing during the SARS-COV-2 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Quantification of the impact of local masking policies may help guide future policy interventions to reduce SARS-COV-2 disease transmission. This study's objective was to identify factors associated with adherence to masking and social distancing guidelines. METHODS: Faculty from 16 U.S. colleges and universities trained 231 students in systematic direct observation. They assessed correct mask use and distancing in public settings in 126 US cities from September 2020 through August 2021. RESULTS: Of 109,999 individuals observed in 126 US cities, 48% wore masks correctly with highest adherence among females, teens and seniors and lowest among non-Hispanic whites, those in vigorous physical activity, and in larger groups (P < .0001). Having a local mask mandate increased the odds of wearing a mask by nearly 3-fold (OR = 2.99, P = .0003) compared to no recommendation. People observed in non-commercial areas were least likely to wear masks. Correct mask use was greatest in December 2020 and remained high until June 2021 (P < .0001). Masking policy requirements were not associated with distancing. DISCUSSION: The strong association between mask mandates and correct mask use suggests that public policy has a powerful influence on individual behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Mask mandates should be considered in future pandemics to increase adherence.

Household-level risk factors for secondary influenza-like illness in a rural area of Bangladesh.

OBJECTIVE: To describe household-level risk factors for secondary influenza-like illness (ILI), an important public health concern in the low-income population of Bangladesh. METHODS: Secondary analysis of control participants in a randomised controlled trial evaluating the effect of handwashing to prevent household ILI transmission. We recruited index-case patients with ILI - fever (<5 years); fever, cough or sore throat (≥5 years) - from health facilities, collected information on household factors and conducted syndromic surveillance among household contacts for 10 days after resolution of index-case patients' symptoms. We evaluated the associations between household factors at baseline and secondary ILI among household contacts using negative binomial regression, accounting for clustering by household. RESULTS: Our sample was 1491 household contacts of 184 index-case patients. Seventy-one percentage reported that smoking occurred in their home, 27% shared a latrine with one other household and 36% shared a latrine with >1 other household. A total of 114 household contacts (7.6%) had symptoms of ILI during follow-up. Smoking in the home (RRadj 1.9, 95% CI: 1.2, 3.0) and sharing a latrine with one household (RRadj 2.1, 95% CI: 1.2, 3.6) or >1 household (RRadj 3.1, 95% CI: 1.8-5.2) were independently associated with increased risk of secondary ILI. CONCLUSION: Tobacco use in homes could increase respiratory illness in Bangladesh. The mechanism between use of shared latrines and household ILI transmission is not clear. It is possible that respiratory pathogens could be transmitted through faecal contact or contaminated fomites in shared latrines.

Impact of Intensive Handwashing Promotion on Secondary Household Influenza-Like Illness in Rural Bangladesh: Findings from a Randomized Controlled Trial.

RATIONALE: There is little evidence for the efficacy of handwashing for prevention of influenza transmission in resource-poor settings. We tested the impact of intensive handwashing promotion on household transmission of influenza-like illness and influenza in rural Bangladesh. METHODS: In 2009-10, we identified index case-patients with influenza-like illness (fever with cough or sore throat) who were the only symptomatic person in their household. Household compounds of index case-patients were randomized to control or intervention (soap and daily handwashing promotion). We conducted daily surveillance and collected oropharyngeal specimens. Secondary attack ratios (SAR) were calculated for influenza and ILI in each arm. Among controls, we investigated individual risk factors for ILI among household contacts of index case-patients. RESULTS: Among 377 index case-patients, the mean number of days between fever onset and study enrollment was 2.1 (SD 1.7) among the 184 controls and 2.6 (SD 2.9) among 193 intervention case-patients. Influenza infection was confirmed in 20% of controls and 12% of intervention index case-patients. The SAR for influenza-like illness among household contacts was 9.5% among intervention (158/1661) and 7.7% among control households (115/1498) (SAR ratio 1.24, 95% CI 0.92-1.65). The SAR ratio for influenza was 2.40 (95% CI 0.68-8.47). In the control arm, susceptible contacts <2 years old (RRadj 5.51, 95% CI 3.43-8.85), those living with an index case-patient enrolled ≤24 hours after symptom onset (RRadj 1.91, 95% CI 1.18-3.10), and those who reported multiple daily interactions with the index case-patient (RRadj 1.94, 95% CI 1.71-3.26) were at increased risk of influenza-like illness. DISCUSSION: Handwashing promotion initiated after illness onset in a household member did not protect against influenza-like illness or influenza. Behavior may not have changed rapidly enough to curb transmission between household members. A reactive approach to reduce household influenza transmission through handwashing promotion may be ineffective in the context of rural Bangladesh. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00880659.