Prevalence and Correlates of Prescription Stimulant Misuse Among US College Students: Results From a National Survey.

Objective: There is a high prevalence of prescription stimulant misuse (PSM) among college students in the United States (US). Preventing and identifying PSM requires an understanding of risk factors and correlates, but large-scale surveys regarding this issue have been lacking. We present the largest multi-institution study to date on the correlates of PSM among US college students.Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of the 2017 American College Health Association-National College Health Assessment (ACHA-NCHA), an annual national survey on the demographics, health, and academic experiences of US college students. Logistic regression models examined associations between past-year PSM in 40,645 undergraduate college students and hypothesized risk factors.Results: PSM was reported in 8% of college students. PSM was associated with past-year diagnosis or treatment of depression (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.16; 99% CI, 1.01-1.33), anorexia (AOR = 1.44; 99% CI, 1.02-2.03), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (AOR = 1.66; 99% CI, 1.41-1.95), and substance use disorder/other addiction (AOR = 1.79; 99% CI, 1.30-2.46). The odds of PSM were 5.5 times higher for students who endorsed past-month use of "Legal drugs" and 8 times higher for students who endorsed past-month use of "Illegal drugs" than for those who did not. Other factors associated with PSM included academic difficulty, daytime sleepiness, fraternity or sorority involvement, White race, and cis-male gender.Conclusions: This study identifies many potential risk factors for PSM among US undergraduate college students. Targeted outreach, prevention, and clinical management are discussed. As the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated psychiatric distress, sleep difficulties, substance use, and attentional challenges among college students, this study may serve as a baseline for future studies examining the impact of COVID-19 on PSM among college students.

Efficacy and safety of antimicrobial stewardship prospective audit and feedback in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 (COVASP): a pragmatic, cluster-randomised, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with increased antimicrobial use despite low rates of bacterial co-infection. Prospective audit and feedback is recommended to optimise antibiotic prescribing, but high-quality evidence supporting its use for COVID-19 is absent. We aimed to study the efficacy and safety of prospective audit and feedback in patients admitted to hospital for the treatment of COVID-19. METHODS: COVASP was a prospective, pragmatic, non-inferiority, small-unit, cluster-randomised trial comparing prospective audit and feedback plus standard of care with standard of care alone in adults admitted to three hospitals in Edmonton, AB, Canada, with COVID-19 pneumonia. All patients aged at least 18 years who were admitted from the community to a designated study bed with microbiologically confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the preceding 14 days were included if they had an oxygen saturation of 94% or lower on room air, required supplemental oxygen, or had chest-imaging findings compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients were excluded if they were transferred in from another acute care centre, enrolled in another clinical trial that involved antibiotic therapy, expected to progress to palliative care or death within 48 h of hospital admission, or managed by any member of the research team within 30 days of enrolment. COVID-19 unit and critical care unit beds were stratified and randomly assigned (1:1) to the prospective audit and feedback plus standard of care group or the standard of care group. Patients were masked to their bed assignment but the attending physician and study team were not. The primary outcome was clinical status on postadmission day 15, measured using a seven-point ordinal scale. We used a non-inferiority margin of 0·5. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04896866, and is now closed. FINDINGS: Between March 1 and Oct 29, 2021, 1411 patients were screened and 886 were enrolled: 457 into the prospective audit and feedback plus standard of care group, of whom 429 completed the study, and 429 into the standard of care group, of whom 404 completed the study. Baseline characteristics were similar for both groups, with an overall mean age of 56·7 years (SD 17·3) and a median baseline ordinal scale of 4·0 (IQR 4·0-5·0). 301 audit and feedback events were recorded in the intervention group and 215 recommendations were made, of which 181 (84%) were accepted. Despite lower antibiotic use in the intervention group than in the control group (length of therapy 364·9 vs 384·2 days per 1000 patient days), clinical status at postadmission day 15 was non-inferior (median ordinal score 2·0 [IQR 2·0-3·0] vs 2·0 [IQR 2·0-4·0]; p=0·37, Mann-Whitney U test). Neutropenia was uncommon in both the intervention group (13 [3%] of 420 patients) and the control group (20 [5%] of 396 patients), and acute kidney injury occurred at a similar rate in both groups (74 [18%] of 421 patients in the intervention group and 76 [19%] of 399 patients in the control group). No intervention-related deaths were recorded. INTERPRETATION: This cluster-randomised clinical trial shows that prospective audit and feedback is safe and effective in optimising and reducing antibiotic use in adults admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Despite many competing priorities during the COVID-19 pandemic, antimicrobial stewardship should remain a priority to mitigate the overuse of antibiotics in this population. FUNDING: None.

COVID-19-related direct and vicarious racial discrimination: Associations with psychological distress among U.S. college students.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by a myriad of racist incidents targeting minorities in the U.S. Young adults are susceptible to direct and vicarious (indirect) pandemic-related racial discrimination. We sought to examine associations between both types of discrimination experiences and psychological distress among college students across different racial groups. METHODS: We analyzed self-reported data from 64,041 undergraduate students from the Spring 2021 American College Health Association-National College Health Assessment. Logistic regression examined odds of severe distress based on self-reported exposure to direct and vicarious racial discrimination. RESULTS: Even after controlling for sociodemographic characteristics and prior mental health diagnoses, there was a significant association between direct discrimination and distress among Asian (AOR: 1.3, p < 0.001), Hispanic (AOR: 1.6, p < 0.001), and Multiracial (AOR: 1.4, p < 0.001) students. Vicarious discrimination was significantly associated with distress among White (AOR: 1.4, p < 0.001), Asian (AOR: 1.4, p < 0.001), Hispanic (AOR: 1.5, p < 0.001), and Multiracial (AOR: 1.3, p < 0.001) students. Further analysis considering distress as a continuous measure revealed a significant association between vicarious discrimination and distress for Black participants (ß = 0.9, p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: Self-reported variables are susceptible to recall bias. Minority racial group analyses may be underpowered. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reveal an overall link between both direct and vicarious racial discrimination and distress across several racial groups. Further studies should examine effective mental health interventions and anti-racism initiatives to support students who have experienced direct or vicarious discrimination due to COVID-19.

Association Between College Course Delivery Model and Rates of Psychological Distress During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: College students in the US have been heavily affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to increased rates of depression and anxiety, college students have faced unprecedented stressors, such as geographic relocation and abrupt conversion from in-person classes to online classes. Objective: To study the association between course delivery model and psychological distress among US college students. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis used national data from the American College Health Association-National College Health Assessment III data set. Data were gathered from a web-based survey administered from January to early June 2021 to full-time US college students attending 4-year programs. Exposure: Course delivery model was self-reported. Main Outcomes and Measures: Psychological distress was measured using the Kessler Screening Scale for Psychological Distress. Results: This study evaluated 59 250 full-time undergraduate students (68.1% women; 51.5% White students; mean [SD] age, 21.2 [4.3] years); 3.5% attended fully in-person classes, 61.2% attended fully online classes, and 35.3% attended a mixed format of in-person and online classes. Students who attended classes fully online reported higher levels of psychological distress than those who attended a mix of online and in-person classes (b = 0.76 [99% CI, 0.64-0.88]; P < .001). This association remained significant after controlling for geographic region, year in school, gender, race and ethnicity, food security, current anxiety and/or depressive disorders, COVID-19 concerns, and residence (living on campus, off campus with family, or other off-campus arrangements) (b = 0.18 [99% CI, 0.04-0.31]; P = .001), as well as time spent socializing with friends (b = 0.13 [99% CI, 0.002-0.26]; P = .009). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that mental health professionals may wish to consider the association of course delivery models with mental health outcomes when working with college students. Colleges should be aware of the mental health burden associated with attending fully online classes and consider possible in-person components and supports for students.

Gut microbiota-derived metabolites confer protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The gut microbiome is intricately coupled with immune regulation and metabolism, but its role in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is not fully understood. Severe and fatal COVID-19 is characterized by poor anti-viral immunity and hypercoagulation, particularly in males. Here, we define multiple pathways by which the gut microbiome protects mammalian hosts from SARS-CoV-2 intranasal infection, both locally and systemically, via production of short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs). SCFAs reduced viral burdens in the airways and intestines by downregulating the SARS-CoV-2 entry receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), and enhancing adaptive immunity via GPR41 and 43 in male animals. We further identify a novel role for the gut microbiome in regulating systemic coagulation response by limiting megakaryocyte proliferation and platelet turnover via the Sh2b3-Mpl axis. Taken together, our findings have unraveled novel functions of SCFAs and fiber-fermenting gut bacteria to dampen viral entry and hypercoagulation and promote adaptive antiviral immunity.

Testing positive, losing a loved one, and financial hardship: Real-world impacts of COVID-19 on US college student distress.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has taken a particularly heavy toll on U.S. college students. In addition to facing academic-related stress and social pressures, these individuals are now increasingly susceptible to experiences such as contracting the virus, losing loved ones to COVID-19, or facing financial hardship due to the pandemic. The effects of such personal, pandemic-related experiences on young adult mental health - and the inherent racial disparities within these outcomes - remain largely understudied. METHODS: We analyzed 65,568 undergraduate students from the Spring 2021 American College Health Association-National College Health Assessment (ACHA-NCHA). RESULTS: The rates of the aforementioned COVID-19-related stressors were unevenly distributed across racial groups. A logistic regression analysis to identify predictors of moderate and serious psychological distress revealed that participants who had experienced the death of a loved one had 1.14 times greater odds of developing psychological distress (p < 0.0001). Those who experienced financial hardship had an odds ratio of 1.78 (p < 0.0001). Surprisingly, testing positive for COVID-19 was associated with an odds ratio of 0.82 of psychological distress (p < 0.0001). LIMITATIONS: Self-reported measures are susceptible to recall bias and misinterpretation. Exposure and outcome variables were measured simultaneously in this cross-sectional study which limits inference on causality. CONCLUSIONS: Financial burdens and bereavement are especially impactful stressors among college students during the pandemic, whereas contracting COVID-19 seemingly exhibits less impact on distress levels. When addressing student wellbeing, institutions should consider prioritizing the implementation of resources to support individuals affected by pandemic-related financial and familial losses.

COVID-19 therapeutics and outcomes among solid organ transplant recipients during the Omicron BA.1 era.

Treatment outcomes associated with the use of novel COVID-19 therapeutics in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR) are not well described in the literature. The objective of this analysis was to characterize 30-day hospitalization and other key secondary endpoints experienced by outpatient SOTR with mild-moderate COVID-19 treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NR), sotrovimab, or no SARS-CoV-2 specific treatment. This IRB-approved, retrospective study included 154 SOTR with a documented positive SARS-CoV-2 infection between December 16, 2021 and January 19, 2022 (a predominant Omicron BA.1 period in New York City). Patients who received NR (N = 28) or sotrovimab (N = 51) experienced a lower rate of 30-day hospitalization or death as compared to those who received no specific treatment (N = 75) (p = .009). A total of three deaths occurred, all among patients who initially received no specific treatment prior to hospitalization. These results suggest a role for SARS-CoV-2 specific agents in the treatment of SOTR with COVID-19, and that there does not appear to be any difference in effectiveness when comparing NR versus sotrovimab.

Trends in Type 1 Diabetic Ketoacidosis During COVID-19 Surges at 7 US Centers: Highest Burden on non-Hispanic Black Patients.

CONTEXT: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on individuals with type 1 diabetes remains poorly defined. OBJECTIVE: We examined United States trends in diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) among individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) during the COVID-19 pandemic at 7 large US medical centers and factors associated with these trends. METHODS: We compared DKA events among children and adults with T1D during COVID-19 surge 1 (March-May 2020) and COVID-19 surge 2 (August-October 2020) to the same periods in 2019. Analysis was performed using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests. RESULTS: We found no difference in the absolute number of T1D patients experiencing DKA in 2019 vs 2020. However, a higher proportion of non-Hispanic Black (NHB) individuals experienced DKA in 2019 than non-Hispanic White (NHW) individuals (44.6% vs 16.0%; P < .001), and this disparity persisted during the COVID-19 pandemic (48.6% vs 18.6%; P < .001). DKA was less common among patients on continuous glucose monitor (CGM) or insulin pump in 2020 compared to 2019 (CGM: 13.2% vs 15.0%, P < .001; insulin pump: 8.0% vs 10.6%, P < .001). In contrast to annual DKA totals, a higher proportion of patients had DKA during COVID-19 surges 1 and 2 compared to the same months in 2019 (surge 1: 7.1% vs 5.4%, P < .001; surge 2: 6.6% vs 5.7%, P = .001). CONCLUSION: DKA frequency increased among T1D patients during COVID-19 surges with highest frequency among NHB patients. DKA was less common among patients using CGM or insulin pumps. These findings highlight the urgent need for improved strategies to prevent DKA among patients with T1D-not only under pandemic conditions, but under all conditions-especially among populations most affected by health inequities.

Efficacy and safety of antimicrobial stewardship prospective audit and feedback in patients hospitalized with COVID-19: A protocol for a pragmatic clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of broad-spectrum antibiotics is widespread in patients with COVID-19 despite a low prevalence of bacterial co-infection, raising concerns for the accelerated development of antimicrobial resistance. Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) is vital but there are limited randomized clinical trial data supporting AMS interventions such as prospective audit and feedback (PAF). High quality data to demonstrate safety and efficacy of AMS PAF in hospitalized COVID-19 patients are needed. METHODS AND DESIGN: This is a prospective, multi-center, non-inferiority, pragmatic randomized clinical trial evaluating AMS PAF intervention plus standard of care (SOC) versus SOC alone. We include patients with microbiologically confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring hospital admission for severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Eligible ward beds and critical care unit beds will be randomized prior to study commencement at each participating site by computer-generated allocation sequence stratified by intensive care unit versus conventional ward in a 1:1 fashion. PAF intervention consists of real time review of antibacterial prescriptions and immediate written and verbal feedback to attending teams, performed by site-based AMS teams comprised of an AMS pharmacist and physician. The primary outcome is clinical status at post-admission day 15 measured using a 7-point ordinal scale. Patients will be followed for secondary outcomes out to 30 days. A total of 530 patients are needed to show a statistically significant non-inferiority, with 80% power and 2.5% one-sided alpha assuming standard deviation of 2 and the non-inferiority margin of 0.5. DISCUSSION: This study protocol presents a pragmatic clinical trial design with small unit cluster randomization for AMS intervention in hospitalized COVID-19 that will provide high-level evidence and may be adopted in other clinical situations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is being performed at the University of Alberta and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04896866) on May 17, 2021.

Early clinical experience with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for the treatment of COVID-19 in solid organ transplant recipients.

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NR) use has not yet been described in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) with mild COVID-19. The objective was to evaluate outcomes among SOTR and describe the drug-drug interaction of NR. This is an IRB-approved, retrospective study of all adult SOTR on a calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) or mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor who were prescribed NR between December 28, 2021 and January 6, 2022. A total of 25 adult SOTR were included (n = 21 tacrolimus, n = 4 cyclosporine, n = 3 everolimus, n = 1 sirolimus). All patients were instructed to follow the following standardized protocol during treatment with 5 days of NR: hold tacrolimus or mTOR inhibitor or reduce cyclosporine dose to 20% of baseline daily dose. Four patients (16%) were hospitalized by day 30; one for infectious diarrhea and three for symptoms related to COVID-19. No patients died within 30 days of receipt of NR. Median tacrolimus level pre- and post-NR were 7.4 ng/ml (IQR, 6.6-8.6) and 5.2 (IQR, 3.6-8.7), respectively. Four patients experienced a supratherapeutic tacrolimus concentration after restarting tacrolimus post-NR. Our results show the clinically significant interaction between NR and immunosuppressive agents can be reasonably managed with a standardized dosing protocol. Prescribers should carefully re-introduce CNI after the NR course is complete.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis (November 2019-June 2021).

BACKGROUND: Pneumonia from SARS-CoV-2 is difficult to distinguish from other viral and bacterial etiologies. Broad-spectrum antimicrobials are frequently prescribed to patients hospitalized with COVID-19 which potentially acts as a catalyst for the development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis during the first 18 months of the pandemic to quantify the prevalence and types of resistant co-infecting organisms in patients with COVID-19 and explore differences across hospital and geographic settings. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science (BioSIS), and Scopus from November 1, 2019 to May 28, 2021 to identify relevant articles pertaining to resistant co-infections in patients with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2. Patient- and study-level analyses were conducted. We calculated pooled prevalence estimates of co-infection with resistant bacterial or fungal organisms using random effects models. Stratified meta-analysis by hospital and geographic setting was also performed to elucidate any differences. RESULTS: Of 1331 articles identified, 38 met inclusion criteria. A total of 1959 unique isolates were identified with 29% (569) resistant organisms identified. Co-infection with resistant bacterial or fungal organisms ranged from 0.2 to 100% among included studies. Pooled prevalence of co-infection with resistant bacterial and fungal organisms was 24% (95% CI 8-40%; n = 25 studies: I2 = 99%) and 0.3% (95% CI 0.1-0.6%; n = 8 studies: I2 = 78%), respectively. Among multi-drug resistant organisms, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and multi-drug resistant Candida auris were most commonly reported. Stratified analyses found higher proportions of AMR outside of Europe and in ICU settings, though these results were not statistically significant. Patient-level analysis demonstrated > 50% (n = 58) mortality, whereby all but 6 patients were infected with a resistant organism. CONCLUSIONS: During the first 18 months of the pandemic, AMR prevalence was high in COVID-19 patients and varied by hospital and geography although there was substantial heterogeneity. Given the variation in patient populations within these studies, clinical settings, practice patterns, and definitions of AMR, further research is warranted to quantify AMR in COVID-19 patients to improve surveillance programs, infection prevention and control practices and antimicrobial stewardship programs globally.

Current utilization of interferon alpha for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019: A comprehensive review.

Recent studies have identified an association between perturbed type I interferon (IFN) responses and the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). IFNα intervention may normalize the dysregulated innate immunity of COVID-19. However, details regarding its utilization and therapeutic evidence have yet to be systematically evaluated. The aim of this comprehensive review was to summarize the current utilization of IFNα for COVID-19 treatment and to explore the evidence on safety and efficacy. A comprehensive review of clinical studies in the literature prior to December 1st, 2021, was performed to identify the current utilization of IFNα, which included details on the route of administration, the number of patients who received the treatment, the severity at the initiation of treatment, age range, the time from the onset of symptoms to treatment, dose, frequency, and duration as well as safety and efficacy. Encouragingly, no evidence was found against the safety of IFNα treatment for COVID-19. Early intervention, either within five days from the onset of symptoms or at hospital admission, confers better clinical outcomes, whereas late intervention may result in prolonged hospitalization.

A Case of Coombs-Negative Hemolytic Anemia Prompting Diagnosis of SARS‐CoV‐2

Case reports have discussed coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) patients presenting with hemolytic anemia, specifically with a positive direct antiglobulin test. However, Coombs-negative hemolytic anemia in COVID-19 patients has been rarely reported. We present an unusual case of Coombs-negative hemolytic anemia caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) which responded with evidence-based COVID-19 treatments. We demonstrate the importance of considering SARS-CoV-2 as a cause of Coombs-negative hemolytic anemia, and we illustrate how treatment of the underlying COVID-19 illness, even if it is just supportive care, will help resolve the associated hemolysis.

Rapid Detection and Inhibition of SARS-CoV-2-Spike Mutation-Mediated Microthrombosis.

Activation of endothelial cells following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is thought to be the primary driver for the increasingly recognized thrombotic complications in coronavirus disease 2019 patients, potentially due to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein binding to the human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (hACE2). Vaccination therapies use the same Spike sequence or protein to boost host immune response as a protective mechanism against SARS-CoV-2 infection. As a result, cases of thrombotic events are reported following vaccination. Although vaccines are generally considered safe, due to genetic heterogeneity, age, or the presence of comorbidities in the population worldwide, the prediction of severe adverse outcome in patients remains a challenge. To elucidate Spike proteins underlying patient-specific-vascular thrombosis, the human microcirculation environment is recapitulated using a novel microfluidic platform coated with human endothelial cells and exposed to patient specific whole blood. Here, the blood coagulation effect is tested after exposure to Spike protein in nanoparticles and Spike variant D614G in viral vectors and the results are corroborated using live SARS-CoV-2. Of note, two potential strategies are also examined to reduce blood clot formation, by using nanoliposome-hACE2 and anti-Interleukin (IL) 6 antibodies.

Biomolecular Modeling and Simulation: A Prospering Multidisciplinary Field.

We reassess progress in the field of biomolecular modeling and simulation, following up on our perspective published in 2011. By reviewing metrics for the field's productivity and providing examples of success, we underscore the productive phase of the field, whose short-term expectations were overestimated and long-term effects underestimated. Such successes include prediction of structures and mechanisms; generation of new insights into biomolecular activity; and thriving collaborations between modeling and experimentation, including experiments driven by modeling. We also discuss the impact of field exercises and web games on the field's progress. Overall, we note tremendous success by the biomolecular modeling community in utilization of computer power; improvement in force fields; and development and application of new algorithms, notably machine learning and artificial intelligence. The combined advances are enhancing the accuracy andscope of modeling and simulation, establishing an exemplary discipline where experiment and theory or simulations are full partners.

Perceived COVID-19-related anti-Asian discrimination predicts post traumatic stress disorder symptoms among Asian and Asian American young adults.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigates the prevalence of COVID-19-related discrimination and the extent to which COVID-19-related discrimination is associated with mental health symptoms among Asians and Asian American (A/AA) young adults during the first three months of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We used data from the COVID-19 Adult Resilience Experiences Study (CARES), a cross-sectional online survey conducted in the U.S. Out of 1,001 respondents, 211 A/AA young adults were analyzed for this study. RESULTS: Sixty-eight percent of A/AA young adults reported that they or their family have experienced COVID-19-related discrimination and approximately 15% of respondents reported verbal or physical assaults. After controlling for covariates including predisposing factors, lifetime discrimination, and pre-existing mental health diagnoses, COVID-19-related discrimination was significantly associated with an increased level of symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), but not of anxiety or depression. Our study results suggest that COVID-19-related discrimination may contribute to PTSD symptoms among A/AA young adults. LIMITATIONS: This was cross-sectional data which was collected through online and self-report rather than clinical evaluation. CONCLUSION: This finding adds greater urgency to develop and implement policy- and individual-level interventions to reduce race-based discrimination among A/AA.

Potential Impact of COVID-19-Related Racial Discrimination on the Health of Asian Americans.

Anti-Asian discrimination and assaults have increased significantly during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, contributing to a "secondary contagion" of racism. The United States has a long and well-documented history of both interpersonal and structural anti-Asian discrimination, and the current pandemic reinforces longstanding negative stereotypes of this rapidly growing minority group as the "Yellow Peril."We provide a general overview of the history of anti-Asian discrimination in the United States, review theoretical and empirical associations between discrimination and health, and describe the associated public health implications of the COVID-19 pandemic, citing relevant evidence from previous disasters in US history that became racialized.Although the literature suggests that COVID-19 will likely have significant negative effects on the health of Asian Americans and other vulnerable groups, there are reasons for optimism as well. These include the emergence of mechanisms for reporting and tracking incidents of racial bias, increased awareness of racism's insidious harms and subsequent civic and political engagement by the Asian American community, and further research into resilience-promoting factors that can reduce the negative health effects of racism.

Priorities for addressing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on college student mental health.

The COVID-19 pandemic has already produced profound impacts on college students, with unprecedented directives for student relocation from their college campuses and dormitories mid-semester and coursework that took place through virtual learning. The current disruptions and anticipated potential long-term changes call for immediate prioritization regarding next steps for addressing college mental health and well-being. This viewpoint article highlights two urgent priorities for addressing current college mental health needs: the development of strategies for ensuring mental health service access, and intentional outreach to college students with special circumstances. The current crisis also represents an opportunity for campus administrators, mental health professionals, researchers, and policymakers to leverage innovative models of care as well as identity-related student assets, strengths, and resilience-promoting factors to support students' eventual return to campus and to respond more effectively to future massive disruptions.

COVID-19 and telepsychiatry: Early outpatient experiences and implications for the future.

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically transformed the U.S. healthcare landscape. Within psychiatry, a sudden relaxing of insurance and regulatory barriers during the month of March 2020 enabled clinicians practicing in a wide range of settings to quickly adopt virtual care in order to provide critical ongoing mental health supports to both existing and new patients struggling with the pandemic's impact. In this article, we briefly review the extensive literature supporting the effectiveness of telepsychiatry relative to in-person mental health care, and describe how payment and regulatory challenges were the primary barriers preventing more widespread adoption of this treatment modality prior to COVID-19. We then review key changes that were implemented at the federal, state, professional, and insurance levels over a one-month period that helped usher in an unprecedented transformation in psychiatric care delivery, from mostly in-person to mostly virtual. Early quality improvement data regarding virtual visit volumes and clinical insights from our outpatient psychiatry department located within a large, urban, tertiary care academic medical center reflect both the opportunities and challenges of virtual care for patients and providers. Notable benefits have included robust clinical volumes despite social distancing mandates, reduced logistical barrieres to care for many patients, and decreased no-show rates. Finally, we provide clinical suggestions for optimizing telepsychiatry based on our experience, make a call for advocacy to continue the reduced insurance and regulatory restrictions affecting telepsychiatry even once this public health crisis has passed, and pose research questions that can help guide optimal utilization of telepsychiatry as mainstay or adjunct of outpatient psychiatric treatment now and in the future.