Pregnancy Intention, Changes in Pregnancy Intention, and Pregnancy Incidence Among Female Nurses in North America.

Importance: Pregnancy intention assessment is a key element of preconception and contraceptive care. The association between a single screening question and the incidence of pregnancy is unknown. Objective: To prospectively evaluate the dynamics of pregnancy intention and pregnancy incidence. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study (the Nurses' Health Study 3) was conducted from June 1, 2010, to April 1, 2022, in 18 376 premenopausal, nonpregnant female nurses aged 19 to 44 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: Pregnancy intention and pregnancy status were assessed at baseline and approximately every 3 to 6 months thereafter. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate the association between pregnancy intention and pregnancy incidence. Results: A total of 18 376 premenopausal, nonpregnant women (mean [SD] age, 32.4 [6.5] years) participated in the study. At baseline, 1008 women (5.5%) were trying to conceive, 2452 (13.3%) were contemplating pregnancy within 1 year, and the remaining 14 916 (81.2%) were neither trying to conceive nor thought they would be pregnant within 1 year. A total of 1314 pregnancies were documented within 12 months of pregnancy intention assessment. The cumulative incidence of pregnancy was 38.8% in women actively trying to conceive (median [IQR] time to pregnancy, 3.3 [1.5-6.7] months), 27.6% in women contemplating pregnancy (median [IQR] time to pregnancy, 6.7 [4.2-9.3] months), and 1.7% in women neither trying to conceive nor contemplating pregnancy (median [IQR] time to pregnancy, 7.8 [5.2-10.5] months) among those who became pregnant. Women who were actively trying to conceive were 23.1 times (95% CI, 19.5-27.4 times) and women who were contemplating pregnancy were 13.0 times (95% CI, 11.1-15.2 times) more likely to conceive within 12 months than women who were neither attempting nor contemplating pregnancy. Among women contemplating pregnancy at baseline who did not get pregnant during follow up, 18.8% were actively trying and 27.6% were not trying by 12 months. Conversely, only 4.9% of women neither trying to conceive nor contemplating pregnancy within 1 year at baseline changed pregnancy intention during follow up. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of reproductive-aged nurses in North America, pregnancy intention was highly fluid among women who were contemplating pregnancy but relatively stable among women trying to conceive and women who were neither trying to conceive nor contemplating pregnancy. Pregnancy intention was strongly associated with pregnancy incidence, but the median time to pregnancy points to a relatively short time window to initiate preconception care.

Financial precarity, food insecurity, and psychological distress prospectively linked with use of potentially dangerous dietary supplements during the pandemic in the US

Introduction Supplements sold with claims to promote weight loss, cleansing/detoxing, increased energy, or boosted immunity can be dangerous, and consumers experiencing extreme stressors may be especially vulnerable to deceptive claims. The purpose of our study was to investigate associations of financial strain and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic with use of supplements sold for weight loss, cleanse/detox, energy, or immunity. Methods We used repeated-measures data gathered over five survey waves from April/May 2020–April 2021 from the COVID-19 Substudy (N = 54,951), within three prospective US national cohorts (Nurses' Health Study 2, Nurses' Health Study 3, and Growing Up Today Study), to investigate longitudinal associations between financial strain and psychological distress and risk of use of potentially dangerous types of supplements. Surveys assessed use of supplements prior to and during the first year of the pandemic, as well as financial precarity, food insecurity, depressive and anxiety symptoms, perceived stress, and daily hassles. We fit sociodemographic-adjusted modified Poisson GEE models to estimate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between baseline or lagged time-varying predictors and prevalent or incident (i.e., new-onset) use of each supplement type. Results At baseline in April/May 2020, soon after pandemic onset, current use of supplement types was: weight loss 2.7%;cleanse/detox 3.2%;energy 4.4%;immune 22.6%. By the end of the study period, cumulative incidence was: weight loss 3.5%;cleanse/detox 3.7%;energy 4.5%;immune 21.3%. In prevalent-use analyses, financial precarity, food insecurity, and psychological distress were associated with up to 2.4 times the risk of use of these types of supplements across the study period. Similarly, in incident-use analyses, financial precarity and psychological distress were associated with up to 2.1 times the risk of initiating use;whereas, high food insecurity was associated with nearly 1.8 times higher risk of onset of weight-loss supplements use but was not associated with onset of use of other types of supplements. Discussion We found consistent evidence that during the first year of the pandemic, participants experiencing elevated financial strain and psychological distress were at heightened risk of initiating use of potentially dangerous types of supplements. Our findings raise concerns about deceptive claims about the safety and product effectiveness by manufacturers of these supplements to profit from vulnerable consumers during the pandemic.

Financial precarity, food insecurity, and psychological distress prospectively linked with use of potentially dangerous dietary supplements during the pandemic in the US.

Introduction: Supplements sold with claims to promote weight loss, cleansing/detoxing, increased energy, or boosted immunity can be dangerous, and consumers experiencing extreme stressors may be especially vulnerable to deceptive claims. The purpose of our study was to investigate associations of financial strain and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic with use of supplements sold for weight loss, cleanse/detox, energy, or immunity. Methods: We used repeated-measures data gathered over five survey waves from April/May 2020-April 2021 from the COVID-19 Substudy (N = 54,951), within three prospective US national cohorts (Nurses' Health Study 2, Nurses' Health Study 3, and Growing Up Today Study), to investigate longitudinal associations between financial strain and psychological distress and risk of use of potentially dangerous types of supplements. Surveys assessed use of supplements prior to and during the first year of the pandemic, as well as financial precarity, food insecurity, depressive and anxiety symptoms, perceived stress, and daily hassles. We fit sociodemographic-adjusted modified Poisson GEE models to estimate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between baseline or lagged time-varying predictors and prevalent or incident (i.e., new-onset) use of each supplement type. Results: At baseline in April/May 2020, soon after pandemic onset, current use of supplement types was: weight loss 2.7%; cleanse/detox 3.2%; energy 4.4%; immune 22.6%. By the end of the study period, cumulative incidence was: weight loss 3.5%; cleanse/detox 3.7%; energy 4.5%; immune 21.3%. In prevalent-use analyses, financial precarity, food insecurity, and psychological distress were associated with up to 2.4 times the risk of use of these types of supplements across the study period. Similarly, in incident-use analyses, financial precarity and psychological distress were associated with up to 2.1 times the risk of initiating use; whereas, high food insecurity was associated with nearly 1.8 times higher risk of onset of weight-loss supplements use but was not associated with onset of use of other types of supplements. Discussion: We found consistent evidence that during the first year of the pandemic, participants experiencing elevated financial strain and psychological distress were at heightened risk of initiating use of potentially dangerous types of supplements. Our findings raise concerns about deceptive claims about the safety and product effectiveness by manufacturers of these supplements to profit from vulnerable consumers during the pandemic.

Associations between greenness and predicted COVID-19-like illness incidence in the United States and the United Kingdom.

Green spaces may be protective against COVID-19 incidence. They may provide outdoor, ventilated, settings for physical and social activities and therefore decrease transmission risk. We examined the association between neighborhood greenness and COVID-19-like illness incidence using individual-level data. Methods: The study population includes participants enrolled in the COVID Symptom Study smartphone application in the United Kingdom and the United States (March-November 2020). All participants were encouraged to report their current health condition and suspected risk factors for COVID-19. We used a validated symptom-based classifier that predicts COVID-19-like illness. We estimated the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), for each participant's reported neighborhood of residence for each month, using images from Landsat 8 (30 m2). We used time-varying Cox proportional hazards models stratified by age, country, and calendar month at study entry and adjusted for the individual- and neighborhood-level risk factors. Results: We observed 143,340 cases of predicted COVID-19-like illness among 2,794,029 participants. Neighborhood NDVI was associated with a decreased risk of predicted COVID-19-like illness incidence in the fully adjusted model (hazard ratio = 0.965, 95% confidence interval = 0.960, 0.970, per 0.1 NDVI increase). Stratified analyses showed protective associations among U.K. participants but not among U.S. participants. Associations were slightly stronger for White individuals, for individuals living in rural neighborhoods, and for individuals living in high-income neighborhoods compared to individuals living in low-income neighborhoods. Conclusions: Higher levels of greenness may reduce the risk of predicted COVID-19-like illness incidence, but these associations were not observed in all populations.

Physical Activity, Sedentary Behavior, and Risk of Coronavirus Disease 2019.

INTRODUCTION: Data on the associations of prepandemic physical activity and sedentary behavior with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity, particularly milder illness, have been limited. METHODS: We used data from 43,913 participants within the Nurses' Health Study II and Health Professionals Follow-Up Study who responded to periodic COVID-related surveys from May 2020 through March 2021. History of physical activity from the prepandemic period was assessed as the metabolic equivalents of task (MET)-hours per week of various activities of different intensity and sedentary behavior assessed from reports of time spent sitting from questionnaires completed 2016-2017. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity, as well as predicted COVID-19 defined using a validated symptom-based algorithm. RESULTS: Higher levels of prepandemic physical activity were associated with a lower risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Compared to participants with <3 MET-hours per week, the multivariable-adjusted OR was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.74, 0.99; P trend =.07) for those with ≥27 MET-hours per week. Higher physical activity levels were also associated with lower risk of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.72, 0.99; P trend = .05) and predicted COVID-19 (OR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.78, 0.97; P trend = .01). Longer time sitting at home watching TV (OR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.73, 0.97) or for other tasks (OR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.66, 0.92) was associated with a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support a protective association between prepandemic physical activity and lower risk and severity of COVID-19.

Effects of portable air cleaners and A/C unit fans on classroom concentrations of particulate matter in a non-urban elementary school.

Given the increased use of air cleaners as a prevention measure in classrooms during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study aimed to investigate the effects of portable air cleaners with HEPA filters and window A/C fans on real-time (1 minute) concentrations of PM less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5) or less than 1 microns (PM1.0) in two classrooms in a non-urban elementary school in Rhode Island. For half of each school day, settings were randomized to "high" or "low" for the air cleaner and "on" or "off" for the fan. Descriptive statistics and linear mixed models were used to evaluate the impacts of each set of conditions on PM2.5 and PM1.0 concentrations. The mean half-day concentrations ranged from 3.4-4.1 µg/m3 for PM2.5 and 3.4-3.9 µg/m3 for PM1.0. On average, use of the fan when the air cleaner was on the low setting decreased PM2.5 by 0.53 µg/m3 [95% CI: -0.64, -0.42] and use of the filter on high (compared to low) when the fan was off decreased PM2.5 by 0.10 µg/m3 [95% CI: -0.20, 0.005]. For PM1.0, use of the fan when the air cleaner was on low decreased concentrations by 0.18 µg/m3 [95% CI: -0.36, -0.01] and use of the filter on high (compared to low) when the fan was off decreased concentrations by 0.38 µg/m3 [95% CI: -0.55, -0.21]. In general, simultaneous use of the fan and filter on high did not result in additional decreases in PM concentrations compared to the simple addition of each appliance's individual effect estimates. Our study suggests that concurrent or separate use of an A/C fan and air cleaner in non-urban classrooms with low background PM may reduce classroom PM concentrations.

A prospective study of the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination with changes in usual menstrual cycle characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Despite anecdotal reports, the impacts of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination on menstrual health have not been systemically investigated. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the associations of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination with menstrual cycle characteristics. STUDY DESIGN: This study prospectively observed 3858 premenopausal women in the Nurses' Health Study 3 living in the United States or Canada who received biannual follow-up questionnaires between January 2011 and December 2021 and completed additional monthly and quarterly surveys related to the COVID-19 pandemic between April 2020 and November 2021. History of positive SARS-CoV-2 test, COVID-19 vaccination status, and vaccine type were self-reported in surveys conducted in 2020 and 2021. Current menstrual cycle length and regularity "before COVID-19" were reported at baseline between 2011 and 2016, and current menstrual cycle length and regularity "after COVID-19" were reported in late 2021. Pre- to post-COVID change in menstrual cycle length and regularity was calculated between reports. Logistic or multinomial logistic regression models were used to assess the associations between SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination and change in menstrual cycle characteristics. RESULTS: The median age at baseline and the median age at end of follow-up were 33 years (range, 21-51) and 42 years (range, 27-56), respectively, with a median follow-up time of 9.2 years. This study documented 421 SARS-CoV-2 infections (10.9%) and 3527 vaccinations (91.4%) during follow-up. Vaccinated women had a higher risk of increased cycle length than unvaccinated women (odds ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-2.19), after adjusting for sociodemographic and behavioral factors. These associations were similar after in addition accounting for pandemic-related stress. COVID-19 vaccination was only associated with change to longer cycles in the first 6 months after vaccination (0-6 months: odds ratio, 1.67 [95% confidence interval, 1.05-2.64]; 7-9 months: odds ratio, 1.43 [95% confidence interval, 0.96-2.14]; >9 months: odds ratio, 1.41 [95% confidence interval, 0.91-2.18]) and among women whose cycles were short, long, or irregular before vaccination (odds ratio, 2.82 [95% confidence interval, 1.51-5.27]; odds ratio, 1.10 [95% confidence interval, 0.68-1.77] for women with normal length, regular cycles before vaccination). Messenger RNA and adenovirus-vectored vaccines were both associated with this change. SARS-CoV-2 infection was not associated with changes in usual menstrual cycle characteristics. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 vaccination may be associated with short-term changes in usual menstrual cycle length, particularly among women whose cycles were short, long, or irregular before vaccination. The results underscored the importance of monitoring menstrual health in vaccine clinical trials. Future work should examine the potential biological mechanisms.

American Frontline Healthcare Personnel's Access to and Use of Personal Protective Equipment Early in the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify adequacy of personal protective equipment (PPE) for U.S. healthcare personnel (HCP) at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic and its association with infection risk. METHODS: March-May 2020 survey of the national Nurses' Health Studies and the Growing Up Today study regarding self-reported PPE access, use, and reuse. COVID-19 endpoints included SARS-CoV-2 tests and COVID-19 status predicted from symptoms. RESULTS: Nearly 22% of 22,232 frontline HCP interacting with COVID-19 patients reported sometimes or always lacking PPE. Fifty percent of HCP reported not needing respirators, including 13% of those working in COVID-19 units. Lack of PPE was cross-sectionally associated with two-fold or greater odds of COVID-19 among those who interacted with infected patients. CONCLUSION: These data show the need to improve the U.S. infection prevention culture of safety when confronting a novel pathogen.

Association of social distancing and face mask use with risk of COVID-19.

Given the continued burden of COVID-19 worldwide, there is a high unmet need for data on the effect of social distancing and face mask use to mitigate the risk of COVID-19. We examined the association of community-level social distancing measures and individual face mask use with risk of predicted COVID-19 in a large prospective U.S. cohort study of 198,077 participants. Individuals living in communities with the greatest social distancing had a 31% lower risk of predicted COVID-19 compared with those living in communities with poor social distancing. Self-reported 'always' use of face mask was associated with a 62% reduced risk of predicted COVID-19 even among individuals living in a community with poor social distancing. These findings provide support for the efficacy of mask-wearing even in settings of poor social distancing in reducing COVID-19 transmission. Despite mass vaccination campaigns in many parts of the world, continued efforts at social distancing and face mask use remain critically important in reducing the spread of COVID-19.

County-level exposures to greenness and associations with COVID-19 incidence and mortality in the United States.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is an infectious disease that has killed more than 555,000 people in the US. During a time of social distancing measures and increasing social isolation, green spaces may be a crucial factor to maintain a physically and socially active lifestyle while not increasing risk of infection. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated whether greenness was related to COVID-19 incidence and mortality in the US. METHODS: We downloaded data on COVID-19 cases and deaths for each US county up through June 7, 2020, from Johns Hopkins University, Center for Systems Science and Engineering Coronavirus Resource Center. We used April-May 2020 Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) data, to represent the greenness exposure during the initial COVID-19 outbreak in the US. We fitted negative binomial mixed models to evaluate associations of NDVI with COVID-19 incidence and mortality, adjusting for potential confounders such as county-level demographics, epidemic stage, and other environmental factors. We evaluated whether the associations were modified by population density, proportion of Black residents, median home value, and issuance of stay-at-home orders. RESULTS: An increase of 0.1 in NDVI was associated with a 6% (95% Confidence Interval: 3%, 10%) decrease in COVID-19 incidence rate after adjustment for potential confounders. Associations with COVID-19 incidence were stronger in counties with high population density and in counties with stay-at-home orders. Greenness was not associated with COVID-19 mortality in all counties; however, it was protective in counties with higher population density. DISCUSSION: Exposures to NDVI were associated with reduced county-level incidence of COVID-19 in the US as well as reduced county-level COVID-19 mortality rates in densely populated counties.

Risk of COVID-19 among frontline healthcare workers and the general community: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Data for frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) and risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection are limited and whether personal protective equipment (PPE) mitigates this risk is unknown. We evaluated risk for COVID-19 among frontline HCWs compared to the general community and the influence of PPE. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of the general community, including frontline HCWs, who reported information through the COVID Symptom Study smartphone application beginning on March 24 (United Kingdom, U.K.) and March 29 (United States, U.S.) through April 23, 2020. We used Cox proportional hazards modeling to estimate multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) of a positive COVID-19 test. FINDINGS: Among 2,035,395 community individuals and 99,795 frontline HCWs, we documented 5,545 incident reports of a positive COVID-19 test over 34,435,272 person-days. Compared with the general community, frontline HCWs had an aHR of 11·6 (95% CI: 10·9 to 12·3) for reporting a positive test. The corresponding aHR was 3·40 (95% CI: 3·37 to 3·43) using an inverse probability weighted Cox model adjusting for the likelihood of receiving a test. A symptom-based classifier of predicted COVID-19 yielded similar risk estimates. Compared with HCWs reporting adequate PPE, the aHRs for reporting a positive test were 1·46 (95% CI: 1·21 to 1·76) for those reporting PPE reuse and 1·31 (95% CI: 1·10 to 1·56) for reporting inadequate PPE. Compared with HCWs reporting adequate PPE who did not care for COVID-19 patients, HCWs caring for patients with documented COVID-19 had aHRs for a positive test of 4·83 (95% CI: 3·99 to 5·85) if they had adequate PPE, 5·06 (95% CI: 3·90 to 6·57) for reused PPE, and 5·91 (95% CI: 4·53 to 7·71) for inadequate PPE. INTERPRETATION: Frontline HCWs had a significantly increased risk of COVID-19 infection, highest among HCWs who reused PPE or had inadequate access to PPE. However, adequate supplies of PPE did not completely mitigate high-risk exposures. FUNDING: Zoe Global Ltd., Wellcome Trust, EPSRC, NIHR, UK Research and Innovation, Alzheimer's Society, NIH, NIOSH, Massachusetts Consortium on Pathogen Readiness.

Risk of COVID-19 among front-line health-care workers and the general community: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Data for front-line health-care workers and risk of COVID-19 are limited. We sought to assess risk of COVID-19 among front-line health-care workers compared with the general community and the effect of personal protective equipment (PPE) on risk. METHODS: We did a prospective, observational cohort study in the UK and the USA of the general community, including front-line health-care workers, using self-reported data from the COVID Symptom Study smartphone application (app) from March 24 (UK) and March 29 (USA) to April 23, 2020. Participants were voluntary users of the app and at first use provided information on demographic factors (including age, sex, race or ethnic background, height and weight, and occupation) and medical history, and subsequently reported any COVID-19 symptoms. We used Cox proportional hazards modelling to estimate multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of our primary outcome, which was a positive COVID-19 test. The COVID Symptom Study app is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04331509. FINDINGS: Among 2 035 395 community individuals and 99 795 front-line health-care workers, we recorded 5545 incident reports of a positive COVID-19 test over 34 435 272 person-days. Compared with the general community, front-line health-care workers were at increased risk for reporting a positive COVID-19 test (adjusted HR 11·61, 95% CI 10·93-12·33). To account for differences in testing frequency between front-line health-care workers and the general community and possible selection bias, an inverse probability-weighted model was used to adjust for the likelihood of receiving a COVID-19 test (adjusted HR 3·40, 95% CI 3·37-3·43). Secondary and post-hoc analyses suggested adequacy of PPE, clinical setting, and ethnic background were also important factors. INTERPRETATION: In the UK and the USA, risk of reporting a positive test for COVID-19 was increased among front-line health-care workers. Health-care systems should ensure adequate availability of PPE and develop additional strategies to protect health-care workers from COVID-19, particularly those from Black, Asian, and minority ethnic backgrounds. Additional follow-up of these observational findings is needed. FUNDING: Zoe Global, Wellcome Trust, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, National Institutes of Health Research, UK Research and Innovation, Alzheimer's Society, National Institutes of Health, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, and Massachusetts Consortium on Pathogen Readiness.

The COronavirus Pandemic Epidemiology (COPE) Consortium: A Call to Action.

The rapid pace of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19) pandemic presents challenges to the real-time collection of population-scale data to inform near-term public health needs as well as future investigations. We established the COronavirus Pandemic Epidemiology (COPE) consortium to address this unprecedented crisis on behalf of the epidemiology research community. As a central component of this initiative, we have developed a COVID Symptom Study (previously known as the COVID Symptom Tracker) mobile application as a common data collection tool for epidemiologic cohort studies with active study participants. This mobile application collects information on risk factors, daily symptoms, and outcomes through a user-friendly interface that minimizes participant burden. Combined with our efforts within the general population, data collected from nearly 3 million participants in the United States and United Kingdom are being used to address critical needs in the emergency response, including identifying potential hot spots of disease and clinically actionable risk factors. The linkage of symptom data collected in the app with information and biospecimens already collected in epidemiology cohorts will position us to address key questions related to diet, lifestyle, environmental, and socioeconomic factors on susceptibility to COVID-19, clinical outcomes related to infection, and long-term physical, mental health, and financial sequalae. We call upon additional epidemiology cohorts to join this collective effort to strengthen our impact on the current health crisis and generate a new model for a collaborative and nimble research infrastructure that will lead to more rapid translation of our work for the betterment of public health.