Decisions about adopting novel COVID-19 vaccines among White adults in a rural state, USA: A qualitative study.

PURPOSE: Many people, especially in rural areas of the United States, choose not to receive novel COVID-19 vaccinations despite public health recommendations. Understanding how people describe decisions to get vaccinated or not may help to address hesitancy. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 17 rural inhabitants of Maine, a sparsely populated state in the northeastern US, about COVID-19 vaccine decisions during the early rollout (March-May 2021). We used the framework method to compare responses, including between vaccine Adopters and Non-adopters. FINDINGS: Adopters framed COVID-19 as unequivocally dangerous, if not personally, then to other people. Describing their COVID concerns, Adopters emphasized disease morbidities. By contrast, Non-adopters never mentioned morbidities, referencing instead mortality risk, which they perceived as minimal. Instead of risks associated with the disease, Non-adopters emphasized risks associated with vaccination. Uncertainty about the vaccine development process, augmented by social media, bolstered concerns about the long-term unknown risks of vaccines. Vaccine Adopters ultimately described trusting the process, while Non-adopters expressed distrust. CONCLUSION: Many respondents framed their COVID vaccination decision by comparing the risks between the disease and the vaccine. Associating morbidity risks with COVID-19 diminishes the relevance of vaccine risks, whereas focusing on low perceived mortality risks heightens their relevance. Results could inform efforts to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the rural US and elsewhere. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Members of Maine rural communities were involved throughout the study. Leaders of community health groups provided feedback on the study design, were actively involved in recruitment, and reviewed findings after analysis. All data produced and used in this study were co-constructed through the participation of community members with lived experience.

Collagen-Specific HSP47+ Myofibroblasts and CD163+ Macrophages Identify Profibrotic Phenotypes in Deceased Hearts With SARS-CoV-2 Infections.

Background Cardiac fibrosis complicates SARS-CoV-2 infections and has been linked to arrhythmic complications in survivors. Accordingly, we sought evidence of increased HSP47 (heat shock protein 47), a stress-inducible chaperone protein that regulates biosynthesis and secretion of procollagen in heart tissue, with the goal of elucidating molecular mechanisms underlying cardiac fibrosis in subjects with this viral infection. Methods and Results Using human autopsy tissue, immunofluorescence, and immunohistochemistry, we quantified Hsp47+ cells and collagen α 1(l) in hearts from people with SARS-CoV-2 infections. Because macrophages are also linked to inflammation, we measured CD163+ cells in the same tissues. We observed irregular groups of spindle-shaped HSP47+ and CD163+ cells as well as increased collagen α 1(I) deposition, each proximate to one another in "hot spots" of ≈40% of hearts after SARS-CoV-2 infection (HSP47+ P<0.05 versus nonfibrotics and P<0.001 versus controls). Because HSP47+ cells are consistent with myofibroblasts, subjects with hot spots are termed "profibrotic." The remaining 60% of subjects dying with COVID-19 without hot spots are referred to as "nonfibrotic." No control subject exhibited hot spots. Conclusions Colocalization of myofibroblasts, M2(CD163+) macrophages, and collagen α 1(l) may be the first evidence of a COVID-19-related "profibrotic phenotype" in human hearts in situ. The potential public health and diagnostic implications of these observations require follow-up to further define mechanisms of viral-mediated cardiac fibrosis.

COVID-19 vaccination and changes in the menstrual cycle among vaccinated persons.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics of people who experience changes to their menstrual cycle after COVID-19 vaccination. DESIGN: Longitudinal study. PATIENT(S): We recruited a volunteer sample with and without a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection who enrolled in the Arizona COVID-19 Cohort (CoVHORT) study and participated in a reproductive sub-cohort who were pre-menopausal, not pregnant, and had received a COVID-19 vaccine in 2021 (n = 545). EXPOSURE(S): Demographic and reproductive characteristics were collected via self-reports. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Information on self-reported changes in the menstrual cycle after COVID-19 vaccination was collected from May 2021 to December 2021. We looked at demographic and reproductive characteristics as predictors of menstrual cycle change. RESULT(S): The majority of our vaccinated sample received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (58%), and were 26-35 years old (51%), non-Hispanic (84%), and White (88%). Approximately 25% of vaccinated participants reported a change in their menstrual cycle after vaccination; the majority reported changes after their second dose (56%) as compared with their first (18%) and third (14%) doses. The most commonly reported changes were irregular menstruation (43%), increased premenstrual symptoms (34%), increased menstrual pain or cramps (30%), and abnormally heavy or prolonged bleeding (31%). High self-reported perceived stress levels compared with low perceived stress (OR, 2.22; 95% CI 1.12-4.37) and greater body mass index (OR, 1.04; 95% CI 1.00-1.07) were associated with greater odds of experiencing the menstrual cycle changes after the vaccination. Participants having a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection were less likely to report changes in their menstrual cycle after vaccination compared with the participants with no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR, 0.58; 95% CI 0.32-1.04). CONCLUSION(S): Among vaccinated participants, approximately 25% of them reported predominantly temporary changes in the menstrual cycle, however, we are unable to determine whether these changes are due to normal cycle variability. The COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective for everyone, including pregnant people and people trying to conceive; hence, these findings should not discourage vaccination.

Peer Review in a General Medical Research Journal Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Although peer review is an important component of publication for new research, the viability of this process has been questioned, particularly with the added stressors of the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective: To characterize rates of peer reviewer acceptance of invitations to review manuscripts, reviewer turnaround times, and editor-assessed quality of reviews before and after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic at a large, open-access general medical journal. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, pre-post cohort study examined all research manuscripts submitted to JAMA Network Open between January 1, 2019, and June 29, 2021, either directly or via transfer from other JAMA Network journals, for which at least 1 peer review of manuscript content was solicited. Measures were compared between the period before the World Health Organization declaration of a COVID-19 pandemic on March 11, 2020 (14.3 months), and the period during the pandemic (15.6 months) among all reviewed manuscripts and between pandemic-period manuscripts that did or did not address COVID-19. Main Outcomes and Measures: For each reviewed manuscript, the number of invitations sent to reviewers, proportions of reviewers accepting invitations, time in days to return reviews, and editor-assessed quality ratings of reviews were determined. Results: In total, the journal sought review for 5013 manuscripts, including 4295 Original Investigations (85.7%) and 718 Research Letters (14.3%); 1860 manuscripts were submitted during the prepandemic period and 3153 during the pandemic period. Comparing the prepandemic with the pandemic period, the mean (SD) number of reviews rated as high quality (very good or excellent) per manuscript increased slightly from 1.3 (0.7) to 1.5 (0.7) (P < .001), and the mean (SD) time for reviewers to return reviews was modestly shorter (from 15.8 [7.6] days to 14.4 [7.0] days; P < .001), a difference that persisted in linear regression models accounting for manuscript type, study design, and whether the manuscript addressed COVID-19. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the speed and editor-reported quality of peer reviews in an open-access general medical journal improved modestly during the initial year of the pandemic. Additional study will be necessary to understand how the pandemic has affected reviewer burden and fatigue.

Pre-existing conditions associated with post-acute sequelae of COVID-19.

Post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) are conditions that occur or remain at least 28 days after SARS-CoV-2 infection. While some risk factors for PASC have been identified, little is known about pre-existing conditions that render one susceptible to developing PASC. Data from participants (n = 1224) in a longitudinal COVID-19 cohort study in Arizona were used to investigate comorbid conditions associated with PASC. After adjustment of the models for age, BMI, gender, race, and smoking, the following pre-existing conditions were statistically significantly associated with the development of PASC: asthma (OR = 1.54; 95% CI = 1.10-2.15); chronic constipation (OR = 4.29; 95% CI = 1.15-16.00); reflux (OR = 1.54; 95% CI = 1.01-2.34); rheumatoid arthritis (OR = 3.69; 95%CI = 1.15-11.82); seasonal allergies (OR = 1.56; 95% CI = 1.22-1.98); and depression/anxiety (OR = 1.72; 95% CI = 1.17-2.52). When grouping conditions together, statistically significant associations with PASC were observed for respiratory (OR = 1.47; 95% CI = 1.06-2.14); gastrointestinal (OR = 1.62; 95% CI = 1.16-2.26), and autoimmune conditions (OR = 4.38; 95% CI = 1.59-12.06). After adjustment for severity of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and depression/anxiety, seasonal allergies (OR = 1.48; 95% CI 1.15-1.91) and autoimmune disease (OR = 3.78; 95% CI - 1.31-10.91) remained significantly associated with risk for PASC. These findings indicate that numerous pre-existing conditions may be associated with an increased risk for the development of PASC. Patients with these conditions should consider taking extra steps to avoid infection.

Patients' and caregivers' experiences of hospitalization under COVID-19 visitation restrictions.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, hospitals did not allow caregiver visitation. Little is known about how caregivers' absence affected patients' care. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe visitation restrictions' impact on patients and their caregivers experiences. DESIGN: We used a sequential explanatory mixed-methods study design. First, we randomly selected 200 adult patients with cancer or heart failure hospitalized before (n = 100) and during visitor restrictions (n = 100) and abstracted data from the electronic medical record on communication between medical teams and caregivers and the topics discussed. Results from the quantitative analysis guided our thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews conducted with a subsample of patients hospitalized during visitor restrictions and their caregivers to understand the impact of visitor restrictions on their experiences. RESULTS: Compared to prerestrictions, caregivers under visitation restrictions communicated less frequently with the medical team (29% vs. 37% of hospitalized days; p = .04), fewer received discharge counseling (37% vs. 52%; p = .04), and disproportionately more had no contact with the medical team (36% vs. 17%; p < .01). Video conferencing was documented for caregivers of only five patients. Qualitative analysis revealed that both caregivers and patients experienced emotional distress, increased conflict, and decreased perception of quality of care because of visitation restrictions. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital visitor restrictions significantly reduced caregivers' communication with patients' medical team, causing caregivers and patients emotional distress. Protocols that facilitate communication between caregivers and care teams may benefit caregivers who cannot be physically present at care facilities, including distance caregivers.

Understanding the Role of Misinformation in COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in a Rural State.

OBJECTIVE: to identify factors associated with COVID19 vaccine hesitancy, including sources of information among residents of Maine. METHODS: 148 study participants, recruited through community partners and primary care offices in Maine, completed an anonymous 15 item online survey. Recruitment and data collection occurred from May to September, 2021. Hesitancy was determined through a single question, "Will you get one of the COVID vaccines when it is offered to you?" RESULTS: vaccine hesitant respondents were younger than not hesitant respondents (p = 0.01). Hesitant individuals were significantly more likely to report concerns regarding the speed of COVID-19 vaccine production, vaccine efficacy, and potential vaccine side effects (p < 0.05 for each). Hesitant individuals were also significantly more likely to have discussed vaccination with their primary physician (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: overall, hesitant individuals are more likely to be younger and had less trust in information from government sources, but they sought input from primary care. They were also more concerned about efficacy, side effects, and the rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines. Primary care physicians are in key positions to address these concerns due to contact with individuals who need accurate information.

Factors associated with cancer treatment delay: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment delays are significantly associated with increased mortality risk among adult cancer patients; however, factors associated with these delays have not been robustly evaluated. This review and meta-analysis will evaluate factors associated with treatment delays among patients with five common cancers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Scientific databases including Ovid MEDLINE, Elsevier Embase, EBSCOhost CINAHL Plus Full Text, Elsevier Scopus and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global will be searched to identify relevant articles published between January 2000 and October 2021. Research articles published in the USA evaluating factors associated with treatment delay among breast, lung, prostate, cervical or colorectal adult cancer patients will be included. The primary outcome of the meta-analysis will be the pooled adjusted and unadjusted odds of treatment delay for patient, disease, provider and system-level factors defined according to specified time intervals. The secondary outcomes will be mean or median treatment delay for each cancer site according to first treatment and the influence of factors on the pooled mean treatment delay for each cancer site (via meta-regression analyses). Results from qualitative and mixed-methods studies will be narratively synthesised. Three reviewers will independently screen records generated from the search and two reviewers will independently extract data following a consensus agreement. Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed with a standard I2 test and funnel plots will be conducted to evaluate publication bias. Risk of bias will be assessed independently by two authors using validated tools according to the article's study design. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethical approval is not required because the work is being carried out on publicly accessible studies. The findings of this review will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed scientific journal, academic conferences, social media, and key stakeholders. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021293131.

Persisting gastrointestinal symptoms and post-infectious irritable bowel syndrome following SARS-CoV-2 infection: results from the Arizona CoVHORT.

In this study, we aimed to examine the association between gastrointestinal (GI) symptom presence during severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and the prevalence of GI symptoms and the development of post-infectious irritable bowel syndrome (PI-IBS). We used data from a prospective cohort and logistic regression to examine the association between GI symptom status during confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and prevalence of persistent GI symptoms at ≥45 days. We also report the incidence of PI-IBS following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of the 1475 participants in this study, 33.8% (n = 499) had GI symptoms during acute infection. Cases with acute GI symptoms had an odds of persisting GI symptoms 4 times higher than cases without acute GI symptoms (odds ratio (OR) 4.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.45-7.53); symptoms lasted on average 8 months following infection. Of those with persisting GI symptoms, 67% sought care for their symptoms and incident PI-IBS occurred in 3.0% (n = 15) of participants. Those with acute GI symptoms after SARS-CoV-2 infection are likely to have similar persistent symptoms 45 days and greater. These data indicate that attention to a potential increase in related healthcare needs is warranted.

COVID-19 Infection, the COVID-19 Pandemic, and Changes in Sleep

The objective of this study was to investigate the differences in sleep patterns among individuals with and without laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 test results and self-reported measures recalling sleep habits prior to and during the pandemic were collected from May 2020 to March 2021 among 1,848 individuals in The Arizona CoVHORT Study. We used linear and logistic regression to model the association between test status, presentation of symptoms, and time since test result with sleep duration and trouble sleeping, respectively. Mixed models were used to investigate change in sleep duration prior to the pandemic compared to during the pandemic. Overall, 16.2% of the sample were SARS-CoV-2 positive, 64.3% were SARS-CoV-2 negative, and 19.5% were untested for SARS-CoV-2. Independent of SARS-CoV-2 infection status, all participants slept longer during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic (Δ SARS-CoV-2 positive: 77.7 min, 95% CI 67.9, 87.5;Δ SARS-CoV-2 negative: 13.4 min, 95% CI 8.4, 18.3). However, SARS-CoV-2 positive participants slept 60.9 min longer (95% CI 49.1, 72.8) than SARS-CoV-2 negative participants in multivariable-adjusted models and had greater odds of trouble sleeping three or more times per week since the start of the pandemic (OR: 1.34 95% CI 1.02, 1.77) This greater odds of trouble sleeping persisted for participants who reported sleep habits > 30 days after their positive SARS-CoV-2 (OR: 2.11 95% CI 1.47, 3.03). Sleep patterns among non-hospitalized individuals with COVID-19 were altered following infection, regardless of the presentation of symptoms and time since infection.

A Rasch analysis assessing the reliability and validity of the Arizona CoVHORT COVID-19 vaccine questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread availability of COVID-19 vaccines in the United States, many that have chosen not to be vaccinated have done so because of vaccine hesitancy. This highlights the need for tools that accurately capture the knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs towards COVID-19 vaccines, and provide steps toward improving vaccine acceptance. METHODS: Participants of the Arizona CoVHORT (COVID-19 Cohort) received a one-time, electronic based cross-sectional questionnaire intended to capture underlying motivations regarding vaccination, as well as hesitations that may prevent people from getting vaccinated. Rasch analysis was conducted among 4703 CoVHORT participants who had completed the vaccine questionnaire to assess questionnaire reliability and validity. Response categories were grouped to optimize scale functioning and to ensure independent probabilities of participant endorsement. RESULTS: A total of 4703 CoVHORT participants completed the questionnaire, of whom 68% were female, and who had a mean age of 48 years. Participants were primarily White (90%), highly educated (63% with a college degree or above, with most respondents (45%) having an income of more than $75,000 per annum. The results indicated the questionnaire has good reliability and construct validity for assessing attitudes and beliefs about the COVID-19 vaccines. In-fit mean-squares for included items ranged from 0.61 to 1.72 and outfit mean-squares ranged from 0.56 to 1.75, and correlation coefficients ranged from 0.25 to 0.75. The person-item map indicated normal distribution of logit scores measuring perceptions about COVID-19 vaccinations. CONCLUSIONS: The CoVHORT vaccine questionnaire demonstrated satisfactory reliability and construct validity in assessing attitudes and beliefs about COVID-19 vaccines. Overall results provide a starting point for a reliable and valid tool to assess knowledge and perceptions about COVID-19 vaccination, ultimately providing public health professionals with an instrument to assess the factors that are associated with vaccine acceptance or hesitancy.

Elucidating symptoms of COVID-19 illness in the Arizona CoVHORT: a longitudinal cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the symptoms of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases as compared with laboratory-confirmed negative individuals and to the untested general population among all participants who reported symptoms within a large prospective cohort study. SETTING AND DESIGN: This work was conducted within the framework of the Arizona CoVHORT, a longitudinal prospective cohort study conducted among Arizona residents. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible participants were any individual living in Arizona and were recruited from across Arizona via COVID-19 case investigations, participation in testing studies and a postcard mailing effort. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was a comparison of the type and frequency of symptoms between COVID-19-positive cases, tested but negative individuals and the general untested population who reported experiencing symptoms consistent with COVID-19. RESULTS: Of the 1335 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases, 180 (13.5%) reported having no symptoms. Of those that did report symptoms, the most commonly reported were fatigue (82.2%), headache (74.6%), aches, pains or sore muscles (66.3%), loss of taste or smell (62.8) and cough (61.9%). In adjusted logistic regression models, COVID-19-positive participants were more likely than negative participants to experience loss of taste and smell (OR 12.1; 95% CI 9.6 to 15.2), bone or nerve pain (OR 3.0; 95% CI 2.2 to 4.1), headache (OR 2.6; 95% CI 2.2 to 3.2), nausea (OR 2.4; 95% CI 1.9 to 3.1) or diarrhoea (OR 2.1; 95% CI 1.7 to 2.6). Fatigue (82.9) and headache (74.9) had the highest sensitivities among symptoms, while loss of taste or smell (87.2) and bone or nerve pain (92.9) had the high specificities among significant symptoms associated with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: When comparing confirmed COVID-19 cases with either confirmed negative or untested participants, the pattern of symptoms that discriminates SARS-CoV-2 infection from those arising from other potential circulating pathogens may differ from general reports of symptoms among cases alone.

Hispanic Ethnicity and Cervical Cancer Precursors Among Low-Income Women in Arizona.

PURPOSE: In the United States, Hispanics are more likely to be diagnosed with cervical cancer compared to Non-Hispanic Whites. Annually, 250,000 to 1 million women are diagnosed with a precursor to CC. The aim of this study was to assess whether Hispanics have a higher prevalence of cervical dysplasia compared to Non-Hispanics Whites among a population of low-income women. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed the results of 10,911 cervical cytology tests administered between 2003 and 2016 that were funded through the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) program for low-income, uninsured women entitled the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP). In the state of Arizona, the program is called the Well Women HealthCheck Program (WWHP). Logistic regression was used to identify increased risk of dysplasia, including low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL/ICC), and multinomial logistic regression was used to assess increased likelihood for LSIL and HSIL/ICC as separate categories. RESULTS: In the crude analysis, Hispanic ethnicity was modestly associated with higher prevalence of LSIL (odds ratio (OR)=1.39, 95% CI=1.01-1.91), but this association was not statistically significant after adjusting for confounders. However, in the final models, lower income was independently associated with LSIL (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=1.55, 95% CI=1.30-1.44), while smoking (aOR=2.88, 95% CI=1.21-6.84) and no history of Pap test within five years (aOR=3.54, 95% CI=1.61-6.99) were independently associated with HSIL. CONCLUSION: After adjusting for confounding in a sample of low-income women with comparable Pap screening rates, ethnicity was not associated with greater prevalence of abnormal pap smears. However, other variables were independently associated with LSIL and HSIL. The higher proportion of LSIL cases among lower income individuals compared to those with higher incomes, and the higher proportion of HSIL cases observed among those screened least regularly stresses the importance of programs like WWHP: programs that target low-income, uninsured women. These programs help save lives.

Pneumocytes are distinguished by highly elevated expression of the ER stress biomarker GRP78, a co-receptor for SARS-CoV-2, in COVID-19 autopsies.

Vaccinations are widely credited with reducing death rates from COVID-19, but the underlying host-viral mechanisms/interactions for morbidity and mortality of SARS-CoV-2 infection remain poorly understood. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) describes the severe lung injury, which is pathologically associated with alveolar damage, inflammation, non-cardiogenic edema, and hyaline membrane formation. Because proteostatic pathways play central roles in cellular protection, immune modulation, protein degradation, and tissue repair, we examined the pathological features for the unfolded protein response (UPR) using the surrogate biomarker glucose-regulated protein 78 (GRP78) and co-receptor for SARS-CoV-2. At autopsy, immunostaining of COVID-19 lungs showed highly elevated expression of GRP78 in both pneumocytes and macrophages compared with that of non-COVID control lungs. GRP78 expression was detected in both SARS-CoV-2-infected and un-infected pneumocytes as determined by multiplexed immunostaining for nucleocapsid protein. In macrophages, immunohistochemical staining for GRP78 from deceased COVID-19 patients was increased but overlapped with GRP78 expression taken from surgical resections of non-COVID-19 controls. In contrast, the robust in situ GRP78 immunostaining of pneumocytes from COVID-19 autopsies exhibited no overlap and was independent of age, race/ethnicity, and gender compared with that from non-COVID-19 controls. Our findings bring new insights for stress-response pathways involving the proteostatic network implicated for host resilience and suggest that targeting of GRP78 expression with existing therapeutics might afford an alternative therapeutic strategy to modulate host-viral interactions during SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 in a non-hospitalized cohort: Results from the Arizona CoVHORT.

Clinical presentation, outcomes, and duration of COVID-19 has ranged dramatically. While some individuals recover quickly, others suffer from persistent symptoms, collectively known as long COVID, or post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC). Most PASC research has focused on hospitalized COVID-19 patients with moderate to severe disease. We used data from a diverse population-based cohort of Arizonans to estimate prevalence of PASC, defined as experiencing at least one symptom 30 days or longer, and prevalence of individual symptoms. There were 303 non-hospitalized individuals with a positive lab-confirmed COVID-19 test who were followed for a median of 61 days (range 30-250). COVID-19 positive participants were mostly female (70%), non-Hispanic white (68%), and on average 44 years old. Prevalence of PASC at 30 days post-infection was 68.7% (95% confidence interval: 63.4, 73.9). The most common symptoms were fatigue (37.5%), shortness-of-breath (37.5%), brain fog (30.8%), and stress/anxiety (30.8%). The median number of symptoms was 3 (range 1-20). Amongst 157 participants with longer follow-up (≥60 days), PASC prevalence was 77.1%.

Gender Disparities in Authorship of Invited Manuscripts During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Introduction: Women have historically been under-represented in medical literature, particularly prominent in authorship of invited commentaries. With the instantaneous change in work environment forcing Americans to adapt to working at home, many theorize that women will be more adversely affected due to traditional concepts of women being more responsible for the home in addition to work responsibilities. Objective: Understand how women contributed to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) literature early in the pandemic. Methods: Cross-sectional analysis of manuscripts published in three high-impact U.S. medical journals from February to May 2020 was performed. We used log-binomial regression to examine for an association between COVID-19 status and likelihood of having at least one female first author, and evaluated for effect modification according to whether the manuscript was invited. Results: Among 980 manuscripts, 313 (31.9%) listed at least one female first author, 203 were written on COVID-19 (20.7%), and 144 (14.7%) were invited. There was no association between COVID-19 status and having at least one female first author overall (adjusted risk ratio [RR] 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-1.19). The relationship between COVID-19 status and first-author sex was 0.23 (95% CI 0.06-0.92) for invited manuscripts and 1.04 (95% CI 0.81-1.35) for noninvited manuscripts (p for interaction 0.02). Discussion: We demonstrate that women were not less likely to be first authors on COVID-19 manuscripts but were less likely to be first authors on invited COVID-19 manuscripts. Early career female researchers are the most vulnerable for inability to meet metrics for promotion, accounting for the continued under-representation of women in senior academic roles. COVID-19 has the potential to exacerbate this disparity.

Design of the Arizona CoVHORT: A Population-Based COVID-19 Cohort.

This study is a prospective, population-based cohort of individuals with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection and those without past infection through multiple recruitment sources. The main study goal is to track health status over time, within the diverse populations of Arizona and to identify the long-term consequences of COVID-19 on health and well-being. A total of 2,881 study participants (16.2% with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection) have been enrolled as of December 22, 2020, with a target enrollment of 10,000 participants and a planned follow-up of at least 2 years. This manuscript describes a scalable study design that utilizes a wide range of recruitment sources, leveraging electronic data collection to capture and link longitudinal participant data on the current and emerging issues associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. The cohort is built within a collaborative infrastructure that includes new and established partnerships with multiple stakeholders, including the state's public universities, local health departments, tribes, and tribal organizations. Challenges remain for ensuring recruitment of diverse participants and participant retention, although the electronic data management system and timing of participant contact can help to mitigate these problems.