ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: On March 13, 2020, the U.S. declared COVID-19 to be a national emergency. As communities adopted mitigation strategies, there were potential changes in the trends of injuries treated in emergency department. This study provides national estimates of injury-related emergency department visits in the U.S. before and during the pandemic. METHODS: A secondary retrospective cohort study was conducted using trained, on-site hospital coders collecting data for injury-related emergency department cases from medical records from a nationally representative sample of 66 U.S. hospital emergency departments. Injury emergency department visit estimates in the year before the pandemic (January 1, 2019-December 31, 2019) were compared with estimates of the year of pandemic declaration (January 1, 2020-December 31, 2020) for overall nonfatal injury-related emergency department visits, motor vehicle, falls-related, self-harm-, assault-related, and poisoning-related emergency department visits. RESULTS: There was an estimated 1.7 million (25%) decrease in nonfatal injury-related emergency department visits during April through June 2020 compared with those of the same timeframe in 2019. Similar decreases were observed for emergency department visits because of motor vehicleârelated injuries (199,329; 23.3%) and falls-related injuries (497,971; 25.1%). Monthly 2020 estimates remained relatively in line with 2019 estimates for self-harmâ, assault-, and poisoning-related emergency department visits. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide updates for clinical and public health practitioners on the changing profile of injury-related emergency department visits during the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding the short- and long-term impacts of the pandemic is important to preventing future injuries.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Self-Injurious Behavior , COVID-19/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , Pandemics , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Expanding access to and use of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is a key component of overdose prevention. An important barrier to the uptake of MOUD is exposure to inaccurate and potentially harmful health misinformation on social media or web-based forums where individuals commonly seek information. There is a significant need to devise computational techniques to describe the prevalence of web-based health misinformation related to MOUD to facilitate mitigation efforts. OBJECTIVE: By adopting a multidisciplinary, mixed methods strategy, this paper aims to present machine learning and natural language analysis approaches to identify the characteristics and prevalence of web-based misinformation related to MOUD to inform future prevention, treatment, and response efforts. METHODS: The team harnessed public social media posts and comments in the English language from Twitter (6,365,245 posts), YouTube (99,386 posts), Reddit (13,483,419 posts), and Drugs-Forum (5549 posts). Leveraging public health expert annotations on a sample of 2400 of these social media posts that were found to be semantically most similar to a variety of prevailing opioid use disorder-related myths based on representational learning, the team developed a supervised machine learning classifier. This classifier identified whether a post's language promoted one of the leading myths challenging addiction treatment: that the use of agonist therapy for MOUD is simply replacing one drug with another. Platform-level prevalence was calculated thereafter by machine labeling all unannotated posts with the classifier and noting the proportion of myth-indicative posts over all posts. RESULTS: Our results demonstrate promise in identifying social media postings that center on treatment myths about opioid use disorder with an accuracy of 91% and an area under the curve of 0.9, including how these discussions vary across platforms in terms of prevalence and linguistic characteristics, with the lowest prevalence on web-based health communities such as Reddit and Drugs-Forum and the highest on Twitter. Specifically, the prevalence of the stated MOUD myth ranged from 0.4% on web-based health communities to 0.9% on Twitter. CONCLUSIONS: This work provides one of the first large-scale assessments of a key MOUD-related myth across multiple social media platforms and highlights the feasibility and importance of ongoing assessment of health misinformation related to addiction treatment.