Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Children (Basel) ; 11(2)2024 Jan 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38397273

ABSTRACT

Declining adolescent mental health is a significant public health concern during the COVID-19 pandemic. Social distancing and stay-at-home orders have led to missed social connections with peers and adults outside households, and this has increased the risk of mental health problems in children and adolescents, particularly those with adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). Studies have shown that strong interpersonal support improves adolescent mental health. We examined the association between ACEs and poor mental health (including stress, anxiety, and depression) and how the presence of interpersonal support from caring adults and friends and school connectedness can mitigate this relationship among adolescents in Arizona. This study analyzed data from the 2021 Arizona Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS; n = 1181), a population-based survey conducted biennially across the United States. The Arizona sample included high school students in grades 9-12 who were enrolled in public and charter schools. This study revealed that nearly three of four adolescents experienced an ACE, and one of five experienced ≥4 ACEs. Compared with adolescents who experienced zero ACEs, those with ≥4 ACEs experienced less interpersonal support from caring adults, friends, and school and more frequently reported poor mental health and suicidal thoughts. However, adolescents with interpersonal support consistently reported lower rates of mental health issues, even with exposure to multiple ACEs. Post-pandemic programs to improve social relationships with adults, peers, and schools are critical, especially for adolescents with multiple adversities.

2.
BMJ Open ; 13(12): e072671, 2023 12 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38159960

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Incidents of maternal morbidity and mortality (MMM) continue to rise in the USA. Significant racial and ethnic health inequities exist, with Native American (NA) women being three to four times more likely to die than white, non-Hispanic women, and three to five times more likely to experience an incident of severe maternal morbidity. Few studies have identified individual and community-level risk factors of MMM experienced by NA women. Therefore, this systematic review will identify said risk factors of MMM experienced by NA women in the USA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review will be conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews, and the findings will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PRISMA). The search strategy will include searches from electronic databases: PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL and SCOPUS, from 1 January 2012 to 10 October 2022. The search strategy will include terms related to the search concepts: 'maternal', 'Native American' and 'MMM'. Bibliographies of selected articles, previously published reviews and high-yield journals will also be searched. All included papers will be evaluated for quality and bias using NIH Quality Assessment Tools for Observational Studies. A description of the study findings will be presented in a tabular format organised by outcome of interest along with study characteristics. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: There are no formal ethics approvals needed for this protocol. The findings of this systematic review will be shared with academic, governmental, community-based, institutes and NA (tribal) entities via a published peer-reviewed article, informational brief, poster and oral presentations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022363405.


Subject(s)
American Indian or Alaska Native , Maternal Health , Maternal Mortality , Research Design , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Risk Factors , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Morbidity
3.
BMC Public Health ; 22(1): 1854, 2022 10 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36195944

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Arizona's Health Start Program is a statewide community health worker (CHW) maternal and child health home visiting intervention. The objective of this study was to test if participation in Health Start during 2006-2016 improved early childhood vaccination completion rates. METHODS: This retrospective study used 11 years of administrative, birth certificate, and immunization records. Propensity score matching was used to identify control groups, based on demographic, socioeconomic, and geographic characteristics. Results are reported by historically disadvantaged subgroups and/or with a history of low vaccine uptake, including Hispanic/Latinx and American Indian children, and children of low socioeconomic status and from rural areas, children with teen mothers and first-born children. The average treatment-on-the-treated (ATT) effect estimated the impact of Health Start on timely completion of seven early childhood vaccine series: diphtheria/tetanus toxoids and acellular/whole-cell pertussis (DTaP/DTP), Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), hepatitis B (Hep. B), measles-mumps-rubella (MMR), pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13), poliovirus, and varicella. RESULTS: Vaccination completion rates (by age five) were 5.0% points higher for Health Start children as a group, and on average 5.0% points higher for several subgroups of mothers: women from rural border counties (ATT 5.8), Hispanic/Latinx women (ATT 4.8), American Indian women (ATT 4.8), women with less than high school education (ATT 5.0), teen mothers (ATT 6.1), and primipara women (ATT 4.5), compared to matched control groups (p-value ≤ 0.05). Time-to-event analyses show Health Start children complete vaccination sooner, with a hazard rate for full vaccination 13% higher than their matches. CONCLUSION: A state-operated home visiting intervention with CHWs as the primary interventionist can effectively promote early childhood vaccine completion, which may reduce the incidence of preventable diseases and subsequently improve children's health. Effects of CHW interventions on vaccination uptake is particularly relevant given the rise in vaccine-preventable diseases in the US and globally. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Approved by the University of Arizona Research Institutional Review Board (Protocol 1701128802), 25 January 2017.


Subject(s)
Community Health Workers , Haemophilus Vaccines , Adolescent , Child , Child, Preschool , Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis Vaccine , Female , Humans , Infant , Poliovirus Vaccine, Inactivated , Propensity Score , Retrospective Studies , Vaccination , Vaccines, Combined , Vaccines, Conjugate
4.
BMJ Open ; 3(5)2013 May 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23645916

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Confidence in healthcare may influence the patients' utilisation of healthcare resources and perceptions of healthcare quality. We sought to determine whether self-reported confidence in healthcare differed between the UK and the USA, as well as by rurality or urbanicity. DESIGN: A secondary analysis of a subset of survey questions regarding self-reported confidence in healthcare from the 2010 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey. SETTING: Telephone survey of participants from the UK and the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Our final analysis included 1511 UK residents (688 rural, 446 suburban, 372 urban, 5 uncategorised) and 2501 US residents (536 rural, 1294 suburban, 671 urban). OUTCOME MEASURES: Questions assessed respondents' confidence in the effectiveness and affordability of the treatment. We compared survey outcomes from these questions between, and within, the two regions and among, and within, residence types (rural, suburban and urban). RESULTS: Significant differences were found in self-reported confidence in healthcare between the UK and US, among residence types, and between the two regions within residence types. Reported levels were higher in the UK. Within regions, significant differences by residence type were found for the US, but not the UK. Within the US, suburban respondents had the highest self-reported confidence in healthcare. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences exist between the UK and US in confidence in healthcare. In the US, but not in the UK, self-reported confidence is related to residence type. Within countries, significant differences by residence type were found for the US, but not the UK. Our findings warrant the examination of causes for relative confidence levels in healthcare between regions and among US residence types.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...