Drug overdose mortality rates by educational attainment and sex for adults aged 25-64 in the United States before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, 2015-2021.

INTRODUCTION: Dramatic increases in U.S. drug overdose deaths involving synthetic opioids, especially fentanyl, beginning around 2014 have driven a marked progression in overall drug overdose deaths in the U.S., which sharply rose to unprecedented levels amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Disparities in drug overdose deaths by educational attainment (EA) during the fentanyl era of the drug overdose epidemic and its intersection with the COVID-19 pandemic have not been widely scrutinized. METHODS: Utilizing restricted-use mortality data from the National Vital Statistics System and population estimates from the American Community Survey, we estimated annual national age-adjusted mortality rates (AAMRs) from drug overdoses jointly stratified by EA and sex for adults aged 25-64 from 2015 to 2021. State-level AAMRs in 2015 and 2021 were also estimated to examine the geographic variation in the cumulative evolution of EA-related disparities over the course of the analysis period. RESULTS: Nationally, AAMRs rose fastest among persons with at most a high school-level education, whereas little to no change was observed for bachelor's degree holders, widening pre-existing disparities. During the analysis period, the difference in national AAMRs between persons with at most a high school-level education and bachelor's degree holders increased from less than 8-fold (2015) to approximately 13-fold (2021). The national widening of EA-related disparities accelerated amid the COVID-19 pandemic, and they widened in nearly every state. Among non-bachelor's degree holders, national AAMRs increased markedly faster for males. CONCLUSIONS: The widening disparities in drug overdose deaths by EA are a likely indicator of a rapidly increasing socioeconomic divide in drug overdose mortality more broadly. Policy strategies should address upstream socioeconomic drivers of drug use and overdose, particularly among males.

Male-Female Disparities in Years of Potential Life Lost Attributable to COVID-19 in the United States: A State-by-State Analysis.

Males are at higher risk relative to females of severe outcomes following COVID-19 infection. Focusing on COVID-19-attributable mortality in the United States (U.S.), we quantify and contrast years of potential life lost (YPLL) attributable to COVID-19 by sex based on data from the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics as of 31 March 2021, specifically by contrasting male and female percentages of total YPLL with their respective percent population shares and calculating age-adjusted male-to-female YPLL rate ratios both nationally and for each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Using YPLL before age 75 to anchor comparisons between males and females and a novel Monte Carlo simulation procedure to perform estimation and uncertainty quantification, our results reveal a near-universal pattern across states of higher COVID-19-attributable YPLL among males compared to females. Furthermore, the disproportionately high COVID-19 mortality burden among males is generally more pronounced when measuring mortality in terms of YPLL compared to age-irrespective death counts, reflecting dual phenomena of males dying from COVID-19 at higher rates and at systematically younger ages relative to females. The U.S. COVID-19 epidemic also offers lessons underscoring the importance of a public health environment that recognizes sex-specific needs as well as different patterns in risk factors, health behaviors, and responses to interventions between men and women. Public health strategies incorporating focused efforts to increase COVID-19 vaccinations among men are particularly urged.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Years of Potential Life Lost Attributable to COVID-19 in the United States: An Analysis of 45 States and the District of Columbia.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic in the United States has disproportionately impacted communities of color across the country. Focusing on COVID-19-attributable mortality, we expand upon a national comparative analysis of years of potential life lost (YPLL) attributable to COVID-19 by race/ethnicity (Bassett et al., 2020), estimating percentages of total YPLL for non-Hispanic Whites, non-Hispanic Blacks, Hispanics, non-Hispanic Asians, and non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Natives, contrasting them with their respective percent population shares, as well as age-adjusted YPLL rate ratios-anchoring comparisons to non-Hispanic Whites-in each of 45 states and the District of Columbia using data from the National Center for Health Statistics as of 30 December 2020. Using a novel Monte Carlo simulation procedure to perform estimation, our results reveal substantial racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19-attributable YPLL across states, with a prevailing pattern of non-Hispanic Blacks and Hispanics experiencing disproportionately high and non-Hispanic Whites experiencing disproportionately low COVID-19-attributable YPLL. Furthermore, estimated disparities are generally more pronounced when measuring mortality in terms of YPLL compared to death counts, reflecting the greater intensity of the disparities at younger ages. We also find substantial state-to-state variability in the magnitudes of the estimated racial/ethnic disparities, suggesting that they are driven in large part by social determinants of health whose degree of association with race/ethnicity varies by state.

Do the unlabeled response categories of the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire satisfy the monotonicity assumption of simple-summated scoring?

PURPOSE: Half of the 21-item Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) response categories are labeled (0 = No, 1 = Very little, 5 = Very much) and half are not (2, 3, and 4). We hypothesized that the unlabeled response options would not be more likely to be chosen at some place along the scale continuum than other response options and, therefore, not satisfy the monotonicity assumption of simple-summated scoring. METHODS: We performed exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the MLHFQ items in a sample of 1437 adults in the Better Effectiveness After Transition-Heart Failure study. We evaluated the unlabeled response options using item characteristic curves from item response theory-graded response models for MLHFQ physical and emotional health scales. Then, we examined the impact of collapsing response options on correlations of scale scores with other variables. RESULTS: The sample was 46% female; 71% aged 65 or older; 11% Hispanic, 22% Black, 54% White, and 12% other. The unlabeled response options were rarely chosen. The standard approach to scoring and scores obtained by collapsing adjacent response categories yielded similar associations with other variables, indicating that the existing response options are problematic. CONCLUSIONS: The unlabeled MLHFQ response options do not meet the assumptions of simple-summated scoring. Further assessment of the performance of the unlabeled response options and evaluation of alternative scoring approaches is recommended. Adding labels for response options in future administrations of the MLHFQ should be considered.