Health inequities in SARS-CoV-2 infection, seroprevalence, and COVID-19 vaccination: Results from the East Bay COVID-19 study.

Comprehensive data on transmission mitigation behaviors and both SARS-CoV-2 infection and serostatus are needed from large, community-based cohorts to identify COVID-19 risk factors and the impact of public health measures. We conducted a longitudinal, population-based study in the East Bay Area of Northern California. From July 2020-March 2021, approximately 5,500 adults were recruited and followed over three data collection rounds to investigate the association between geographic and demographic characteristics and transmission mitigation behavior with SARS-CoV-2 prevalence. We estimated the populated-adjusted prevalence of antibodies from SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination, and self-reported COVID-19 test positivity. Population-adjusted SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was low, increasing from 1.03% (95% CI: 0.50-1.96) in Round 1 (July-September 2020), to 1.37% (95% CI: 0.75-2.39) in Round 2 (October-December 2020), to 2.18% (95% CI: 1.48-3.17) in Round 3 (February-March 2021). Population-adjusted seroprevalence of COVID-19 vaccination was 21.64% (95% CI: 19.20-24.34) in Round 3, with White individuals having 4.35% (95% CI: 0.35-8.32) higher COVID-19 vaccine seroprevalence than individuals identifying as African American or Black, American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian, Hispanic, two or more races, or other. No evidence for an association between transmission mitigation behavior and seroprevalence was observed. Despite >99% of participants reporting wearing masks individuals identifying as African American or Black, American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian, Hispanic, two or more races, or other, as well as those in lower-income households, and lower-educated individuals had the highest SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and lowest vaccination seroprevalence. Results demonstrate that more effective policies are needed to address these disparities and inequities.

Associations of household food insufficiency with childhood depression and anxiety: a nationwide cross-sectional study in the USA.

OBJECTIVE: Household food insufficiency (HFIS) is a major public health threat to children. Children may be particularly vulnerable to HFIS as a psychological stressor due to their rapid growth and accelerated behavioural and cognitive states, whereas data focusing on HFIS and childhood mental disorders are as-yet sparse. We aimed to examine the associations of HFIS with depression and anxiety in US children. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: The 2016-2018 National Survey of Children's Health, a nationally-representative study. PARTICIPANTS: Primary caregivers of 102 341 children in the USA. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Physician diagnosed depression and anxiety were assessed by questionnaires administered to primary caregivers of 102 341 children. Multivariable logistic regression models estimated adjusted OR (aOR) for current depression or anxiety associated with HFIS measured through a validated single-item instrument. RESULTS: Among children aged 3-17 years, 3.2% and 7.4% had parent-reported physician-diagnosed current depression and anxiety, respectively. Compared with children without HFIS, children with HFIS had approximately twofold higher weighted prevalence of anxiety or depression. After adjusting for covariates, children with versus without HFIS had a 1.53-fold (95% CI 1.15 to 2.03) and 1.48-fold (95% CI 1.20 to 1.82) increased odds of current depression and anxiety, respectively. Associations were slightly more pronounced among girls (aOR (95% CI): depression 1.69 (1.16 to 2.48); anxiety 1.78 (1.33 to 2.38)) than boys (1.42 (0.98 to 2.08); 1.32 (1.00 to 1.73); both P-for-interaction <0.01). The associations did not vary by children's age or race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: HFIS was independently associated with depression and anxiety among US children. Girls presented slightly greater vulnerability to HFIS in terms of impaired mental health. Children identified as food-insufficient may warrant mental health assessment and possible intervention. Assessment of HFIS among children with impaired mental health is also warranted. Our findings also highlight the importance of promptly addressing HFIS with referral to appropriate resources and inform its potential to alleviate childhood mental health issues.

Household mold, pesticide use, and childhood asthma: A nationwide study in the U.S.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the associations of household mold and pesticide use with risk of childhood asthma and examine the potential effect modification by child's sex at a national level in the U.S. METHODS: Nationally representative data were drawn from the cross-sectional 2017 and 2018 National Surveys of Children's Health. Household mold and pesticide exposures during the past 12 months and physician-diagnosed childhood asthma were assessed by standard questionnaires administered to primary caregivers. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for current asthma, adjusting for child, caregiver, and household covariates. We also examined potential effect modification by child's sex. Sampling weights accounted for the complex survey design. RESULTS: Among 41,423 U.S. children in 2017-2018, the weighted prevalence of current asthma was 10.8% in household mold-exposed children, compared with 7.2% in non-exposed children (P < 0.001). After adjusting for covariates including child's obesity, children with household mold exposure compared to those with no household mold exposure had a 1.41-fold (95% CI: 1.07, 1.87) higher odds of current asthma. Associations between household mold and current asthma were pronounced among boys (aOR 1.57; 95% CI: 1.03-2.38) but not girls (aOR 1.28; 0.90-1.83; P for interaction <0.001). No significant associations were observed between household pesticide use and current asthma, after adjusting for covariates. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that household mold is associated with current asthma among children, independent of other major risk factors including child's obesity status. Our findings may inform strategies targeting mitigation of household mold as an important indoor environment factor to address childhood asthma.