Why Didn't You Text Me? Poststudy Trends From the DepoText Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the longitudinal impact of a 9-month text message intervention on participant adherence beyond the intervention to highly effective contraceptive methods among urban adolescent and young adult women enrolled in the DepoText randomized control trial (RCT). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective longitudinal cohort study of long-term follow-up data from the DepoText RCT. Sixty-seven female participants (aged 13-21 years) using depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) were recruited from an urban academic adolescent practice in Baltimore, Maryland. The principal outcome measured was a comparison of contraceptive method choice between the control and intervention groups during the 20 months postintervention. RESULTS: Intervention participants were 3.65 times more likely to continue using DMPA or a more efficacious method at the 20-month postintervention evaluation (odds ratio 3.65, 95% CI 1.26-10.08; P = .015). CONCLUSION: Participation in the DepoText trial was associated with continued use of DMPA or a more effective contraceptive method almost 20 months after the intervention exposure ended.

Adverse Childhood Experiences Among Hispanic Children in Immigrant Families Versus US-Native Families.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the prevalence of child and family characteristics associated with adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) in Hispanic children in immigrant families compared with Hispanic children in US-native families. METHODS: Data were from the nationally representative 2011-2012 National Survey of Children's Health. Parent-reported child ACE exposure was classified as no ACEs (0), low ACEs (1), or high ACEs (≥2). By using multinomial logistic regression, we evaluated the odds of low or high ACE exposure versus no ACE exposure by immigrant family status and child and family characteristics (eg, insurance status, child health status, or household-to-income ratio). RESULTS: The study sample included 12 162 Hispanic children. More children in immigrant families lived ≤200% of the federal poverty level compared with children in US-native families (80% vs 47%, respectively; P < .001). Thirty percent of children in US-native families reported high ACEs compared with only 16% of children in immigrant families (P < .001). The odds of high ACE exposure versus no ACE exposure for children in immigrant families compared with US-native children was 0.46 (95% confidence interval: 0.34-0.61). Child and family characteristics did not explain the difference in odds of ACE exposure by immigrant family status. CONCLUSIONS: Children in immigrant families had significantly lower odds of ACE exposure despite higher prevalence of poverty. This may not reflect a true health advantage in this population. There may be unmeasured factors that buffer children in immigrant families from ACE exposure, or ACE questions may not capture the adverse experiences specific to immigrant families.