Domains of Excellence: A CDC Framework for Developing High-Quality, Impact-Driven Public Health Science Publications.

CONTEXT: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has a long history of using high-quality science to drive public health action that has improved the health, safety, and well-being of people in the United States and globally. To ensure scientific quality, manuscripts authored by CDC staff are required to undergo an internal review and approval process known as clearance. During 2022, CDC launched a scientific clearance transformation initiative to improve the efficiency of the clearance process while ensuring scientific quality. PROGRAM: As part of the scientific clearance transformation initiative, a group of senior scientists across CDC developed a framework called the Domains of Excellence for High-Quality Publications (DOE framework). The framework includes 7 areas ("domains") that authors can consider for developing high-quality and impactful scientific manuscripts: Clarity, Scientific Rigor, Public Health Relevance, Policy Content, Ethical Standards, Collaboration, and Health Equity. Each domain includes multiple quality elements, highlighting specific key considerations within. IMPLEMENTATION: CDC scientists are expected to use the DOE framework when conceptualizing, developing, revising, and reviewing scientific products to support collaboration and to ensure the quality and impact of their scientific manuscripts. DISCUSSION: The DOE framework sets expectations for a consistent standard for scientific manuscripts across CDC and promotes collaboration among authors, partners, and other subject matter experts. Many aspects have broad applicability to the public health field at large and might be relevant for others developing high-quality manuscripts in public health science. The framework can serve as a useful reference document for CDC authors and others in the public health community as they prepare scientific manuscripts for publication and dissemination.

COVID-19 Trends Among Persons Aged 0-24 Years - United States, March 1-December 12, 2020.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case and electronic laboratory data reported to CDC were analyzed to describe demographic characteristics, underlying health conditions, and clinical outcomes, as well as trends in laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 incidence and testing volume among U.S. children, adolescents, and young adults (persons aged 0-24 years). This analysis provides a critical update and expansion of previously published data, to include trends after fall school reopenings, and adds preschool-aged children (0-4 years) and college-aged young adults (18-24 years) (1). Among children, adolescents, and young adults, weekly incidence (cases per 100,000 persons) increased with age and was highest during the final week of the review period (the week of December 6) among all age groups. Time trends in weekly reported incidence for children and adolescents aged 0-17 years tracked consistently with trends observed among adults since June, with both incidence and positive test results tending to increase since September after summer declines. Reported incidence and positive test results among children aged 0-10 years were consistently lower than those in older age groups. To reduce community transmission, which will support schools in operating more safely for in-person learning, communities and schools should fully implement and strictly adhere to recommended mitigation strategies, especially universal and proper masking, to reduce COVID-19 incidence.

Treatment satisfaction and quality of life with insulin glargine plus insulin lispro compared with NPH insulin plus unmodified human insulin in individuals with type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare quality of life (QoL) and treatment satisfaction using insulin glargine plus insulin lispro with that using NPH insulin plus unmodified human insulin in adults with type 1 diabetes managed with multiple injection regimens. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: As part of a 32-week, five-center, two-way crossover study in 56 individuals with type 1 diabetes randomized to evening insulin glargine plus mealtime insulin lispro or to NPH insulin (once or twice daily) plus mealtime unmodified human insulin, the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) and the Audit of Diabetes Dependent Quality of Life questionnaire were completed at baseline and at weeks 16 and 32, with additional interim DTSQ measurements. RESULTS: For all patients combined, the mean baseline present QoL score was 1.3, reflecting "good" QoL. Present QoL improved with glargine + lispro but did not change with NPH + human insulin (1.6 +/- 0.1 [mean +/- SEM] vs. 1.3 +/- 0.1, difference 0.3 [95% CI 0.1-0.6]; P = 0.014). Baseline mean average weighted impact score (AWI) of diabetes on QoL was -1.8, indicating a negative impact of diabetes on QoL. The AWI score at end point improved significantly with glargine + lispro but changed little with NPH + human insulin (-1.4 +/- 0.1 vs. -1.7 +/- 0.1, 0.3 [0.0-0.6]; P = 0.033). Treatment satisfaction (DTSQ 36-0 scale score) at end point was markedly greater with glargine plus lispro compared with that for NPH plus human insulin (32.2 +/- 3.4 vs. 23.9 +/- 7.2, 8.6 [6.5-10.6]; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Insulin glargine plus insulin lispro improves treatment satisfaction, reduces the negative impact of diabetes on QoL, and improves QoL in comparison with NPH insulin plus unmodified human insulin in type 1 diabetes.

Characterization of hard metal dusts from sintering and detonation coating processes and comparative hydroxyl radical production.

Dust samples from sintering and detonation coating hard-metal processes were characterized, compared, and contrasted for morphology, composition, and generation of hydroxyl radicals. Inhalation of respirable hard-metal (sintered carbide) dusts from hard-metal processes is known to cause fibrotic and asthmatic lung disease. Scanning electron microscopy/energy-dispersive X-ray analysis was used for morphology, composition, and elemental distribution. An electron spin resonance (ESR) spin trapping technique was used to detect hydroxyl radical generation. Samples were incubated with air-saturated buffer solutions containing a spin trap and analyzed by ESR for the presence of *OH in solution. Postdetonation coating samples often had surface contamination of Co on the WC particles, as shown by elemental mapping of individual particles; this was not evident in predetonation samples or unsintered materials in this study. ESR measurements show that both detonation-gun materials were capable of generating *OH , while the WC, cobalt, and presintered mixture did not produce detectable amounts of *OH radicals. The DMPO/*OH adduct formation was apparently facilitated by Fe-mediated reactions for predetonation dusts, and by Fe-mediated site-specific reactions for postdetonation dusts. The overspray materials from the detonation-gun process produced 9-fold more *OH radicals than the predetonation coating mixture. Overall, this study indicates there are substantial differences between postdetonation materials and both predetonation and unsintered hard-metal process materials with respect to morphology, elemental distribution, and *OH radical generation reactions and that these differences may be important in the toxic potential of those materials.