Standing Firm: Maine’s Delegation to Congress during The Secession Crisis of 1860-1861

In the years leading up to the Civil War, many Americans in both the North and the South considered it inevitable that a war between the sections would occur. Historians have debated this idea ever since. Could the war have been avoided? Was a compromise between the sections of the country possible? In this article, the author examines the role played by Maine’s congressional delegation in resisting compromise during the Great Secession Winter of 1860-1861. The author is a graduate of the University of Maine, with master’s degrees in education (1979) and Arts (History-1991). He served as the lead consulting curator during the planning and development of the National Civil War Museum in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. He is the author of several books and articles about the Civil War, including the forthcoming Mantled in Smoke and Fire: Maine Regiments at Gettysburg (Spring 2014). He is currently the executive director of the Birmingham History Center in Birmingham, Alabama

The Attempt to Repeal Maine’s Personal Liberty Laws

Many issues divided the nation before the Civil War. One in particular involved the passage of Personal Liberty laws in the northern states, which circumscribed the conduct of officials handling fugitive slaves. While Maine was not a prominent destination for runaway slaves, its Personal Liberty laws, redrafted in 1857 by the state\u27s new Republican majority, were particularly forceful and therefore particularly odious to Southern planters. As the secession crisis loomed, Maine reconsidered the constitutionality of the laws and their political expediency: Would the state bend to the needs of national reconciliation? Mr. Desmond, born in Island Falls, Maine, received M.A. degrees in education (1979) and History (1991) from the University of Maine and taught for twelve years in Maine public schools. He has published several articles (New England Quarterly, Tennessee Historical Quarterly, Chattanooga Regional Historical Journal), and a book: Images Of America: Chattanooga. A resident of Lookout Mountain, Georgia he is currently employed as Curator of Collections for the Chattanooga Regional History Museum

Cardiovascular Dysfunction Criteria in Critically Ill Children: The PODIUM Consensus Conference

CONTEXT Cardiovascular dysfunction is associated with poor outcomes in critically ill children. OBJECTIVE We aim to derive an evidence-informed, consensus-based definition of cardiovascular dysfunction in critically ill children. DATA SOURCES Electronic searches of PubMed and Embase were conducted from January 1992 to January 2020 using medical subject heading terms and text words to define concepts of cardiovascular dysfunction, pediatric critical illness, and outcomes of interest. STUDY SELECTION Studies were included if they evaluated critically ill children with cardiovascular dysfunction and assessment and/or scoring tools to screen for cardiovascular dysfunction and assessed mortality, functional status, organ-specific, or other patient-centered outcomes. Studies of adults, premature infants (≤36 weeks gestational age), animals, reviews and/or commentaries, case series (sample size ≤10), and non-English-language studies were excluded. Studies of children with cyanotic congenital heart disease or cardiovascular dysfunction after cardiopulmonary bypass were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION Data were abstracted from each eligible study into a standard data extraction form, along with risk-of-bias assessment by a task force member. RESULTS Cardiovascular dysfunction was defined by 9 elements, including 4 which indicate severe cardiovascular dysfunction. Cardiopulmonary arrest (>5 minutes) or mechanical circulatory support independently define severe cardiovascular dysfunction, whereas tachycardia, hypotension, vasoactive-inotropic score, lactate, troponin I, central venous oxygen saturation, and echocardiographic estimation of left ventricular ejection fraction were included in any combination. There was expert agreement (>80%) on the definition. LIMITATIONS All included studies were observational and many were retrospective. CONCLUSIONS The Pediatric Organ Dysfunction Information Update Mandate panel propose this evidence-informed definition of cardiovascular dysfunction

Global, regional, and national cancer incidence, mortality, years of life lost, years lived with disability, and disability-Adjusted life-years for 29 cancer groups, 1990 to 2017 : A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study

Importance: Cancer and other noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are now widely recognized as a threat to global development. The latest United Nations high-level meeting on NCDs reaffirmed this observation and also highlighted the slow progress in meeting the 2011 Political Declaration on the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases and the third Sustainable Development Goal. Lack of situational analyses, priority setting, and budgeting have been identified as major obstacles in achieving these goals. All of these have in common that they require information on the local cancer epidemiology. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study is uniquely poised to provide these crucial data. Objective: To describe cancer burden for 29 cancer groups in 195 countries from 1990 through 2017 to provide data needed for cancer control planning. Evidence Review: We used the GBD study estimation methods to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-Adjusted life-years (DALYs). Results are presented at the national level as well as by Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a composite indicator of income, educational attainment, and total fertility rate. We also analyzed the influence of the epidemiological vs the demographic transition on cancer incidence. Findings: In 2017, there were 24.5 million incident cancer cases worldwide (16.8 million without nonmelanoma skin cancer [NMSC]) and 9.6 million cancer deaths. The majority of cancer DALYs came from years of life lost (97%), and only 3% came from years lived with disability. The odds of developing cancer were the lowest in the low SDI quintile (1 in 7) and the highest in the high SDI quintile (1 in 2) for both sexes. In 2017, the most common incident cancers in men were NMSC (4.3 million incident cases); tracheal, bronchus, and lung (TBL) cancer (1.5 million incident cases); and prostate cancer (1.3 million incident cases). The most common causes of cancer deaths and DALYs for men were TBL cancer (1.3 million deaths and 28.4 million DALYs), liver cancer (572000 deaths and 15.2 million DALYs), and stomach cancer (542000 deaths and 12.2 million DALYs). For women in 2017, the most common incident cancers were NMSC (3.3 million incident cases), breast cancer (1.9 million incident cases), and colorectal cancer (819000 incident cases). The leading causes of cancer deaths and DALYs for women were breast cancer (601000 deaths and 17.4 million DALYs), TBL cancer (596000 deaths and 12.6 million DALYs), and colorectal cancer (414000 deaths and 8.3 million DALYs). Conclusions and Relevance: The national epidemiological profiles of cancer burden in the GBD study show large heterogeneities, which are a reflection of different exposures to risk factors, economic settings, lifestyles, and access to care and screening. The GBD study can be used by policy makers and other stakeholders to develop and improve national and local cancer control in order to achieve the global targets and improve equity in cancer care. © 2019 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.Peer reviewe

Global burden of 288 causes of death and life expectancy decomposition in 204 countries and territories and 811 subnational locations, 1990–2021: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021

BACKGROUND Regular, detailed reporting on population health by underlying cause of death is fundamental for public health decision making. Cause-specific estimates of mortality and the subsequent effects on life expectancy worldwide are valuable metrics to gauge progress in reducing mortality rates. These estimates are particularly important following large-scale mortality spikes, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. When systematically analysed, mortality rates and life expectancy allow comparisons of the consequences of causes of death globally and over time, providing a nuanced understanding of the effect of these causes on global populations. METHODS The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2021 cause-of-death analysis estimated mortality and years of life lost (YLLs) from 288 causes of death by age-sex-location-year in 204 countries and territories and 811 subnational locations for each year from 1990 until 2021. The analysis used 56 604 data sources, including data from vital registration and verbal autopsy as well as surveys, censuses, surveillance systems, and cancer registries, among others. As with previous GBD rounds, cause-specific death rates for most causes were estimated using the Cause of Death Ensemble model-a modelling tool developed for GBD to assess the out-of-sample predictive validity of different statistical models and covariate permutations and combine those results to produce cause-specific mortality estimates-with alternative strategies adapted to model causes with insufficient data, substantial changes in reporting over the study period, or unusual epidemiology. YLLs were computed as the product of the number of deaths for each cause-age-sex-location-year and the standard life expectancy at each age. As part of the modelling process, uncertainty intervals (UIs) were generated using the 2·5th and 97·5th percentiles from a 1000-draw distribution for each metric. We decomposed life expectancy by cause of death, location, and year to show cause-specific effects on life expectancy from 1990 to 2021. We also used the coefficient of variation and the fraction of population affected by 90% of deaths to highlight concentrations of mortality. Findings are reported in counts and age-standardised rates. Methodological improvements for cause-of-death estimates in GBD 2021 include the expansion of under-5-years age group to include four new age groups, enhanced methods to account for stochastic variation of sparse data, and the inclusion of COVID-19 and other pandemic-related mortality-which includes excess mortality associated with the pandemic, excluding COVID-19, lower respiratory infections, measles, malaria, and pertussis. For this analysis, 199 new country-years of vital registration cause-of-death data, 5 country-years of surveillance data, 21 country-years of verbal autopsy data, and 94 country-years of other data types were added to those used in previous GBD rounds. FINDINGS The leading causes of age-standardised deaths globally were the same in 2019 as they were in 1990; in descending order, these were, ischaemic heart disease, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and lower respiratory infections. In 2021, however, COVID-19 replaced stroke as the second-leading age-standardised cause of death, with 94·0 deaths (95% UI 89·2-100·0) per 100 000 population. The COVID-19 pandemic shifted the rankings of the leading five causes, lowering stroke to the third-leading and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to the fourth-leading position. In 2021, the highest age-standardised death rates from COVID-19 occurred in sub-Saharan Africa (271·0 deaths [250·1-290·7] per 100 000 population) and Latin America and the Caribbean (195·4 deaths [182·1-211·4] per 100 000 population). The lowest age-standardised death rates from COVID-19 were in the high-income super-region (48·1 deaths [47·4-48·8] per 100 000 population) and southeast Asia, east Asia, and Oceania (23·2 deaths [16·3-37·2] per 100 000 population). Globally, life expectancy steadily improved between 1990 and 2019 for 18 of the 22 investigated causes. Decomposition of global and regional life expectancy showed the positive effect that reductions in deaths from enteric infections, lower respiratory infections, stroke, and neonatal deaths, among others have contributed to improved survival over the study period. However, a net reduction of 1·6 years occurred in global life expectancy between 2019 and 2021, primarily due to increased death rates from COVID-19 and other pandemic-related mortality. Life expectancy was highly variable between super-regions over the study period, with southeast Asia, east Asia, and Oceania gaining 8·3 years (6·7-9·9) overall, while having the smallest reduction in life expectancy due to COVID-19 (0·4 years). The largest reduction in life expectancy due to COVID-19 occurred in Latin America and the Caribbean (3·6 years). Additionally, 53 of the 288 causes of death were highly concentrated in locations with less than 50% of the global population as of 2021, and these causes of death became progressively more concentrated since 1990, when only 44 causes showed this pattern. The concentration phenomenon is discussed heuristically with respect to enteric and lower respiratory infections, malaria, HIV/AIDS, neonatal disorders, tuberculosis, and measles. INTERPRETATION Long-standing gains in life expectancy and reductions in many of the leading causes of death have been disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, the adverse effects of which were spread unevenly among populations. Despite the pandemic, there has been continued progress in combatting several notable causes of death, leading to improved global life expectancy over the study period. Each of the seven GBD super-regions showed an overall improvement from 1990 and 2021, obscuring the negative effect in the years of the pandemic. Additionally, our findings regarding regional variation in causes of death driving increases in life expectancy hold clear policy utility. Analyses of shifting mortality trends reveal that several causes, once widespread globally, are now increasingly concentrated geographically. These changes in mortality concentration, alongside further investigation of changing risks, interventions, and relevant policy, present an important opportunity to deepen our understanding of mortality-reduction strategies. Examining patterns in mortality concentration might reveal areas where successful public health interventions have been implemented. Translating these successes to locations where certain causes of death remain entrenched can inform policies that work to improve life expectancy for people everywhere. FUNDING Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

Prevalence of chronic kidney disease in US adults with undiagnosed diabetes or prediabetes

Background and objectives: Prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in people with diagnosed diabetes is known to be high, but little is known about the prevalence of CKD in those with undiagnosed diabetes or prediabetes. We aimed to estimate and compare the community prevalence of CKD among people with diagnosed diabetes, undiagnosed diabetes, prediabetes, or no diabetes. Design, setting, participants, & measurements: The 1999 through 2006 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey is a representative survey of the civilian, noninstitutionalized US population. Participants who were aged ≥20 years; responded to the diabetes questionnaire; and had fasting plasma glucose (FPG), serum creatinine, and urinary albumin- creatinine ratio measurements were included (N=8188). Diabetes status was defined as follows: Diagnosed diabetes, self-reported provider diagnosis (n=826); undiagnosed diabetes, FPG ≥126 mg/dl without self-reported diagnosis (n=299); prediabetes, FPG ≥100 and \u3c126 mg/dl (n=2272); and no diabetes, FPG\u3c 100 mg/dl (n=4791). Prevalence of CKD was defined by estimated GFR 15 to 59 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 or albumin-creatinine ratio ≥30 mg/g; adjustment was performed with multivariable logistic regression. Results: Fully 39.6% of people with diagnosed and 41.7% with undiagnosed diabetes had CKD; 17.7% with prediabetes and 10.6% without diabetes had CKD. Age-, gender-, and race/ethnicity-adjusted prevalence of CKD was 32.9, 24.2, 17.1, and 11.8%, for diagnosed, undiagnosed, pre-, and no diabetes, respectively. Among those with CKD, 39.1% had undiagnosed or prediabetes. Conclusions: CKD prevalence is high among people with undiagnosed diabetes and prediabetes. These individuals might benefit from interventions aimed at preventing development and/or progression of both CKD and diabetes. Copyright © 2010 by the

Potential Impact of Prescribing Metformin According to eGFR Rather Than Serum Creatinine

OBJECTIVE: Many societies recommend using estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) rather than serum creatinine (sCr) to determine metformin eligibility. We examined the potential impact of these recommendations on metformin eligibility among U.S. adults. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Metformin eligibility was assessed among 3,902 adults with diabetes who participated in the 1999-2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys and reported routine access to health care, using conventional sCr thresholds (eligible if RESULTS: Among adults with sCr above conventional cutoffs, MDRD eGFR ≥45 mL/min/1.73 m(2) was most common among men (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 33.3 [95% CI 7.4-151.5] vs. women) and non-Hispanic Blacks (aOR vs. whites 14.8 [4.27-51.7]). No individuals with sCr below conventional cutoffs had an MDRD eGFR/min/1.73 m(2). All estimating equations expanded the population of individuals for whom metformin is likely safe, ranging from 86,900 (CKD-EPIcr) to 834,800 (CG). All equations identified larger populations with eGFR 30-44 mL/min/1.73 m(2), for whom metformin safety is indeterminate, ranging from 784,700 (CKD-EPIcr) to 1,636,000 (CG). CONCLUSIONS: The use of eGFR or CrCl to determine metformin eligibility instead of sCr can expand the adult population with diabetes for whom metformin is likely safe, particularly among non-Hispanic blacks and men

Nephrology care prior to end-stage renal disease and outcomes among new ESRD patients in the USA.

BackgroundLonger nephrology care before end-stage renal disease (ESRD) has been linked with better outcomes.MethodsWe investigated whether longer pre-end-stage renal disease (ESRD) nephrology care was associated with lower mortality at both the patient and state levels among 443 761 incident ESRD patients identified in the USA between 2006 and 2010.ResultsOverall, 33% of new ESRD patients had received no prior nephrology care, while 28% had received care for >12 months. At the patient level, predictors of >12 months of nephrology care included having health insurance, white race, younger age, diabetes, hypertension and US region. Longer pre-ESRD nephrology care was associated with lower first-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.58 for >12 months versus no care; 95% confidence interval 0.57-0.59), higher albumin and hemoglobin, choice of peritoneal dialysis and native fistula and discussion of transplantation options. Living in a state with a 10% higher proportion of patients receiving >12 months of pre-ESRD care was associated with a 9.3% lower relative mortality rate, standardized for case mix (R (2) = 0.47; P < 0.001).ConclusionsThis study represents the largest cohort of incident ESRD patients to date. Although we did not follow patients before ESRD onset, our findings, both at the individual patient and state levels, reflect the importance of early nephrology care among those with chronic kidney disease

Nephrology care prior to end-stage renal disease and outcomes among new ESRD patients in the USA

BACKGROUND: Longer nephrology care before end-stage renal disease (ESRD) has been linked with better outcomes. METHODS: We investigated whether longer pre-end-stage renal disease (ESRD) nephrology care was associated with lower mortality at both the patient and state levels among 443 761 incident ESRD patients identified in the USA between 2006 and 2010. RESULTS: Overall, 33% of new ESRD patients had received no prior nephrology care, while 28% had received care for >12 months. At the patient level, predictors of >12 months of nephrology care included having health insurance, white race, younger age, diabetes, hypertension and US region. Longer pre-ESRD nephrology care was associated with lower first-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.58 for >12 months versus no care; 95% confidence interval 0.57–0.59), higher albumin and hemoglobin, choice of peritoneal dialysis and native fistula and discussion of transplantation options. Living in a state with a 10% higher proportion of patients receiving >12 months of pre-ESRD care was associated with a 9.3% lower relative mortality rate, standardized for case mix (R(2) = 0.47; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the largest cohort of incident ESRD patients to date. Although we did not follow patients before ESRD onset, our findings, both at the individual patient and state levels, reflect the importance of early nephrology care among those with chronic kidney disease