8 research outputs found

    Does Economic Decline Contribute to a Decline in Children’s Food Security?

    Get PDF
    Most Americans believe that children should not experience persistent worry about the quality or quantity of food consumed due to low household resources. Since 1995, the USDA has tracked children’s food security based upon household responses to the annual Current Population Survey Food Security Supplement (CPS-FSS). During this time, a small, but recently growing, share of U.S. households report multiple indicators of reduced food intake and disrupted eating patterns among children due to inadequate resources to obtain food (Coleman- Jenson et al, 2012). The USDA classifies children as food secure, low food secure, or very low food secure based upon the number of affirmative responses to eight child-specific food sufficiency questions in the CPS-FSS (Nord, 2009). Children in households that answer one or none of the child specific questions affirmatively are classified as food secure. Children in households that affirmatively answer two to four of the child specific questions are low food secure. Children in households answering five or more questions affirmatively are classified as very low food secure. Jointly, very low food secure children and low food secure children are considered food insecure children. This paper follows the USDA’s definitions in classifying children’s food security status (Figure 1)

    COVID-19 vaccine perceptions and uptake in a national prospective cohort of essential workers

    Get PDF
    INTRODUCTION: In a multi-center prospective cohort of essential workers, we assessed knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) by vaccine intention, prior SARS-CoV-2 positivity, and occupation, and their impact on vaccine uptake over time. METHODS: Initiated in July 2020, the HEROES-RECOVER cohort provided socio-demographics and COVID-19 vaccination data. Using two follow-up surveys approximately three months apart, COVID-19 vaccine KAP, intention, and receipt was collected; the first survey categorized participants as reluctant, reachable, or endorser. RESULTS: A total of 4,803 participants were included in the analysis. Most (70%) were vaccine endorsers, 16% were reachable, and 14% were reluctant. By May 2021, 77% had received at least one vaccine dose. KAP responses strongly predicted vaccine uptake, particularly positive attitudes about safety (aOR = 5.46, 95% CI: 1.4-20.8) and effectiveness (aOR = 5.0, 95% CI: 1.3-19.1). Participants' with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection were 22% less likely to believe the COVID-19 vaccine was effective compared with uninfected participants (aOR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64-0.96). This was even more pronounced in first responders compared with other occupations, with first responders 42% less likely to believe in COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (aOR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.40-0.84). Between administrations of the two surveys, 25% of reluctant, 56% reachable, and 83% of endorser groups received the COVID-19 vaccine. The reachable group had large increases in positive responses for questions about vaccine safety (10% of vaccinated, 34% of unvaccinated), and vaccine effectiveness (12% of vaccinated, 27% of unvaccinated). DISCUSSION: Our study demonstrates attitudes associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake and a positive shift in attitudes over time. First responders, despite potential high exposure to SARS-CoV-2, and participants with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection were more vaccine reluctant. CONCLUSIONS: Perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine can shift over time. Targeting messages about the vaccine's safety and effectiveness in reducing SARS-CoV-2 virus infection and illness severity may increase vaccine uptake for reluctant and reachable participants

    Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among COVID-19 vaccinated and unvaccinated healthcare personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers: Eight US locations, January-September 2021

    No full text
    We sought to evaluate the impact of changes in estimates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness on the incidence of laboratory-confirmed infection among frontline workers at high risk for SARS-CoV-2. We analyzed data from a prospective frontline worker cohort to estimate the incidence of COVID-19 by month as well as the association of COVID-19 vaccination, occupation, demographics, physical distancing, and mask use with infection risk. Participants completed baseline and quarterly surveys, and each week self-collected mid-turbinate nasal swabs and reported symptoms. Among 1018 unvaccinated and 3531 fully vaccinated workers, the monthly incidence of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in January 2021 was 13.9 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.4-17.4), declining to 0.5 (95% CI -0.4-1.4) per 1000 person-weeks in June. By September 2021, when the Delta variant predominated, incidence had once again risen to 13.6 (95% CI 7.8-19.4) per 1000 person-weeks. In contrast, there was no reportable incidence among fully vaccinated participants at the end of January 2021, and incidence remained low until September 2021 when it rose modestly to 4.1 (95% CI 1.9-3.8) per 1000. Below average facemask use was associated with a higher risk of infection for unvaccinated participants during exposure to persons who may have COVID-19 and vaccinated participants during hours in the community. COVID-19 vaccination was significantly associated with a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection despite Delta variant predominance. Our data demonstrate the added protective benefit of facemask use among both unvaccinated and vaccinated frontline workers
    corecore