The Earned Income Tax Credit and Rural Families: Differences between Participants and Non-participants

The differences between rural low-income mothers who were participants and non-participants in the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) were examined. One-third of the 224 eligible mothers in a multi-state study did not claim the tax credit. Non-participants were more likely to be Hispanic, less educated, with larger families, borrowing money from family, and living in more rural counties. Participating mothers, on the other hand, were more food secure, perceived their household income as being adequate, reported recent improvements in their economic situation, were satisfied with life, and lived in states with a state EITC. Analysis of qualitative data revealed that rural mothers had many misconceptions about the EITC. These findings contribute to family and economic professionals’ understanding of why rural low-income families do not participate in the tax credit and assist in formulating policies and education/outreach efforts that would increase their participationEITC non-participants, EITC participants, rural low-income mothers, state EITC, rural low-income families

Southern Rural Family Economic Well-Being in the Context of Public Assistance

As Congress considers reauthorization of public assistance legislation in 2002, researchers are challenged to provide data about the economic well-being of rural, low-income families. This paper provides findings from three southern states (Kentucky, Louisiana, and Maryland) currently participating in a 15-state, longitudinal study monitoring the economic well-being of rural families in the context of welfare reform of cash and food assistance. Initial findings reveal that even families using assistance to supplement their earned income fall short of self-sufficiency. These families are at-risk of living in economic crisis, or critical hardship, with inadequate earned and unearned income to meet their basic needs. Findings demonstrate that rurality and locality matter, that families vary widely in their use of assistance,and that economic self-sufficiency is unlikely in the foreseeable. The sample of 83 low-income families from five rural counties in three southern states demonstrates the variability both within and across rural counties and a range of needs and resources. These findings support the need for customizing the implementation of public assistance legislation designed to increase economic self-sufficiency and the well-being of southern rural families

Rural Low-income Families Speak: Living in Rural Louisiana (Research Information Sheet # 109)

After the passage of federal welfare reform legislation in 1996, faculty from land-grant universities organized to conduct a study of the legislation’s impact on rural families. The project began in 1998 and runs through 2008. The intent was to provide policymakers and program directors with up-to-date information about the ability of rural, low-income families to be economically self sufficient. The objectives of this project are included in this publication.https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/agcenter_researchinfosheets/1000/thumbnail.jp

Credit Card Usage of College Students: Evidence from Louisiana State University (Research Information Sheet #107)

In recent years, there has been a dramatic growth in credit card usage among college students. How are Louisiana State University undergraduates using credit cards? Are LSU students managing credit card debt wisely? What can LSU do to offer the appropriate kinds of help to enable students to be financially literate? These are the issues addressed in this publication.https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/agcenter_researchinfosheets/1007/thumbnail.jp

Mindfulness based interventions in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review

<b>Background</b> Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a stressful condition; depression, anxiety, pain and fatigue are all common problems. Mindfulness based interventions (MBIs) mitigate stress and prevent relapse in depression and are increasingly being used in healthcare. However, there are currently no systematic reviews of MBIs in people with MS. This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of MBIs in people with MS.<p></p> <b>Methods</b> Systematic searches were carried out in seven major databases, using both subject headings and key words. Papers were screened, data extracted, quality appraised, and analysed by two reviewers independently, using predefined criteria. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. Perceived stress was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes include mental health, physical health, quality of life, and health service utilisation. Statistical meta-analysis was not possible. Disagreements were adjudicated by a third party reviewer.<p></p> <b>Results</b> Three studies (n = 183 participants) were included in the final analysis. The studies were undertaken in Wales (n = 16, randomised controlled trial - (RCT)), Switzerland (n = 150, RCT), and the United States (n = 17, controlled trial). 146 (80%) participants were female; mean age (SD) was 48.6 (9.4) years. Relapsing remitting MS was the main diagnostic category (n = 123, 67%); 43 (26%) had secondary progressive disease; and the remainder were unspecified. MBIs lasted 6–8 weeks; attrition rates were variable (5-43%); all employed pre- post- measures; two had longer follow up; one at 3, and one at 6 months. Socio-economic status of participants was not made explicit; health service utilisation and costs were not reported. No study reported on perceived stress. All studies reported quality of life (QOL), mental health (anxiety and depression), physical (fatigue, standing balance, pain), and psychosocial measures. Statistically significant beneficial effects relating to QOL, mental health, and selected physical health measures were sustained at 3- and 6- month follow up.<p></p> <b>Conclusion</b> From the limited data available, MBIs may benefit some MS patients in terms of QOL, mental health, and some physical health measures. Further studies are needed to clarify how MBIs might best serve the MS population.<p></p&gt

Costs of facility-based HIV testing in Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

BACKGROUND: Providing HIV testing at health facilities remains the most common approach to ensuring access to HIV treatment and prevention services for the millions of undiagnosed HIV-infected individuals in sub-Saharan Africa. We sought to explore the costs of providing these services across three southern African countries with high HIV burden. METHODS: Primary costing studies were undertaken in 54 health facilities providing HIV testing services (HTS) in Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Routinely collected monitoring and evaluation data for the health facilities were extracted to estimate the costs per individual tested and costs per HIV-positive individual identified. Costs are presented in 2016 US dollars. Sensitivity analysis explored key drivers of costs. RESULTS: Health facilities were testing on average 2290 individuals annually, albeit with wide variations. The mean cost per individual tested was US$5.03.9 in Malawi, US$4.24 in Zambia and US$8.79 in Zimbabwe. The mean cost per HIV-positive individual identified was US$79.58, US$73.63 and US$178.92 in Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe respectively. Both cost estimates were sensitive to scale of testing, facility staffing levels and the costs of HIV test kits. CONCLUSIONS: Health facility based HIV testing remains an essential service to meet HIV universal access goals. The low costs and potential for economies of scale suggests an opportunity for further scale-up. However low uptake in many settings suggests that demand creation or alternative testing models may be needed to achieve economies of scale and reach populations less willing to attend facility based services

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Modulates the Immune Microenvironment in Metastases of Tubo-Ovarian High-Grade Serous Carcinoma

This research was funded by Swiss Cancer League (BIL KLS-2883-02-2012), the European Research Council (ERC322566), Cancer Research UK (A16354), and Barts and The London Charity (467/1307)

Maternal hookworm modifies risk factors for childhood eczema: results from a birth cohort in Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Worms may protect against allergy. Early-life worm exposure may be critical, but this has not been fully investigated. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether worms in pregnancy and in early childhood are associated with childhood eczema incidence. METHODS: The Entebbe Mother and Baby Study, an anthelminthic treatment trial, enrolled pregnant women between 2003 and 2005 in Uganda. Mothers were investigated for worms during pregnancy and children annually. Eczema was doctor-diagnosed from birth to age five years. A planned observational analysis was conducted within the trial cohort to investigate associations between worms and eczema. RESULTS: Data for 2345 live-born children were analysed. Hookworm was the most prevalent maternal worm (45%). Childhood worms were less prevalent. Eczema incidence was 4.68/100 person-years. Maternal hookworm was associated with reduced eczema incidence [adjusted hazard ratio (95% confidence interval), p-value: 0.71(0.51-0.99), 0.04] and modified effects of known risk factors for eczema: Dermatophagoides-specific IgE in children was positively associated with eczema incidence if the mother had no hookworm [2.72(1.11-6.63), 0.03], but not if the mother had hookworm [0.41(0.10-1.69), 0.22], interaction p-value = 0.03. Similar interactions were seen for maternal history of eczema {[2.87(1.31-6.27, 0.008) vs. [0.73(0.23-2.30), 0.60], interaction p-value = 0.05}, female gender {[1.82(1.22-2.73), 0.004 vs. [0.96(0.60-1.53), 0.87], interaction p-value = 0.04} and allergen-specific IgE. Childhood Trichuris trichiura and hookworm were inversely associated with eczema. CONCLUSIONS: Maternal hookworm modifies effects of known risk factors for eczema. Mechanisms by which early-life worm exposures influence allergy need investigation. Worms or worm products, and intervention during pregnancy have potential for primary prevention of allergy

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a ‘stepping into day treatment’ approach versus inpatient treatment as usual for anorexia nervosa in adult specialist eating disorder services (DAISIES trial): a study protocol of a randomised controlled multi-centre open-label parallel group non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND: Anorexia nervosa (AN) is a serious and disabling mental disorder with a high disease burden. In a proportion of cases, intensive hospital-based treatments, i.e. inpatient or day patient treatment, are required, with day patient treatment often being used as a 'step-down' treatment after a period of inpatient treatment. Demand for such treatment approaches has seen a sharp rise. Despite this, the relative merits of these approaches for patients, their families, and the NHS and wider society are relatively unknown. This paper describes the rationale for, and protocol of, a two-arm multi-centre open-label parallel group non-inferiority randomised controlled trial, evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these two intensive treatments for adults with severe AN: inpatient treatment as usual and a stepped care day patient approach (the combination of day patient treatment with the option of initial inpatient treatment for medical stabilisation). The main aim of this trial is to establish whether, in adults with severe AN, a stepped care day patient approach is non-inferior to inpatient treatment as usual in relation to improving body mass index (BMI) at 12 months post-randomisation. METHODS: 386 patients with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual 5th edition diagnosis of severe AN or related disorder, with a BMI of ≤16 kg/m2 and in need of intensive treatment will be randomly allocated to either inpatient treatment as usual or a stepped care day patient approach. Patients in both groups will receive treatment until they reach a healthy weight or get as close to this point as possible. Assessments will be conducted at baseline (prior to randomisation), and at 6 and 12 months post-randomisation, with additional monthly symptom monitoring. The primary outcome will be BMI at the 12-month post-randomisation assessment. Other outcomes will include psychosocial adjustment; treatment motivation, expectations and experiences; cost-effectiveness; and carer burden. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will provide a rigorous evaluation of two intensive treatment approaches which will inform future national and international treatment guidelines and service provision