Gun Violence, Policing, and Young Communities of Color

Young people of color are leading the response to recent instances of gun violence. Young people do not all experience gun violence at the same rate nor do they feel its consequences evenly. Our research on young adults between the ages of 18 and 29 years old highlights the very different experiences young people have with guns, gun violence, and policing across racial and ethnic groups

Millennial Evaluations of Donald Trump and the Future of American Politics

The GenForward Survey is the first of its kind -- a nationally representative survey of over 1,750 young adults ages 18-34 conducted bimonthly that pays special attention to how race and ethnicity influence how young adults or Millennials experience and think about the world. Given the importance of race and ethnicity for shaping the diverse perspectives and lived experiences of young people, we believe researchers make a mistake when they present data on young adults in a manner that assumes a monolithic Millennial generation and young adult vote. Millennials now represent the largest generation of Americans, and they are by far the most racially and ethnically diverse generation in the country. About 19 percent of Millennials identify as Latino or Hispanic, 13 percent as Black or African American, and 6 percent as Asian American. Thus, to fully understand how young adults think about elections and politicians, issues such as terrorism or gun violence, as well as their economic futures and race relations, we apply an intersectional lens and pay attention to characteristics such as race, ethnicity, gender and sexuality. In this report, we present GenForward survey data collected between June 23 and July 10, 2017. We provide an extensive look at how Millennials think about politics and political officials in both the Republican and Democratic parties

Education in America: The Views of Millennials

This GenForward report presents the views of young adults between the ages of 18 and 34 on education in the United States. We asked our nationally representative and diverse sample of young adults to provide their evaluations of their own school system, their thoughts about what makes a good school, their preferences regarding proposals for reforming education, their perceptions about issues of equity in schools, and their beliefs about the promise and challenges of higher education in America today. Who better to assess the strengths and weaknesses of our educational systems than those most proximate to the American educational experience? Many Millennials recently graduated from high school, while some are currently pursuing higher educational opportunities and/or navigating educational systems for their children

Powered bone marrow biopsy procedures produce larger core specimens, with less pain, in less time than with standard manual devices

Bone marrow sampling remains essential in the evaluation of hematopoietic and many non-hematopoietic disorders. One common limitation to these procedures is the discomfort experienced by patients. To address whether a Powered biopsy system could reduce discomfort while providing equivalent or better results, we performed a randomized trial in adult volunteers. Twenty-six subjects underwent bilateral biopsies with each device. Core samples were obtained in 66.7% of Manual insertions; 100% of Powered insertions (P=0.002). Initial mean biopsy core lengths were 11.1±4.5 mm for the Manual device; 17.0±6.8 mm for the Powered device (P<0.005). Pathology assessment for the Manual device showed a mean length of 6.1±5.6 mm, width of 1.0±0.7 mm, and volume of 11.0±10.8 mm3. Powered device measurements were mean length of 15.3±6.1 mm, width of 2.0±0.3 mm, and volume of 49.1±21.5 mm3 (P<0.001). The mean time to core ejection was 86 seconds for Manual device; 47 seconds for the Powered device (P<0.001). The mean second look overall pain score was 33.3 for the Manual device; 20.9 for the Powered (P=0.039). We conclude that the Powered biopsy device produces superior sized specimens, with less overall pain, in less time

Early Clinical and Subclinical Visual Evoked Potential and Humphrey's Visual Field Defects in Cryptococcal Meningitis.

Cryptococcal induced visual loss is a devastating complication in survivors of cryptococcal meningitis (CM). Early detection is paramount in prevention and treatment. Subclinical optic nerve dysfunction in CM has not hitherto been investigated by electrophysiological means. We undertook a prospective study on 90 HIV sero-positive patients with culture confirmed CM. Seventy-four patients underwent visual evoked potential (VEP) testing and 47 patients underwent Humphrey's visual field (HVF) testing. Decreased best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was detected in 46.5% of patients. VEP was abnormal in 51/74 (68.9%) right eyes and 50/74 (67.6%) left eyes. VEP P100 latency was the main abnormality with mean latency values of 118.9 (±16.5) ms and 119.8 (±15.7) ms for the right and left eyes respectively, mildly prolonged when compared to our laboratory references of 104 (±10) ms (p<0.001). Subclinical VEP abnormality was detected in 56.5% of normal eyes and constituted mostly latency abnormality. VEP amplitude was also significantly reduced in this cohort but minimally so in the visually unimpaired. HVF was abnormal in 36/47 (76.6%) right eyes and 32/45 (71.1%) left eyes. The predominant field defect was peripheral constriction with an enlarged blind spot suggesting the greater impact by raised intracranial pressure over that of optic neuritis. Whether this was due to papilloedema or a compartment syndrome is open to further investigation. Subclinical HVF abnormalities were minimal and therefore a poor screening test for early optic nerve dysfunction. However, early optic nerve dysfunction can be detected by testing of VEP P100 latency, which may precede the onset of visual loss in CM

Biomarkers of Stroke Recovery: Consensus-Based Core Recommendations from the Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable*

The most difficult clinical questions in stroke rehabilitation are "What is this patient's potential for recovery?" and "What is the best rehabilitation strategy for this person, given her/his clinical profile?" Without answers to these questions, clinicians struggle to make decisions regarding the content and focus of therapy, and researchers design studies that inadvertently mix participants who have a high likelihood of responding with those who do not. Developing and implementing biomarkers that distinguish patient subgroups will help address these issues and unravel the factors important to the recovery process. The goal of the present paper is to provide a consensus statement regarding the current state of the evidence for stroke recovery biomarkers. Biomarkers of motor, somatosensory, cognitive and language domains across the recovery timeline post-stroke are considered; with focus on brain structure and function, and exclusion of blood markers and genetics. We provide evidence for biomarkers that are considered ready to be included in clinical trials, as well as others that are promising but not ready and so represent a developmental priority. We conclude with an example that illustrates the utility of biomarkers in recovery and rehabilitation research, demonstrating how the inclusion of a biomarker may enhance future clinical trials. In this way, we propose a way forward for when and where we can include biomarkers to advance the efficacy of the practice of, and research into, rehabilitation and recovery after stroke

Access to COVID-19 testing by individuals with housing insecurity during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States: a scoping review

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic focused attention on healthcare disparities and inequities faced by individuals within marginalized and structurally disadvantaged groups in the United States. These individuals bore the heaviest burden across this pandemic as they faced increased risk of infection and difficulty in accessing testing and medical care. Individuals experiencing housing insecurity are a particularly vulnerable population given the additional barriers they face. In this scoping review, we identify some of the barriers this high-risk group experienced during the early days of the pandemic and assess novel solutions to overcome these barriers. Methods: A scoping review was performed following PRISMA-Sc guidelines looking for studies focusing on COVID-19 testing among individuals experiencing housing insecurity. Barriers as well as solutions to barriers were identified as applicable and summarized using qualitative methods, highlighting particular ways that proved effective in facilitating access to testing access and delivery. Results: Ultimately, 42 studies were included in the scoping review, with 143 barriers grouped into four categories: lack of cultural understanding, systemic racism, and stigma; medical care cost, insurance, and logistics; immigration policies, language, and fear of deportation; and other. Out of these 42 studies, 30 of these studies also suggested solutions to address them. Conclusion: A paucity of studies have analyzed COVID-19 testing barriers among those experiencing housing insecurity, and this is even more pronounced in terms of solutions to address those barriers. Expanding resources and supporting investigators within this space is necessary to ensure equitable healthcare delivery

RADx-UP Testing Core: Access to COVID-19 Diagnostics in Community-Engaged Research with Underserved Populations

Research on the COVID-19 pandemic revealed a disproportionate burden of COVID-19 infection and death among underserved populations and exposed low rates of SARS-CoV-2 testing in these communities. A landmark National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding initiative, the Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics-Underserved Populations (RADx-UP) program, was developed to address the research gap in understanding the adoption of COVID-19 testing in underserved populations. This program is the single largest investment in health disparities and community-engaged research in the history of the NIH. The RADx-UP Testing Core (TC) provides community-based investigators with essential scientific expertise and guidance on COVID-19 diagnostics. This commentary describes the first 2 years of the TC's experience, highlighting the challenges faced and insights gained to safely and effectively deploy large-scale diagnostics for community-initiated research in underserved populations during a pandemic. The success of RADx-UP shows that community-based research to increase access and uptake of testing among underserved populations can be accomplished during a pandemic with tools, resources, and multidisciplinary expertise provided by a centralized testing-specific coordinating center. We developed adaptive tools to support individual testing strategies and frameworks for these diverse studies and ensured continuous monitoring of testing strategies and use of study data. In a rapidly evolving setting of tremendous uncertainty, the TC provided essential and real-time technical expertise to support safe, effective, and adaptive testing. The lessons learned go beyond this pandemic and can serve as a framework for rapid deployment of testing in response to future crises, especially when populations are affected inequitably