IMPORTANCE Black and Hispanic populations have higher rates of coronavirus disease 2019 hospitalization and mortality than White populations but lower in-hospital case-fatality rates. The extent to which neighborhood characteristics and comorbidity explain these disparities is unclear. Outcomes in Asian American populations have not been explored. OBJECTIVETo compare COVID-19 outcomes based on race and ethnicity and assess the association of any disparities with comorbidity and neighborhood characteristics. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis retrospective cohort study was conducted within the New York University Langone Health system, which includes over 260 outpatient practices and 4 acute care hospitals. All patients within the system's integrated health record who were tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 between March 1, 2020, and April 8, 2020, were identified and followed up through May 13, 2020. Data were analyzed in June 2020. Among 11 547 patients tested, outcomes were compared by race and ethnicity and examined against differences by age, sex, body mass index, comorbidity, insurance type, and neighborhood socioeconomic status.EXPOSURES Race and ethnicity categorized using self-reported electronic health record data (ie, non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, Asian, and multiracial/other patients). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe likelihood of receiving a positive test, hospitalization, and critical illness (defined as a composite of care in the intensive care unit, use of mechanical ventilation, discharge to hospice, or death). RESULTSAmong 9722 patients (mean [SD] age, 50.7 [17.5] years; 58.8% women), 4843 (49.8%) were positive for COVID-19; 2623 (54.2%) of those were admitted for hospitalization (1047 [39.9%] White, 375 [14.3%] Black, 715 [27.3%] Hispanic, 180 [6.9%] Asian, 207 [7.9%] multiracial/other). In fully adjusted models, Black patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.3; 95% CI, 1.2-1.6) and Hispanic patients (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.3-1.7) were more likely than White patients to test positive. Among those who tested positive, odds of hospitalization were similar among White, Hispanic, and Black patients, but higher among Asian (OR, 1.6, 95% CI, 1.1-2.3) and multiracial patients (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-1.9) compared with White patients. Among those hospitalized, Black patients were less likely than White patients to have severe illness (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.8) and to die or be discharged to hospice (hazard ratio, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6-0.9). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this cohort study of patients in a large health system in New York City, Black and Hispanic patients were more likely, and Asian patients less likely, than White patients to test positive; once hospitalized, Black patients were less likely than White patients to have (continued) Key Points Question Do outcomes among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) differ by race/ethnicity, and are observed disparities associated with comorbidity and neighborhood characteristics? Findings This cohort study including ...

Sleep is important for regulating many physiologic functions that relate to metabolism. Because of this, there is substantial evidence to suggest that sleep habits and sleep disorders are related to diabetes risk. In specific, insufficient sleep duration and/or sleep restriction in the laboratory, poor sleep quality, and sleep disorders such as insomnia and sleep apnea have all been associated with diabetes risk. This research spans epidemiologic and laboratory studies. Both physiologic mechanisms such as insulin resistance, decreased leptin, and increased ghrelin and inflammation and behavioral mechanisms such as increased food intake, impaired decision-making, and increased likelihood of other behavioral risk factors such as smoking, sedentary behavior, and alcohol use predispose to both diabetes and obesity, which itself is an important diabetes risk factor. This review describes the evidence linking sleep and diabetes risk at the population and laboratory levels.

Study Objectives To determine the effect of self-reported clinical diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) on longitudinal changes in brain amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers (Aβ42, T-tau, and P-tau) in cognitively normal (NL), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) elderly. Methods Longitudinal study with mean follow-up time of 2.52 ± 0.51 years. Data were obtained from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database. Participants included 516 NL, 798 MCI, and 325 AD elderly. Main outcomes were annual rate of change in brain amyloid burden (i.e. longitudinal increases in florbetapir PET uptake or decreases in CSF Aβ42 levels); and tau protein aggregation (i.e. longitudinal increases in CSF total tau [T-tau] and phosphorylated tau [P-tau]). Adjusted multilevel mixed effects linear regression models with randomly varying intercepts and slopes was used to test whether the rate of biomarker change differed between participants with and without OSA. Results In NL and MCI groups, OSA+ subjects experienced faster annual increase in florbetapir uptake (B = .06, 95% CI = .02, .11 and B = .08, 95% CI = .05, .12, respectively) and decrease in CSF Aβ42 levels (B = −2.71, 95% CI = −3.11, −2.35 and B = −2.62, 95% CI = −3.23, −2.03, respectively); as well as increases in CSF T-tau (B = 3.68, 95% CI = 3.31, 4.07 and B = 2.21, 95% CI = 1.58, 2.86, respectively) and P-tau (B = 1.221, 95% CI = 1.02, 1.42 and B = 1.74, 95% CI = 1.22, 2.27, respectively); compared with OSA− participants. No significant variations in the biomarker changes over time were seen in the AD group. Conclusions In both NL and MCI, elderly, clinical interventions aimed to treat OSA are needed to test if OSA treatment may affect the progression of cognitive impairment due to AD.

Purpose of review The mental health toll on populations exposed to COVID-19 is alarming, and there is a need to address this with urgency. This current review provides insights on how individuals, communities, and specific populations, such as healthcare workers and patients are leveraging pre-COVID-19 and peri-COVID-19 factors to reinforce their psychological resilience during the global public health crisis. Recent findings Examination of the extant literature indicated that populations around the world rely often on support from their loved-ones, closed significant others, outdoor and physical activities, and spirituality to cope with the COVID-19-related distress. Increased sense of meaning/purpose since the COVID-19 pandemic was also reported. Summary A portion of publications provided intervention models to reinforce resilience among specific populations during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, it is not convincing that some of these models can be applied universally. Additionally, it is important to note that in this category, translational data was scarce.

community stakeholders regarding obstructive sleep apnea. (3) Increase the proportion of students in grades 9 through 12 who get sufficient sleep and (4) Perform trials aimed at improving adherence to treatments for sleep-disordered breathing (particularly evaluating cognitive therapy approaches). The fourth priority area was identified as an important barrier to implementation science efforts in sleep.