OBJECTIVES: To evaluate racial and/or ethnic and socioeconomic differences in rates of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among children. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of children tested for SARS-CoV-2 at an exclusively pediatric drive-through and walk-up SARS-CoV-2 testing site from March 21, 2020, to April 28, 2020. We performed bivariable and multivariable logistic regression to measure the association of patient race and/or ethnicity and estimated median family income (based on census block group estimates) with (1) SARS-CoV-2 infection and (2) reported exposure to SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Of 1000 children tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection, 20.7% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. In comparison with non-Hispanic white children (7.3%), minority children had higher rates of infection (non-Hispanic Black: 30.0%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.3 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2-4.4]; Hispanic: 46.4%, aOR 6.3 [95% CI 3.3-11.9]). In comparison with children in the highest median family income quartile (8.7%), infection rates were higher among children in quartile 3 (23.7%; aOR 2.6 [95% CI 1.4-4.9]), quartile 2 (27.1%; aOR 2.3 [95% CI 1.2-4.3]), and quartile 1 (37.7%; aOR 2.4 [95% CI 1.3-4.6]). Rates of reported exposure to SARS-CoV-2 also differed by race and/or ethnicity and socioeconomic status. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of children tested for SARS-CoV-2 through a community-based testing site, racial and/or ethnic minorities and socioeconomically disadvantaged children carry the highest burden of infection. Understanding and addressing the causes of these differences are needed to mitigate disparities and limit the spread of infection.

This is a prepublication version of an article that has undergone peer review and been accepted for publication but is not the final version of record. This paper may be cited using the DOI and date of access. This paper may contain information that has errors in facts, figures, and statements, and will be corrected in the final published version. The journal is providing an early version of this article to expedite access to this information. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the editors, and authors are not responsible for inaccurate information and data described in this version.

Objectives To evaluate acceptance of sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening and measure STI prevalence in an asymptomatic adolescent ED population. Study design This was a prospectively enrolled cross-sectional study of 14–21 year old patients who sought care at an urban pediatric ED with non-STI related complaints. Participants completed a computer-assisted questionnaire to collect demographic and behavioral data and were asked to provide a urine sample to screen for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae infection. We calculated STI screening acceptance and STI prevalence. We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with screening acceptance and presence of infection. Results Of 553 enrolled patients, 326 (59.0%) agreed to be screened for STIs. STI screening acceptability was associated with having public health insurance (aOR 1.7; 1.1, 2.5) and being sexually active (sexually active but denying high risk activity [aOR 1.7; 1.1, 2.5]; sexually active and reporting high risk activity [aOR 2.6; 1.5, 4.6]). Sixteen patients (4.9%; 95% CI 2.6, 7.3) had an asymptomatic STI. High-risk sexual behavior (aOR 7.2; 1.4, 37.7) and preferential use of the ED rather than primary care for acute medical needs (aOR 4.0; 1.3, 12.3) were associated with STI. Conclusions STI screening is acceptable to adolescents in the ED, especially among those who declare sexual experience. Overall, there was a low prevalence of asymptomatic STI. Risk of STI was higher among youth engaging in high-risk sexual behavior and those relying on the ED for acute health care access. Targeted screening interventions may be more efficient than universal screening for STI detection in the ED.

BACKGROUND: Firearms are the second leading cause of pediatric death in the United States. There is significant variation in firearm legislation at the state level. Recently, 3 state laws were associated with a reduction in overall deaths from firearms: universal background checks for firearm purchases, universal background checks for ammunition purchases, and identification requirement for firearms. We sought to determine if stricter firearm legislation at the state level is associated with lower pediatric firearm-related mortality. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study in which we used 2011-2015 Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System and Census data. We measured the association of the (1) strictness of firearm legislation (gun law score) and (2) presence of the 3 aforementioned gun laws with pediatric firearm-related mortality. We performed negative binomial regression accounting for differences in state-level characteristics (population-based race and ethnicity, education, income, and gun ownership) to derive mortality rate ratios associated with a 10-point change in each predictor and predicted mortality rates. RESULTS: A total of 21 241 children died of firearm-related injuries during the 5-year period. States with stricter gun laws had lower rates of firearm-related pediatric mortality (adjusted incident rate ratio 0.96 [0.93-0.99]). States with laws requiring universal background checks for firearm purchase in effect for $5 years had lower pediatric firearm-related mortality rates (adjusted incident rate ratio 0.65 [0.46-0.90]). CONCLUSIONS: In this 5-year analysis, states with stricter gun laws and laws requiring universal background checks for firearm purchase had lower firearm-related pediatric mortality rates. These findings support the need for further investigation to understand the impact of firearm legislation on pediatric mortality.

No abstract