No abstract

Commonly used dating violence prevention programs assume that promotion of more egalitarian gender role attitudes will prevent dating violence perpetration. Empirical research examining this assumption, however, is limited and inconsistent. The current study examined the longitudinal association between gender role attitudes and physical dating violence perpetration among adolescent boys (n=577; 14% Black, 5% other race/ethnicity) and examined whether injunctive (i.e., acceptance of dating violence) and descriptive (i.e., beliefs about dating violence prevalence) normative beliefs moderated the association. As expected, the findings suggest that traditional gender role attitudes at T1 were associated with increased risk for dating violence perpetration 18 months later (T2) among boys who reported high, but not low, acceptance of dating violence (injunctive normative beliefs) at T1. Descriptive norms did not moderate the effect of gender role attitudes on dating violence perpetration. The results suggest that injunctive norms and gender role attitudes work synergistically to increase risk for dating violence perpetration among boys; as such, simultaneously targeting both of these constructs may be an effective prevention approach.

Problem/ConditionRural communities often have worse health outcomes, have less access to care, and are less diverse than urban communities. Much of the research on rural health disparities examines disparities between rural and urban communities, with fewer studies on disparities within rural communities. This report provides an overview of racial/ethnic health disparities for selected indicators in rural areas of the United States.Reporting Period2012–2015.Description of SystemSelf-reported data from the 2012–2015 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were pooled to evaluate racial/ethnic disparities in health, access to care, and health-related behaviors among rural residents in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Using the National Center for Health Statistics 2013 Urban-Rural Classification Scheme for Counties to assess rurality, this analysis focused on adults living in noncore (rural) counties.ResultsRacial/ethnic minorities who lived in rural areas were younger (more often in the youngest age group) than non-Hispanic whites. Except for Asians and Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders (combined in the analysis), more racial/ethnic minorities (compared with non-Hispanic whites) reported their health as fair or poor, that they had obesity, and that they were unable to see a physician in the past 12 months because of cost. All racial/ethnic minority populations were less likely than non-Hispanic whites to report having a personal health care provider. Non-Hispanic whites had the highest estimated prevalence of binge drinking in the past 30 days.InterpretationAlthough persons in rural communities often have worse health outcomes and less access to health care than those in urban communities, rural racial/ethnic minority populations have substantial health, access to care, and lifestyle challenges that can be overlooked when considering aggregated population data. This study revealed difficulties among non-Hispanic whites as well, primarily related to health-related risk behaviors. Across each population, the challenges vary.Public Health ActionStratifying data by different demographics, using community health needs assessments, and adopting and implementing the National Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services Standards can help rural communities identify disparities and develop effective initiatives to eliminate them, which aligns with a Healthy People 2020 overarching goal: achieving health equity.

On January 14, 2022, this report was posted as an MMWR Early Release on the MMWR website (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr).The COVID-19 pandemic has magnified longstanding health care and social inequities, resulting in disproportionately high COVID-19-associated illness and death among members of racial and ethnic minority groups (1). Equitable use of effective medications (2) could reduce disparities in these severe outcomes (3). Monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, initially received Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in November 2020. mAbs are typically administered in an outpatient setting via intravenous infusion or subcutaneous injection and can prevent progression of COVID-19 if given after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result or for postexposure prophylaxis in patients at high risk for severe illness. † Dexamethasone, a commonly used steroid, and remdesivir, an antiviral drug that received EUA from FDA in May 2020, are used in inpatient settings and help prevent COVID-19 progression § (2). No large-scale studies have yet examined the use of mAb by race and ethnicity. Using COVID-19 patient electronic health record data from 41 U.S. health care systems that participated in the PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, ¶ this study assessed receipt of medications for COVID-19 treatment by race (White, Black, Asian, and Other races [including American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other * These authors contributed equally to this report. † Fact sheets for healthcare providers for FDA emergency use authorization are available from https://www.fda.gov/media/145611/download for REGEN-COV (casirivimab and imdevimab) and https://www.fda.gov/ media/145802/download for bamlanivimab and etesevimab. The SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant is not neutralized by bamlanivimab and etesevimab or casirivimab and imdevimab, the mAb-based COVID-19 treatments that were most frequently prescribed before the emergence of Omicron. § https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/management/ clinical-management/ ¶ PCORnet is a national network-of-networks developed to conduct patientcentered outcomes research. The PCORnet infrastructure supports large-scale studies using its distributed data network.