Previous pandemics have demonstrated that several demographic, geographic, and socioeconomic factors may play a role in increased infection risk. During this current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, our aim was to examine the association of timing of lockdown at the county level and aforementioned risk factors with daily case rate (DCR) in the United States.
Methods:A cross-sectional study using publicly available data was performed including Americans with COVID-19 infection as of May 24, 2020. The United States counties with >100 000 population and >50 cases per 100 000 people were included. The independent variable was the days required from the declaration of lockdown to reach the target case rate (50/100 000 cases) while the dependent (outcome) variable was the DCR per 100 000 on the day of statistical calculation (May 24, 2020) after adjusting for multiple confounding socio-demographic, geographic, and health-related factors. Each independent factor was correlated with outcome variables and assessed for collinearity with each other. Subsequently, all factors with significant association to the outcome variable were included in multiple linear regression models using stepwise method. Models with best R 2 value from the multiple regression were chosen.
Results:The timing of mandated lockdown order had the most significant association on the DCR per 100 000 after adjusting for multiple socio-demographic, geographic and health-related factors. Additional factors with significant association with increased DCR include rate of uninsured and unemployment.
Conclusions:The timing of lockdown order was significantly associated with the spread of COVID-19 at the county level in the United States.
BackgroundPrior studies indicate that young African-Americans (AA) have a greater frequency of ischemic stroke than similarly aged European-Americans (EA). We hypothesized that differences in stroke subtype frequency mediated through sex and differing risk factor profiles may play a role in ethnicity-specific stroke. Utilizing our biracial young-onset stroke population, we explored these relationships.MethodsFifty nine hospitals in the Baltimore-Washington area participated in a population-based study of young-onset stroke in men (218-AA, 291-EA) and women (219-AA, 222-EA) aged 16–49. Data on age, sex, ethnicity and stroke risk factors (hypertension (HTN) and smoking) were gathered through standardized interview. A pair of vascular neurologists adjudicated each case to determine TOAST subtype. Logistic regression analyses evaluating for differences in stroke risk factors by TOAST subtype were performed.ResultsAnalyses controlling for age and sex demonstrated that AA were more likely to have a lacunar stroke than EA (OR = 1.61; 95 % CI = 1.12–2.32; p = 0.011) when utilizing the other TOAST subtypes as the reference group. This effect was mediated by HTN, which increases the risk of lacunar stroke (OR = 2.03; 95 % CI = 1.38–2.98; p = 0.0003) and large artery stroke (OR = 1.70; 95 % CI = 1.01–2.88; p = 0.048) when controlling for sex, ethnicity, and age. Cases below age 40 were more likely to have a cardioembolic stroke than those above age 40 (OR = 1.62; 95 % CI = 1.15–2.27; p = 0.006), controlling for sex and ethnicity. Lastly, current smokers were more likely to have a large artery stroke than non-smokers (OR = 1.79; 95 % CI = 1.08–2.98; p = 0.024).ConclusionsOur population-based data demonstrate ethnic differences in ischemic stroke subtypes. These findings may help clarify mechanisms of stroke in young adults which may in part be driven by ethnic-specific differences in early-onset traditional risk factors, thereby indicating differing emphasis on workup and prevention.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.