There is an epidemic of obesity in adults in rural America. It is estimated that about 19% of the population resides in rural areas, which encompasses 97% of America's total landmass. Although rural America makes up a fraction of America's total population, it has been estimated that the prevalence of obesity is approximately 6.2 times higher than in urban America. This illustrates an apparent disparity that exists between the rural population and urban populations that needs to be examined.The prevalence of obesity, especially in rural America, is a growing concern in the medical community in recent years. Obesity has been identified as a significant risk factor for cardiovascular disease, cancer, and type 2 diabetes mellitus, which are leading causes of morbidity and mortality in the US. To better understand the disparity in the prevalence of adult obesity between rural and urban America, researchers have identified risk factors that are associated with the high incidence and prevalence of obesity in the rural American adult population. Low income and lack of physical activity have been identified as factors that predispose rural Americans to increased risk of obesity, arguing that low-income Americans may not have access to the resources available to assist them in weight reduction. With rural Americans being at an income disadvantage, it creates a risk for obesity, which further predisposes them to chronic diseases such as hypertension, obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), diabetes, and coronary artery disease.As obesity continues to rise among the American population, the burden on the rural population is incredibly evident. Despite ongoing efforts by the US government and strategies implemented by the Common Community Measures for Obesity Prevention, there is still much to be done to tackle the epidemic. With an existing strategy in place, such as the 12 Common Community Measures for Obesity Prevention (COCOMO) strategies to fight obesity with physical activity, Americans are a step closer to conquering this epidemic. However, until other disparities such as income are addressed, rural Americans may continue to be severely impacted by the rising incidence of obesity and subsequent higher mortality rates from associated diseases.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a term that encompasses conditions characterized by chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract (GIT). It includes Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. Major scientific organizations interested in gastrointestinal systems or GIT-focused organizations worldwide release guidelines for diagnosing, classifying, managing, and treating IBD. However, there are subtle differences among each of these guidelines. This review evaluates four evidence-based guidelines in the management of IBD and seeks to highlight the differences and similarities between them. The main differences in the evaluated guidelines were in diagnosis and treatment recommendations. The diagnosing recommendations were comparable amongst the four guidelines; however, some were more specific about limiting the number of interventions necessary to confirm a diagnosis. Regarding treatment options, each guideline had clear suggestions about what was considered ideal. Although the treatment options were identical, the main differences existed in the recommended diets and initial therapy in patients with moderate disease. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) recommend evidence-based practice from opinion leaders in clinical decision-making. Rather than dictating a one-size-fits-all approach in IBD management, reviewing various guidelines can enhance the cross-pollination of ideas amongst clinicians to improve decision-making. Clearly describing and appraising evidence-based reasoning for scientific recommendations remain driving factors for quality patient care. The effectiveness of CPGs in improving health and the complexities of their formation requires constant review to maximize constructive criticisms and explore possible improvements.

Background: Sexually transmitted infections, including HIV, remain a significant public health challenge for low-and middle-income countries, and about 111 million unintended pregnancies occur in these countries annually. The female condom is the only commonly available method that affords women and girls more control in protecting themselves from sexually transmitted infections, as well as unintended pregnancies. Yet, the female condom only accounts for 1.6% of total condom distribution worldwide.Objectives: To help fill the gaps in an understanding of what works for improved acceptability and use of the female condom in low-and middle-income countries, we conducted a systematic review of the literature that focuses on acceptability of the FC, as examined in the specific settings of intervention programs or research in low-and middleincome countries. Methods:We conducted a preliminary search of two purposively selected databases (PubMed and POPLINE) for English language articles from 2009 to 2019 with the keyword "female condom." PubMed yielded 145 articles, while POPLINE yielded 164 articles. Included studies involve a purposive, interventional deployment of the female condom; have occurred in a low-or middle-income country, as defined by the World Bank; and have focused on acceptability of the female condom. Upon review of duplicates and abstracts, a total of 14 articles made the final selection. Findings:The included articles represent seven different countries: the Dominican Republic,

No abstract