Last data update: Jul 11, 2025. (Total: 49561 publications since 2009)
Records 1-5 (of 5 Records) |
Query Trace: Smith CS[original query] |
---|
Estimating county-level vaccination coverage using small area estimation with the National Immunization Survey-Child
Seeskin ZH , Ganesh N , Maitra P , Herman P , Wolter KM , Copeland KR , English N , Chen MP , Singleton JA , Santibanez TA , Yankey D , Elam-Evans LD , Sterrett N , Smith CS , Gipson K , Meador S . Vaccine 2023 The National Immunization Survey-Child (NIS-Child) provides annual vaccination coverage estimates in the United States for children aged 19 through 35 months, nationally, for each state, and for select local areas and territories. There is a need for vaccination coverage estimates for smaller geographic areas to support local authority planning and identify counties with potentially low vaccination coverage for possible further intervention. We describe small area estimation methods using 2008-2018 NIS-Child data to generate county-level estimates for children up to two years of age born 2007-2011 and 2012-2016. We applied an empirical best linear unbiased prediction method to combine direct estimates of vaccination coverage with model-based prediction using county-level predictors regarding health and demographic characteristics. We review the predictors commonly selected for the small area models and note multiple predictors related to barriers to vaccination. |
The association of reported experiences of racial and ethnic discrimination in health care with COVID-19 vaccination status and intent - United States, April 22, 2021-November 26, 2022
Elam-Evans LD , Jones CP , Vashist K , Yankey D , Smith CS , Kriss JL , Lu PJ , St Louis ME , Brewer NT , Singleton JA . MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2023 72 (16) 437-444 In 2021, the CDC Director declared that racism is a serious threat to public health,* reflecting a growing awareness of racism as a cause of health inequities, health disparities, and disease. Racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19-related hospitalization and death (1,2) illustrate the need to examine root causes, including experiences of discrimination. This report describes the association between reported experiences of discrimination in U.S. health care settings and COVID-19 vaccination status and intent to be vaccinated by race and ethnicity during April 22, 2021-November 26, 2022, based on the analysis of interview data collected from 1,154,347 respondents to the National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM). Overall, 3.5% of adults aged ≥18 years reported having worse health care experiences compared with persons of other races and ethnicities (i.e., they experienced discrimination), with significantly higher percentages reported by persons who identified as non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black) (10.7%), non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN) (7.2%), non-Hispanic multiple or other race (multiple or other race) (6.7%), Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) (4.5%), non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (NHOPI) (3.9%), and non-Hispanic Asian (Asian) (2.8%) than by non-Hispanic White (White) persons (1.6%). Unadjusted differences in prevalence of being unvaccinated against COVID-19 among respondents reporting worse health care experiences than persons of other races and ethnicities compared with those who reported that their health care experiences were the same as those of persons of other races and ethnicities were statistically significant overall (5.3) and for NHOPI (19.2), White (10.5), multiple or other race (5.7), Black (4.6), Asian (4.3), and Hispanic (2.6) adults. Findings were similar for vaccination intent. Eliminating inequitable experiences in health care settings might help reduce some disparities in receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine. |
Leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis with single-dose rifampicin: Toolkit for implementation
Barth-Jaeggi T , Cavaliero A , Aerts A , Anand S , Arif M , Ay SS , Aye TM , Banstola NL , Baskota R , Blaney D , Bonenberger M , Van Brakel W , Cross H , Das VK , Budiawan T , Fernando N , Gani Z , Greter H , Ignotti E , Kamara D , Kasang C , Komm B , Kumar A , Lay S , Mieras L , Mirza F , Mutayoba B , Njako B , Pakasi T , Richardus JH , Saunderson P , Smith CS , Staheli R , Suriyarachchi N , Shwe T , Tiwari A , Wijesinghe MSD , Van Berkel J , Plaetse BV , Virmond M , Steinmann P . Lepr Rev 2019 90 (4) 356-363 Objective: Leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis with single-dose rifampicin (SDRPEP) has proven effective and feasible, and is recommended by WHO since 2018. This SDR-PEP toolkit was developed through the experience of the leprosy postexposure prophylaxis (LPEP) programme. It has been designed to facilitate and standardise the implementation of contact tracing and SDR-PEP administration in regions and countries that start the intervention. Result(s): Four tools were developed, incorporating the current evidence for SDRPEP and the methods and learnings from the LPEP project in eight countries. (1) the SDR-PEP policy/advocacy PowerPoint slide deck which will help to inform policy makers about the evidence, practicalities and resources needed for SDR-PEP, (2) the SDR-PEP field implementation training PowerPoint slide deck to be used to train front line staff to implement contact tracing and PEP with SDR, (3) the SDR-PEP generic field guide which can be used as a basis to create a location specific field protocol for contact tracing and SDR-PEP serving as a reference for frontline field staff. Finally, (4) the SDR-PEP toolkit guide, summarising the different components of the toolkit and providing instructions on its optimal use. Conclusion(s): In response to interest expressed by countries to implement contact tracing and leprosy PEP with SDR in the light of the WHO recommendation of SDRPEP, this evidence-based, concrete yet flexible toolkit has been designed to serve national leprosy programme managers and support them with the practical means to translate policy into practice. The toolkit is freely accessible on the Infolep homepages and updated as required: https://www.leprosy-information.org/keytopic/leprosy-postexposure-prophylaxis-lpep-programme. |
The Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) programme: Update and interim analysis
Steinmann P , Cavaliero A , Aerts A , Anand S , Arif M , Ay SS , Aye TM , Barth-Jaeggi T , Banstola NL , Bhandari CM , Blaney D , Bonenberger M , Van Brakel W , Cross H , Das VK , Fahrudda A , Fernando N , Gani Z , Greter H , Ignotti E , Kamara D , Kasang C , Kömm B , Kumar A , Lay S , Mieras L , Mirza F , Mutayoba B , Njako B , Pakasi T , Saunderson P , Shengelia B , Smith CS , Stäheli R , Suriyarachchi N , Shwe T , Tiwari A , D Wijesinghe MS , Van Berkel J , Plaetse BV , Virmond M , Richardus JH . Lepr Rev 2018 89 (2) 102-116 Innovative approaches are required to further enhance leprosy control, reduce the number of people developing leprosy, and curb transmission. Early case detection, contact screening, and chemoprophylaxis currently is the most promising approach to achieve this goal. The Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) programme generates evidence on the feasibility of integrating contact tracing and single-dose rifampicin (SDR) administration into routine leprosy control activities in different settings. The LPEP programme is implemented within the leprosy control programmes of Brazil, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Tanzania. Focus is on three key interventions: tracing the contacts of newly diagnosed leprosy patients; screening the contacts for leprosy; and administering SDR to eligible contacts. Country-specific protocol adaptations refer to contact definition, minimal age for SDR, and staff involved. Central coordination, detailed documentation and rigorous supervision ensure quality evidence. Around 2 years of field work had been completed in seven countries by July 2017. The 5,941 enrolled index patients (89·4% of the registered) identified a total of 123,311 contacts, of which 99·1% were traced and screened. Among them, 406 new leprosy patients were identified (329/100,000), and 10,883 (8·9%) were excluded from SDR for various reasons. Also, 785 contacts (0·7%) refused the prophylactic treatment with SDR. Overall, SDR was administered to 89·0% of the listed contacts. Post-exposure prophylaxis with SDR is safe; can be integrated into the routines of different leprosy control programmes; and is generally well accepted by index patients, their contacts and the health workforce. The programme has also invigorated local leprosy control. |
Diagnosis of influenza from respiratory autopsy tissues: detection of virus by real-time reverse transcription-PCR in 222 cases.
Denison AM , Blau DM , Jost HA , Jones T , Rollin D , Gao R , Liu L , Bhatnagar J , Deleon-Carnes M , Shieh WJ , Paddock CD , Drew C , Adem P , Emery SL , Shu B , Wu KH , Batten B , Greer PW , Smith CS , Bartlett J , Montague JL , Patel M , Xu X , Lindstrom S , Klimov AI , Zaki SR . J Mol Diagn 2011 13 (2) 123-8 ![]() The recent influenza pandemic, caused by a novel H1N1 influenza A virus, as well as the seasonal influenza outbreaks caused by varieties of influenza A and B viruses, are responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths worldwide. Few studies have evaluated the utility of real-time reverse transcription-PCR to detect influenza virus RNA from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues obtained at autopsy. In this work, respiratory autopsy tissues from 442 suspect influenza cases were tested by real-time reverse transcription-PCR for seasonal influenza A and B and 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) viruses and the results were compared to those obtained by immunohistochemistry. In total, 222 cases were positive by real-time reverse transcription-PCR, and of 218 real-time, reverse transcription-PCR-positive cases also tested by immunohistochemistry, only 107 were positive. Although formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues can be used for diagnosis, frozen tissues offer the best chance to make a postmortem diagnosis of influenza because these tissues possess nucleic acids that are less degraded and, as a consequence, provide longer sequence information than that obtained from fixed tissues. We also determined that testing of all available respiratory tissues is critical for optimal detection of influenza virus in postmortem tissues. |
- Page last reviewed:Feb 1, 2024
- Page last updated:Jul 11, 2025
- Content source:
- Powered by CDC PHGKB Infrastructure