A multistate measles outbreak, predominantly affecting members of close-knit communities with low measles vaccination coverage in New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas began in January 2025. As of April 17, a total of 800 cases have been reported in the United States in 2025; 654 (82%) cases in New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas have been associated with the ongoing outbreak. These cases represent an approximately 180% increase over the 285 measles cases reported in the United States during all of 2024, and the second highest annual case count in the United States in 25 years. Overall, 771 (96%) patients have been unvaccinated or had unknown vaccination status (77% were unvaccinated, and 14% had unknown vaccination status when excluding 590 cases reported by Texas, which requires explicit consent by law [i.e., opt-in] to enroll in the Texas Immunization Registry), 85 (11%) patients have been hospitalized, and three patients have died. Among 48 (6%) internationally imported cases, 44 (92%) occurred among U.S. residents. Endemic measles was declared eliminated in the United States in 2000 as a direct result of high 2-dose childhood coverage with the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. However, measles cases and outbreaks continue to occur when travelers with measles return to the United States while they are infectious; larger U.S. outbreaks typically follow importation into close-knit communities with low vaccination coverage. Nationally, risk for widespread measles transmission remains low because of high population-level immunity. To prepare for and prevent measles cases and outbreaks, public health departments should continue working with trusted community messengers on culturally competent community engagement, education, vaccination efforts, and other community infection prevention approaches (e.g., case isolation, contact monitoring, and post-exposure prophylaxis) and coordinating with health care facilities and schools. Increasing national and local MMR vaccination coverage is essential to preventing measles cases and outbreaks.

Human norovirus causes more than 700 million illnesses annually. Extensive genetic diversity and a paucity of information on conserved neutralizing epitopes pose major obstacles to the design of broadly protective norovirus immunogens. Here, we used high-resolution liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS)-driven proteomics to quantitatively characterize the circulating serum IgG repertoire before and after immunization with an experimental monovalent norovirus GII.4 VP1 capsid-encoding adenoviral vaccine. Two participants were specifically selected on the basis of the breadth of serum neutralization responses either across GII.4 variants (participant A) or across GII genotypes (participant B). In participant A, vaccination back-boosted highly abundant serum antibody clonotypes targeting epitopes conserved among rapidly evolving GII.4 variants spanning from a strain identified in 1987 to a strain identified in 2019. In participant B, we identified a recall response consisting of broadly neutralizing monoclonal antibodies with remarkable cross-GII ligand-binding blockade (blocking ≥ seven GII genotypes) and virus neutralization breadth. The cocrystal structure of one of these antibodies, VX22, in complex with the VP1 capsid protruding (P) domain revealed a highly conserved epitope (residues 479 to 484 and 509 to 513) within two lateral loops of the P1 subdomain. Antibody evolutionary trajectory analysis further revealed that VX22 had originally evolved from an early heterologous infection, likely by a GII.12 strain. Together, our study demonstrates that norovirus human monoclonal antibodies with broad GII.4 potency and cross-GII breadth can be boosted in serum after immunization with an adenoviral vector-based vaccine, findings that may guide the design of immunogens for broadly protective norovirus vaccines.

OBJECTIVES: Direct electronic access to multiple electronic health record (EHR) systems through patient portals offers a novel avenue for decentralized research. Given the critical value of patient characterization, we sought to compare computable evaluation of health conditions from patient-portal EHR against the traditional self-report. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the nationwide Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry (INSPIRE) study, which linked self-reported questionnaires with multiplatform patient-portal EHR data, we compared self-reported health conditions across different clinical domains against computable definitions based on diagnosis codes, medications, vital signs, and laboratory testing. We assessed their concordance using Cohen's Kappa and the prognostic significance of differentially captured features as predictors of 1-year all-cause hospitalization risk. RESULTS: Among 1683 participants (mean age 41 ± 15 years, 67% female, 63% non-Hispanic Whites), the prevalence of conditions varied substantially between EHR and self-report (-13.2% to +11.6% across definitions). Compared with comprehensive EHR phenotypes, self-report under-captured all conditions, including hypertension (27.9% vs 16.2%), diabetes (10.1% vs 6.2%), and heart disease (8.5% vs 4.3%). However, diagnosis codes alone were insufficient. The risk for 1-year hospitalization was better defined by the same features from patient-portal EHR (area under the receiver operating curve [AUROC] 0.79) than from self-report (AUROC 0.68). DISCUSSION: EHR-derived computable phenotypes identified a higher prevalence of comorbidities than self-report, with prognostic value of additionally identified features. However, definitions based solely on diagnosis codes often undercaptured self-reported conditions, suggesting a role of broader EHR elements. CONCLUSION: In this nationwide study, patient-portal-derived EHR data enabled extensive capture of patient characteristics across multiple EHR platforms, allowing better disease phenotyping compared with self-report.

Background: Although short-term outcomes of Long COVID have been described, longer-term physical and mental health outcomes of Long COVID are less well-established. This study sought to assess differences in long-term physical and mental health outcomes extending up to three years among those with current, resolved, and no Long COVID, as well as duration of Long COVID and vaccination status. Methods: This was a prospective, multisite, study of participants with SARS-CoV-2 infection from 12/7/2020-8/29/2022, with data collected through 4/2/2024. Surveys included validated tools for physical and mental health. Data were analyzed by Long COVID status (never-had, resolved, current), Long COVID duration and vaccination status. Findings: Of 3663 participants, 2604 (71.1%) never had Long COVID, 994 (27.1%) reported current Long COVID, and 65 (1.8%) reported resolved Long COVID. Compared to never having Long COVID, current Long COVID had lower/worse scores for Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) version 29 Physical (7.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.3–8.3) and Mental Health (9.4; 95% CI 8.8–10.1) and higher likelihood of moderate-to-high stress (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.0; 95% CI 1.6–2.4), moderate-to-high loneliness (aOR: 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–2.0), moderate-to-severe fatigue (aOR: 3.0; 95% CI 2.5–3.7), insufficient activity (aOR for Speedy Nutrition and Physical Activity Assessment ≤4: 0.6; 95% CI 0.5–0.7; aOR for Exercise Vital Sign ≤150 min/week: 0.7, 95% CI 0.6–1.0), and worse dyspnea (aOR: 5.0; 95% CI 4.3–5.8). Resolved Long COVID had lower scores for PROMIS Physical by 2.0 (95% CI 0.2–3.8) and Mental Health by 2.3 (95% CI 0.2–4.4) than the never-had-Long COVID cohort. Number of COVID-19 vaccinations was associated with better outcomes across all measures. Interpretation: Among participants followed up to 3 years after initial infection, those with current Long COVID had worse physical and mental health outcomes. The majority of those with Long COVID did not resolve, with less than 2% having resolved Long COVID. The resolved Long COVID cohort had moderately worse physical and mental health compared with those never-having-Long COVID. COVID-19 vaccination was associated with better outcomes. Funding: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. © 2025 The Author(s)

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends annual influenza and COVID-19 vaccination for all persons aged ≥6 months, including adults aged ≥18 years. ACIP also recommends a single lifetime dose of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine for adults aged ≥75 years and for those aged 60-74 years who are at increased risk for severe RSV disease. Data from the National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module, a random-digit-dialed cellular telephone survey of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years, are used to monitor influenza, COVID-19, and RSV vaccination coverage. By the week ending November 9, 2024, an estimated 34.7% of adults aged ≥18 years reported having received an influenza vaccine, and 17.9% reported having received a COVID-19 vaccine for the 2024-25 respiratory virus season; 39.7% of adults aged ≥75 years, and 31.6% of adults aged 60-74 years at increased risk for severe RSV, had ever received an RSV vaccine. Coverage varied by jurisdiction and demographic characteristics and was lowest among younger adults and those without health insurance. Although early season estimates indicate that many adults are unprotected from respiratory virus infections, many appeared open to vaccination: overall, approximately 35% and 41% of adults aged ≥18 years reported that they definitely or probably will receive or were unsure about receiving influenza and COVID-19 vaccines, respectively, and 40% of adults aged ≥75 years reported that they definitely or probably will receive or were unsure about receiving RSV vaccine. Health care providers and immunization programs still have time to expand outreach activities and promote vaccination to increase coverage in preparation for the height of the respiratory virus season. Using these data can help health care providers and immunization programs identify undervaccinated populations and understand vaccination patterns to guide planning, implementation, and evaluation of vaccination activities.

OBJECTIVES: Drowning is the leading cause of death during flood disasters. Little is known about these deaths. Child death review teams review details of child deaths to understand circumstances and risk factors to inform prevention. METHODS: Using data entered in 2005 to 2021 for children ages 0 to 17 years from the National Fatality Review-Case Reporting System, we identified 130 drowning deaths directly attributed to natural disaster or weather incidents, and 14 deaths indirectly attributed to these incidents. Frequencies, proportions, and χ2 statistics were used to describe selected measures and compare with other drowning deaths. RESULTS: Children who drowned as a direct result of a natural disaster- or weather-related incident were more likely to be aged >4 years (81% vs 40%, P < .001) and located in a rural or frontier setting (63% vs 30%, P < .001). They were more likely to be supervised at the time of the incident (61% vs 38%, P < .001), and it was more likely for additional children (35% vs 5%, P < .001) or adults (33% vs 3%, P < .001) to have perished. The indirect deaths were commonly a result of damage to protective barriers. CONCLUSIONS: The characteristics of natural disaster- or weather-related drowning deaths among children differ from other drowning deaths. Natural disaster- or weather-related drowning may warrant tailored drowning prevention strategies. Improved surveillance of all water-related deaths may be a proactive action leading to the development of these prevention strategies, whereas poststorm remediation of protective barriers can be used as a reactive prevention after a storm has passed.

IMPORTANCE: Many recent advances in pediatric concussion care are implemented by specialists; however, children with concussion receive care across varied locations. Thus, it is critical to identify which children have access to the most up-to-date treatment strategies. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate differences in the sociodemographic and community characteristics of pediatric patients who sought care for concussion across various points of entry into a regional health care network. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study included children seen for concussions across a regional US health care network from January 1, 2017, to August 4, 2023. Pediatric patients aged 0 to 18 years who received an International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification code for concussion were included. The study took place at emergency department (ED) and outpatient (primary care [PC] and specialty care [SC]) settings. EXPOSURES: Age at visit, biological sex, parent-identified race and ethnicity, payer type, median income and percentage of adults with a bachelor's degree for home zip code, and overall and subdomain Child Opportunity Index (COI) score based on patient address. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The association of exposures with point of entry of ED, PC, and SC were examined in both bivariate analysis and a multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, 15 631 patients were included in the study (median [IQR] age, 13 [11-15] years; 7879 [50.4%] male; 1055 [6.7%] Hispanic, 2865 [18.3%] non-Hispanic Black, and 9887 [63.7%] non-Hispanic White individuals). Race and ethnicity were significantly different across settings (1485 patients [50.0%] seen in the ED were non-Hispanic Black vs 1012 [12.0%] in PC and 368 [8.7%] in SC; P < .001) as was insurance status (1562 patients [52.6%] seen in the ED possessed public insurance vs 1624 [19.3%] in PC and 683 [16.1%] in SC; P < .001). Overall and individual COI subdomain scores were also significantly different between settings (overall COI median [IQR]: ED, 30 [9-71]; PC, 87 [68-95]; SC, 87 [69-95]; P < .001). Race, insurance status, and overall COI had the strongest associations with point of entry in the multivariable model (eg, non-Hispanic Black patients seen in the ED compared with non-Hispanic White patients: odds ratio, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.69-2.45). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cross-sectional study, children with concussion seen in the ED setting were more likely to be non-Hispanic Black, have public insurance, and have a lower Child Opportunity Index compared with children cared for in the PC or SC setting. This highlights the importance of providing education and training for ED clinicians as well as establishing up-to-date community-level resources to optimize care delivery for pediatric patients with concussion at high risk of care inequities.

Background: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Sickle Cell Data Collection (SCDC) program comprises multidisciplinary teams, which include community-based organizations. Partnering with community-based organizations (CBOs) is a novel approach to ensure that SCDC data are actionable.

BACKGROUND: Differences in acute COVID-19 associated morbidity based on race, ethnicity, and gender have been well described; however, less is known about differences in subsequent longer term health-related quality of life and well-being. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included symptomatic adults tested for SARS-CoV-2 who completed baseline and 3-month follow-up surveys. Using the PROMIS-29 tool, a validated measure of health and well-being, we compared outcomes at 3 months and change in outcomes from baseline to 3 months among groups with different races, ethnicities, and/or sexes. RESULTS: Among 6044 participants, 4113 (3202 COVID +) were included. Among COVID + participants, compared to non-Hispanic White participants, Black participants had better PROMIS T-scores for cognitive function (3.6 [1.1, 6.2]) and fatigue (- 4.3 [- 6.6, - 2.0]) at 3 months and experienced more improvement in fatigue over 3 months (- 2.7 [- 4.7, - 0.8]). At 3 months, compared with males, females had worse PROMIS T-scores for cognitive function (- 4.1 [- 5.6, - 2.6]), physical function (- 2.1 [- 3.1, - 1.0]), social participation (- 2.8 [- 4.2, - 1.5]), anxiety (2.8 [1.5, 4.1]), fatigue (5.1 [3.7, 6.4]), and pain interference (2.0 [0.9, 3.2]). Females experienced less improvement in fatigue over 3 months (3.1 [2.0, 4.3]). Transgender/non-binary/other gender participants had worse 3-month scores in all domains except for sleep disturbance and pain interference. CONCLUSIONS: Three months after the initial COVID-19 infection, Black participants reported better cognitive function and fatigue, while females and other gender minoritized groups experienced lower well-being. Future studies are necessary to better understand how and why social constructs, specifically race, ethnicity, and gender, influence differences in COVID-19-related health outcomes. Trials Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04610515.

IMPORTANCE: Chronic symptoms reported following an infection with SARS-CoV-2, such as cognitive problems, overlap with symptoms included in the definition of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence of ME/CFS-like illness subsequent to acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, changes in ME/CFS symptoms through 12 months of follow-up, and the association of ME/CFS symptoms with SARS-CoV-2 test results at the acute infection-like index illness. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This prospective, multisite, longitudinal cohort study (Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry [INSPIRE]) enrolled participants from December 11, 2020, to August 29, 2022. Participants were adults aged 18 to 64 years with acute symptoms suggestive of SARS-CoV-2 infection who received a US Food and Drug Administration-approved SARS-CoV-2 test at the time of illness and did not die or withdraw from the study by 3 months. Follow-up surveys were collected through February 28, 2023. EXPOSURE: COVID-19 status (positive vs negative) at enrollment. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: The main outcome was the weighted proportion of participants with ME/CFS-like illness based on the 2015 Institute of Medicine clinical case definition using self-reported symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 4378 participants were included in the study. Most were female (3226 [68.1%]). Mean (SD) age was 37.8 (11.8) years. The survey completion rates ranged from 38.7% (3613 of 4738 participants) to 76.3% (1835 of 4738) and decreased over time. The weighted proportion of participants identified with ME/CFS-like illness did not change significantly at 3 through 12 months of follow-up and was similar in the COVID-19-positive (range, 2.8%-3.7%) and COVID-19-negative (range, 3.1%-4.5%) groups. Adjusted analyses revealed no significant difference in the odds of ME/CFS-like illness at any time point between COVID-19-positive and COVID-19-negative individuals (marginal odds ratio range, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.42-1.67] to 1.18 [95% CI, 0.55-2.51]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this prospective cohort study, there was no evidence that the proportion of participants with ME/CFS-like illness differed between those infected with SARS-CoV-2 vs those without SARS-CoV-2 infection up to 12 months after infection. A 3% to 4% prevalence of ME/CFS-like illness after an acute infection-like index illness would impose a high societal burden given the millions of persons infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Ornithologic study skins are specimens of avian skins that have been preserved by drying after removing the viscera and muscle. Because of the high value of study skins for scientific studies, specimens are shared among researchers. There is concern that study skins might be contaminated with high-consequence diseases such as highly pathogenic avian influenza virus (HPAIV) or Newcastle disease virus (NDV). To mitigate risk, thermal or chemical treatment of study skins may be required before transfer; however, such treatments might damage the specimens. Therefore, a study was conducted to evaluate the duration of infectivity of HPAIV and NDV in study skins prepared from infected chickens (Gallus gallus). Study skins were prepared from 10 chickens infected with each virus. Skin and feather pulp samples were taken at the time of study skin preparation to establish starting titers. Mean starting titers in the skin was 4.2 log10 and 5.1 log10 50% egg infectious doses (EID50) for HPAIV and NDV groups respectively, and were 6.7 log10 EID50 for HPAIV, and 6.4 log10 EID50 for NDV in feather pulp. Samples were collected at 2 and 4 wk of drying to quantify viable virus. At 2 wk, fewer samples had detectable virus and mean titers were 1.8 log10 (skin) and 2.1 log10 (feathers) EID50 for HPAIV, and 1.7 log10 (skin) and 3.5 log10 (feathers) EID50 for NDV. At 4 wk viable virus could not be detected in either tissue type.

PURPOSE: Examine how school-based COVID-19 prevention strategy implementation varied over time, including by local characteristics. METHODS: School administrators (n=335) from a nationally representative sample of K-12 public schools completed four surveys assessing COVID-19 prevention strategies at two-month intervals between October 2021 and June 2022. We calculated weighted prevalence estimates by survey wave. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) were used to model longitudinal changes in strategy implementation, accounting for school and county covariates. RESULTS: Opening doors/windows, daily cleaning, and diagnostic testing were reported by ≥50% of schools at each survey wave. Several strategies were consistently implemented across the 2021-2022 school year (i.e., daily cleaning, opening doors and windows, diagnostic testing) while other strategies increased initially and then declined (i.e., contact tracing, screening testing, on-campus vaccination) or declined consistently throughout the school year (i.e., mask requirement, classroom distancing, quarantine). Although longitudinal changes in strategy implementation did not vary by school characteristics, strategy implementation varied by urban-rural classification and school level throughout the school year. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies that were consistently implemented throughout the school year were also reported by a majority of schools, speaking toward their feasibility for school-based infection control and prevention and potential utility in future public health emergencies.

Measles, a highly contagious respiratory virus with the potential to cause severe complications, hospitalization, and death, was declared eliminated from the United States in 2000; however, with ongoing global transmission, infections in the United States still occur. On March 7, 2024, the Chicago Department of Public Health (CDPH) confirmed a case of measles in a male aged 1 year residing in a temporary shelter for migrants in Chicago. Given the congregate nature of the setting, high transmissibility of measles, and low measles vaccination coverage among shelter residents, measles virus had the potential to spread rapidly among approximately 2,100 presumed exposed shelter residents. CDPH immediately instituted outbreak investigation and response activities in collaboration with state and local health departments, health care facilities, city agencies, and shelters. On March 8, CDPH implemented active case-finding and coordinated a mass vaccination campaign at the affected shelter (shelter A), including vaccinating 882 residents and verifying previous vaccination for 784 residents over 3 days. These activities resulted in 93% measles vaccination coverage (defined as receipt of ≥1 recorded measles vaccine dose) by March 11. By May 13, a total of 57 confirmed measles cases associated with residing in or having contact with persons from shelter A had been reported. Most cases (41; 72%) were among persons who did not have documentation of measles vaccination and were considered unvaccinated. In addition, 16 cases of measles occurred among persons who had received ≥1 measles vaccine dose ≥21 days before first known exposure. This outbreak underscores the need to ensure high vaccination coverage among communities residing in congregate settings.

COVID-19 remains an important public health threat, despite overall decreases in COVID-19-related severe disease since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19-associated hospitalization rates remain higher among adults aged ≥65 years relative to rates in younger adults, adolescents, and children; during October 2023-January 2024, 67% of all COVID-19-associated hospitalizations were among persons aged ≥65 years. On September 12, 2023, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended updated (2023-2024 Formula) COVID-19 vaccination with a monovalent XBB.1.5-derived vaccine for all persons aged ≥6 months to protect against severe COVID-19-associated illness and death. Because SARS-CoV-2 continues to circulate throughout the year, and because of the increased risk for COVID-19-related severe illness in persons aged ≥65 years, the protection afforded by updated vaccines against JN.1 and other currently circulating variants, and the expected waning of vaccine-conferred protection against disease, on February 28, 2024, ACIP recommended all persons aged ≥65 years receive 1 additional dose of the updated (2023-2024 Formula) COVID-19 vaccine. Implementation of these recommendations is expected to enhance immunity that might have waned and decrease the risk for severe COVID-19-associated outcomes, including death, among persons aged ≥65 years.

OBJECTIVE: This report highlights state and local practices for optimizing the pediatric COVID-19 vaccination program for children ages 6 months through 11 years. METHODS: State and local practices designed to optimize pediatric COVID-19 vaccine uptake were identified from a range of sources, including immunization program, CDC, and partner staff; and media stories or program descriptions identified via online searches. RESULTS: A range of practices were identified across different categories: provider-focused practices, school-based practices, jurisdiction or health department-based activities, community-focused practices involving partners, use of vaccination incentives, and Medicaid-related practices. CONCLUSIONS: Immunization programs and stakeholders implemented a variety of practices to meet the challenge of the pediatric COVID-19 vaccination program. The key findings may serve to inform not only the current pediatric COVID-19 vaccination program, but also future outbreak response work and routine immunization activities.

COVID-19 vaccination decreases risk for COVID-19 illness and severe disease in children, including multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) and death. On December 13, 2020, CDC recommended COVID-19 vaccination for persons ages ≥16 years, with expansion on May 12, 2021, to adolescents ages 12-15 years; to children ages 5-11 years on November 2, 2021; and to children ages 6 months-4 years on June 18, 2022. Following each age-specific recommendation, the U.S. government collaborated with state and local governments, vaccine manufacturers, and numerous other public and private entities, to ensure rapid, broad, and equitable COVID-19 vaccine distribution to strategic locations across the country to maximize access. However, vaccination coverage among children has been lower than among adults and lower among younger children than adolescents. As of May 10, 2023, COVID-19 primary series vaccination coverage was 61.8% among U.S. children ages 12-17 years, 32.9% among those ages 5-11 years, and 5.5% among those ages 6 months-4 years. This manuscript describes the planning and implementation of the U.S. COVID-19 pediatric vaccine program, including successes (e.g., the availability of pharmacy vaccination to extend access beyond more traditional pediatric vaccine providers) and challenges (e.g., multi-dose vaccine vials instead of single-dose vials, leading to concerns about wastage) to provide a historical record of the program and to help inform planning and implementation of future routine or pandemic-related pediatric vaccination campaigns.

INTRODUCTION: Data on ethnic and racial differences in symptoms and health-related impacts following SARS-CoV-2 infection are limited. We aimed to estimate the ethnic and racial differences in symptoms and health-related impacts 3 and 6 months after the first SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Participants included adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection enrolled in a prospective multicenter US study between 12/11/2020 and 7/4/2022 as the primary cohort of interest, as well as a SARS-CoV-2-negative cohort to account for non-SARS-CoV-2-infection impacts, who completed enrollment and 3-month surveys (N = 3,161; 2,402 SARS-CoV-2-positive, 759 SARS-CoV-2-negative). Marginal odds ratios were estimated using GEE logistic regression for individual symptoms, health status, activity level, and missed work 3 and 6 months after COVID-19 illness, comparing each ethnicity or race to the referent group (non-Hispanic or white), adjusting for demographic factors, social determinants of health, substance use, pre-existing health conditions, SARS-CoV-2 infection status, COVID-19 vaccination status, and survey time point, with interactions between ethnicity or race and time point, ethnicity or race and SARS-CoV-2 infection status, and SARS-CoV-2 infection status and time point. RESULTS: Following SARS-CoV-2 infection, the majority of symptoms were similar over time between ethnic and racial groups. At 3 months, Hispanic participants were more likely than non-Hispanic participants to report fair/poor health (OR: 1.94; 95%CI: 1.36-2.78) and reduced activity (somewhat less, OR: 1.47; 95%CI: 1.06-2.02; much less, OR: 2.23; 95%CI: 1.38-3.61). At 6 months, differences by ethnicity were not present. At 3 months, Other/Multiple race participants were more likely than white participants to report fair/poor health (OR: 1.90; 95% CI: 1.25-2.88), reduced activity (somewhat less, OR: 1.72; 95%CI: 1.21-2.46; much less, OR: 2.08; 95%CI: 1.18-3.65). At 6 months, Asian participants were more likely than white participants to report fair/poor health (OR: 1.88; 95%CI: 1.13-3.12); Black participants reported more missed work (OR, 2.83; 95%CI: 1.60-5.00); and Other/Multiple race participants reported more fair/poor health (OR: 1.83; 95%CI: 1.10-3.05), reduced activity (somewhat less, OR: 1.60; 95%CI: 1.02-2.51; much less, OR: 2.49; 95%CI: 1.40-4.44), and more missed work (OR: 2.25; 95%CI: 1.27-3.98). DISCUSSION: Awareness of ethnic and racial differences in outcomes following SARS-CoV-2 infection may inform clinical and public health efforts to advance health equity in long-term outcomes.

This manuscript is being submitted as a Commentary; Abstract not applicable.

During the 2023-24 respiratory virus season, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends influenza and COVID-19 vaccines for all persons aged ≥6 months, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine is recommended for persons aged ≥60 years (using shared clinical decision-making), and for pregnant persons. Data from the National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module, a random-digit-dialed cellular telephone survey of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years, are used to monitor influenza, COVID-19, and RSV vaccination coverage. By December 9, 2023, an estimated 42.2% and 18.3% of adults aged ≥18 years reported receiving an influenza and updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccine, respectively; 17.0% of adults aged ≥60 years had received RSV vaccine. Coverage varied by demographic characteristics. Overall, approximately 27% and 41% of adults aged ≥18 years and 53% of adults aged ≥60 years reported that they definitely or probably will be vaccinated or were unsure whether they would be vaccinated against influenza, COVID-19, and RSV, respectively. Strong provider recommendations for and offers of vaccination could increase influenza, COVID-19, and RSV vaccination coverage. Immunization programs and vaccination partners are encouraged to use these data to understand vaccination patterns and attitudes toward vaccination in their jurisdictions to guide planning, implementation, strengthening, and evaluation of vaccination activities.

THIS REPORT UPDATES PREVIOUS CDC GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON PREFERRED PREVENTION AND TREATMENT REGIMENS REGARDING NATURALLY OCCURRING ANTHRAX. ALSO PROVIDED ARE A WIDE RANGE OF ALTERNATIVE REGIMENS TO FIRST-LINE ANTIMICROBIAL DRUGS FOR USE IF PATIENTS HAVE CONTRAINDICATIONS OR INTOLERANCES OR AFTER A WIDE-AREA AEROSOL RELEASE OF: Bacillus anthracis spores if resources become limited or a multidrug-resistant B. anthracis strain is used (Hendricks KA, Wright ME, Shadomy SV, et al.; Workgroup on Anthrax Clinical Guidelines. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention expert panel meetings on prevention and treatment of anthrax in adults. Emerg Infect Dis 2014;20:e130687; Meaney-Delman D, Rasmussen SA, Beigi RH, et al. Prophylaxis and treatment of anthrax in pregnant women. Obstet Gynecol 2013;122:885-900; Bradley JS, Peacock G, Krug SE, et al. Pediatric anthrax clinical management. Pediatrics 2014;133:e1411-36). Specifically, this report updates antimicrobial drug and antitoxin use for both postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) and treatment from these previous guidelines best practices and is based on systematic reviews of the literature regarding 1) in vitro antimicrobial drug activity against B. anthracis; 2) in vivo antimicrobial drug efficacy for PEP and treatment; 3) in vivo and human antitoxin efficacy for PEP, treatment, or both; and 4) human survival after antimicrobial drug PEP and treatment of localized anthrax, systemic anthrax, and anthrax meningitis. CHANGES FROM PREVIOUS CDC GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDE AN EXPANDED LIST OF ALTERNATIVE ANTIMICROBIAL DRUGS TO USE WHEN FIRST-LINE ANTIMICROBIAL DRUGS ARE CONTRAINDICATED OR NOT TOLERATED OR AFTER A BIOTERRORISM EVENT WHEN FIRST-LINE ANTIMICROBIAL DRUGS ARE DEPLETED OR INEFFECTIVE AGAINST A GENETICALLY ENGINEERED RESISTANT: B. anthracis strain. In addition, these updated guidelines include new recommendations regarding special considerations for the diagnosis and treatment of anthrax meningitis, including comorbid, social, and clinical predictors of anthrax meningitis. The previously published CDC guidelines and recommendations described potentially beneficial critical care measures and clinical assessment tools and procedures for persons with anthrax, which have not changed and are not addressed in this update. In addition, no changes were made to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendations for use of anthrax vaccine (Bower WA, Schiffer J, Atmar RL, et al. Use of anthrax vaccine in the United States: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, 2019. MMWR Recomm Rep 2019;68[No. RR-4]:1-14). The updated guidelines in this report can be used by health care providers to prevent and treat anthrax and guide emergency preparedness officials and planners as they develop and update plans for a wide-area aerosol release of B. anthracis.

CONTEXT: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has a long history of using high-quality science to drive public health action that has improved the health, safety, and well-being of people in the United States and globally. To ensure scientific quality, manuscripts authored by CDC staff are required to undergo an internal review and approval process known as clearance. During 2022, CDC launched a scientific clearance transformation initiative to improve the efficiency of the clearance process while ensuring scientific quality. PROGRAM: As part of the scientific clearance transformation initiative, a group of senior scientists across CDC developed a framework called the Domains of Excellence for High-Quality Publications (DOE framework). The framework includes 7 areas ("domains") that authors can consider for developing high-quality and impactful scientific manuscripts: Clarity, Scientific Rigor, Public Health Relevance, Policy Content, Ethical Standards, Collaboration, and Health Equity. Each domain includes multiple quality elements, highlighting specific key considerations within. IMPLEMENTATION: CDC scientists are expected to use the DOE framework when conceptualizing, developing, revising, and reviewing scientific products to support collaboration and to ensure the quality and impact of their scientific manuscripts. DISCUSSION: The DOE framework sets expectations for a consistent standard for scientific manuscripts across CDC and promotes collaboration among authors, partners, and other subject matter experts. Many aspects have broad applicability to the public health field at large and might be relevant for others developing high-quality manuscripts in public health science. The framework can serve as a useful reference document for CDC authors and others in the public health community as they prepare scientific manuscripts for publication and dissemination.

On June 19, 2022, the original monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were approved as a primary series for children aged 6 months-4 years (Pfizer-BioNTech) and 6 months-5 years (Moderna) based on safety, immunobridging, and limited efficacy data from clinical trials. On December 9, 2022, CDC expanded recommendations for use of updated bivalent vaccines to children aged ≥6 months. mRNA COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against emergency department or urgent care (ED/UC) encounters was evaluated within the VISION Network during July 4, 2022-June 17, 2023, among children with COVID-19-like illness aged 6 months-5 years. Among children aged 6 months-5 years who received molecular SARS-CoV-2 testing during August 1, 2022-June 17, 2023, VE of 2 monovalent Moderna doses against ED/UC encounters was 29% (95% CI = 12%-42%) ≥14 days after dose 2 (median = 100 days after dose 2; IQR = 63-155 days). Among children aged 6 months-4 years with a COVID-19-like illness who received molecular testing during September 19, 2022-June 17, 2023, VE of 3 monovalent Pfizer-BioNTech doses was 43% (95% CI = 17%-61%) ≥14 days after dose 3 (median = 75 days after dose 3; IQR = 40-139 days). Effectiveness of ≥1 bivalent dose, comparing children with at least a complete primary series and ≥1 bivalent dose to unvaccinated children, irrespective of vaccine manufacturer, was 80% (95% CI = 42%-96%) among children aged 6 months-5 years a median of 58 days (IQR = 32-83 days) after the dose. All children should stay up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccines, including initiation of COVID-19 vaccination immediately when they are eligible.

To further the understanding of post-COVID conditions, and provide a more nuanced description of symptom progression, resolution, emergence, and reemergence after SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-like illness, analysts examined data from the Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry (INSPIRE), a prospective multicenter cohort study. This report includes analysis of data on self-reported symptoms collected from 1,296 adults with COVID-like illness who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 using a Food and Drug Administration-approved polymerase chain reaction or antigen test at the time of enrollment and reported symptoms at 3-month intervals for 12 months. Prevalence of any symptom decreased substantially between baseline and the 3-month follow-up, from 98.4% to 48.2% for persons who received a positive SARS-CoV-2 test results (COVID test-positive participants) and from 88.2% to 36.6% for persons who received negative SARS-CoV-2 test results (COVID test-negative participants). Persistent symptoms decreased through 12 months; no difference between the groups was observed at 12 months (prevalence among COVID test-positive and COVID test-negative participants = 18.3% and 16.1%, respectively; p>0.05). Both groups reported symptoms that emerged or reemerged at 6, 9, and 12 months. Thus, these symptoms are not unique to COVID-19 or to post-COVID conditions. Awareness that symptoms might persist for up to 12 months, and that many symptoms might emerge or reemerge in the year after COVID-like illness, can assist health care providers in understanding the clinical signs and symptoms associated with post-COVID-like conditions.

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the respiratory disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was first identified in Wuhan, China and has since become pandemic. As part of initial response activities in the United States, enhanced contact investigations were conducted to enable early identification and isolation of additional cases and to learn more about risk factors for transmission.Methods Close contacts of nine early travel-related cases in the United States were identified. Close contacts meeting criteria for active monitoring were followed, and selected individuals were targeted for collection of additional exposure details and respiratory samples. Respiratory samples were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Results There were 404 close contacts who underwent active monitoring in the response jurisdictions; 338 had at least basic exposure data, of whom 159 had ≥1 set of respiratory samples collected and tested. Across all known close contacts under monitoring, two additional cases were identified; both secondary cases were in spouses of travel-associated case patients. The secondary attack rate among household members, all of whom had ≥1 respiratory sample tested, was 13% (95% CI: 4 – 38%).Conclusions The enhanced contact tracing investigations undertaken around nine early travel-related cases of COVID-19 in the United States identified two cases of secondary transmission, both spouses. Rapid detection and isolation of the travel-associated case patients, enabled by public awareness of COVID-19 among travelers from China, may have mitigated transmission risk among close contacts of these cases.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNo external funding was sought or received.Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData may be available upon reasonable request.

BACKGROUND: Given the lack of a national, population-based birth defects surveillance program in the United States, the National Birth Defects Prevention Network (NBDPN) has facilitated important studies on surveillance, research, and prevention of major birth defects. We sought to summarize NBDPN peer-reviewed publications and their impact. METHODS: We obtained and reviewed a curated list of 49 NBDPN multistate collaborative publications during 2000-2022, as of December 31, 2022. Each publication was reviewed and classified by type (e.g., risk factor association analysis). Key characteristics of study populations and analytic approaches used, along with publication impact (e.g., number of citations), were tabulated. RESULTS: NBDPN publications focused on prevalence estimates (N = 17), surveillance methods (N = 11), risk factor associations (N = 10), mortality and other outcomes among affected individuals (N = 6), and descriptive epidemiology of various birth defects (N = 5). The most cited publications were those that reported on prevalence estimates for a spectrum of defects and those that assessed changes in neural tube defects (NTD) prevalence following mandatory folic acid fortification in the United States. CONCLUSIONS: Results from multistate NBDPN publications have provided critical information not available through other sources, including US prevalence estimates of major birth defects, folic acid fortification and NTD prevention, and improved understanding of defect trends and surveillance efforts. Until a national birth defects surveillance program is established in the United States, NBDPN collaborative publications remain an important resource for investigating birth defects and informing decisions related to health services planning of secondary disabilities prevention and care.

BACKGROUND: Reports on medium and long-term sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infections largely lack quantification of incidence and relative risk. We describe the rationale and methods of the Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Registry (INSPIRE) that combines patient-reported outcomes with data from digital health records to understand predictors and impacts of SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHOD(S): INSPIRE is a prospective, multicenter, longitudinal study of individuals with symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection in eight regions across the US. Adults are eligible for enrollment if they are fluent in English or Spanish, reported symptoms suggestive of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, and if they are within 42 days of having a SARS-CoV-2 viral test (i.e., nucleic acid amplification test or antigen test), regardless of test results. Recruitment occurs in-person, by phone or email, and through online advertisement. A secure online platform is used to facilitate the collation of consent-related materials, digital health records, and responses to self-administered surveys. Participants are followed for up to 18 months, with patient-reported outcomes collected every three months via survey and linked to concurrent digital health data; follow-up includes no in-person involvement. Our planned enrollment is 4,800 participants, including 2,400 SARS-CoV-2 positive and 2,400 SARS-CoV-2 negative participants (as a concurrent comparison group). These data will allow assessment of longitudinal outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection and comparison of the relative risk of outcomes in individuals with and without infection. Patient-reported outcomes include self-reported health function and status, as well as clinical outcomes including health system encounters and new diagnoses. RESULT(S): Participating sites obtained institutional review board approval. Enrollment and follow-up are ongoing. CONCLUSION(S): This study will characterize medium and long-term sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection among a diverse population, predictors of sequelae, and their relative risk compared to persons with similar symptomatology but without SARS-CoV-2 infection. These data may inform clinical interventions for individuals with sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Copyright The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence, incidence, and interrelationships of persistent symptoms after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection vary. There are limited data on specific phenotypes of persistent symptoms. Using latent class analysis (LCA) modeling, we sought to identify whether specific phenotypes of COVID-19 were present 3 months and 6 months post-infection. METHODS: This was a multicenter study of symptomatic adults tested for SARS-CoV-2 with prospectively collected data on general symptoms and fatigue-related symptoms up to 6 months postdiagnosis. Using LCA, we identified symptomatically homogenous groups among COVID-positive and COVID-negative participants at each time period for both general and fatigue-related symptoms. RESULTS: Among 5963 baseline participants (4504 COVID-positive and 1459 COVID-negative), 4056 had 3-month and 2856 had 6-month data at the time of analysis. We identified 4 distinct phenotypes of post-COVID conditions (PCCs) at 3 and 6 months for both general and fatigue-related symptoms; minimal-symptom groups represented 70% of participants at 3 and 6 months. When compared with the COVID-negative cohort, COVID-positive participants had higher occurrence of loss of taste/smell and cognition problems. There was substantial class-switching over time; those in 1 symptom class at 3 months were equally likely to remain or enter a new phenotype at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: We identified distinct classes of PCC phenotypes for general and fatigue-related symptoms. Most participants had minimal or no symptoms at 3 and 6 months of follow-up. Significant proportions of participants changed symptom groups over time, suggesting that symptoms present during the acute illness may differ from prolonged symptoms and that PCCs may have a more dynamic nature than previously recognized. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT04610515.

BACKGROUND: While prior work examining severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern focused on hospitalization and death, less is known about differences in clinical presentation. We compared the prevalence of acute symptoms across pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of the Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry (INSPIRE), a cohort study enrolling symptomatic SARS-CoV-2-positive participants. We determined the association between the pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron time periods and the prevalence of 21 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute symptoms. RESULTS: We enrolled 4113 participants from December 2020 to June 2022. Pre-Delta vs Delta vs Omicron participants had increasing sore throat (40.9%, 54.6%, 70.6%; P < .001), cough (50.9%, 63.3%, 66.7%; P < .001), and runny noses (48.9%, 71.3%, 72.9%; P < .001). We observed reductions during Omicron in chest pain (31.1%, 24.2%, 20.9%; P < .001), shortness of breath (42.7%, 29.5%, 27.5%; P < .001), loss of taste (47.1%, 61.8%, 19.2%; P < .001), and loss of smell (47.5%, 55.6%, 20.0%; P < .001). After adjustment, those infected during Omicron had significantly higher odds of sore throat vs pre-Delta (odds ratio [OR], 2.76; 95% CI, 2.26-3.35) and Delta (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.69-2.28). CONCLUSIONS: Participants infected during Omicron were more likely to report symptoms of common respiratory viruses, such as sore throat, and less likely to report loss of smell and taste. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04610515.

Awareness of HIV status in Malawi is 88.3% and lowest among 15-24-year-olds (76.2%). There is a need to understand HIV testing history and transmission in this age group. We analyzed pooled HIV surveillance data to describe testing history and HIV recent infection among 8,389 HIV-positive 15-24-year-olds from 251 sites in Malawi between 2019 and 2022. Most HIV-positive 15-24-year-olds were female; aged 23-24 years; rural residents; and diagnosed at voluntary counseling and testing. No prior HIV testing was reported in 43.5% and 32.9% of 15-19-year-olds and males, respectively. Overall, 4.9% of HIV-positive diagnoses were classified as recent HIV infections, with the highest proportions among breastfeeding women (8.2%); persons tested at sexually transmitted infection clinics (9.0%); persons with a prior negative test within 6 months (13.0%); and 17-18-year-olds (7.3%). Tailored and innovative HIV prevention and testing strategies for young adolescents, young males, and pregnant and breastfeeding women are needed for HIV epidemic control.