Background: Skin cancer is the most common form of cancer, and both clinical and epidemiological data link cumulative solar dosages and the number of sunburns to skin cancer. Each year, more than 5.4 million new cases of skin cancer are diagnosed, incurring a significant health and financial burden. Recommended preventive measures for skin cancer include the use of sunscreen, sun avoidance, and protective clothing. This study used a national database to examine the association of preventive measures with the prevalence of skin cancer, specifically analyzing the preventive measures of sunscreen use, staying in the shade, and wearing long-sleeved shirts. The second aim was to determine which characteristics, if any, correlated with using prevention measures. Methods: This study analyzed data from the National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey 2015–2016 cycle to examine the association of three preventive measures (using sunscreen, staying in the shade, and wearing long-sleeved shirts) with skin cancer. Logistic regression and chi-square tests were utilized to examine the relationship between skin cancer and these prevention methods. Results: Sunscreen use (OR = 3.752; p < 0.05) was statistically associated with a lower prevalence of skin cancer, while wearing long-sleeved shirts (OR = 6.911; p = 0.064) and staying in the shade (OR = 0.646; p = 0.481) did not emerge as factors significantly associated with a lower prevalence after controlling for gender, race/ethnicity, marital status, income, health insurance, and general health. Additionally, men and individuals of color were less likely to use sunscreen. Conclusion: Sunscreen use was associated with a lower prevalence of skin cancer, while wearing long-sleeved shirts and staying in the shade was not significantly linked to lower rates of skin cancer, suggesting that these measures may not be as effective as sunscreen for preventing skin cancer. Men and individuals of color were significantly less likely to use sunscreen. These findings can help guide future education efforts and research regarding skin cancer prevention and suggest the need to develop male-oriented programs to mitigate the gender disparity in employing sun-protection measures.

This study evaluated the responsiveness of several PROMIS patient-reported outcome measures in patients with hand and upper extremity disorders and provided comparisons with the qDASH instrument. The PROMIS Upper Extremity computer adaptive test (UE CAT) v1.2, the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) CAT v1.2, the PROMIS Pain Interference (PI) CAT v1.1 and the qDASH were administered to patients presenting to an orthopaedic hand clinic during the years 2014–2016, along with anchor questions. The responsiveness of these instruments was assessed using anchor based methods. Changes in functional outcomes were evaluated by paired-sample t-test, effect size, and standardized response mean. There were a total of 255 patients (131 females and 124 males) with an average age of 50.75 years (SD = 15.84) included in our study. Based on the change and no change scores, there were three instances (PI at 3 months, PI >3 months, and qDASH >3 months follow-ups) where scores differed between those experiencing clinically meaningful change versus no clinically meaningful change. Effect sizes for the responsiveness of all instruments were large and ranged from 0.80–1.48. All four instruments demonstrated high responsiveness, with a standardized response mean ranging from 1.05 to 1.63. The PROMIS UE CAT, PF CAT, PI CAT, and qDASH are responsive to patient-reported functional change in the hand and upper extremity patient population.

Objective: Pediatric concussion is an extensive public health concern with a complex clinical presentation. Balance assessment has been well-studied in the adult population, but has been limited in children. We aimed to assess the reliability and minimum detectable change (MDC) of the Balance Error Scoring System (BESS) in healthy children. Design: This prospective observational study included 373 healthy children aged 5 to 14. Interrater reliability was assessed by having 4 assessors review videos of 50 random subjects distributed evenly by age and sex across the entire cohort. Intrarater reliability was performed by having assessors review videos of other assessors' live evaluations. Test–retest reliability was obtained by comparing BESS scores as recorded live at the 2 separate time points by the same rater. Setting: Local elementary and junior high schools. Participants: Three hundred and seventy three healthy children between the ages of 5 and 14. Interventions: The BESS was performed on all children. Main Outcome Measures: Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs) and MDC Scores. Results: The overall interrater ICC was determined to be 0.93 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.79-0.97] and intrarater ICC was 0.96 (95% CI, 0.95-0.97) with individual intrarater ICCs ranging between 0.69 and 0.99. The test–retest reliability was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.88-0.92). The MDCs were 9.6, 4.6, and 7.3 points at the 95% CIs for interrater, intrarater, and test–retest comparisons, respectively. No learning effect was seen. Conclusions: The BESS demonstrates excellent reliability in the pediatric population without evidence of a learning effect.

RRH: Rural and Remote Health. Published article number: 7050 - Using machine learning to identify factors associated with practice location of the healthcare workforce

Background: This study explored whether opinions about the government’s role in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic vary based on demographic characteristics and racial beliefs. We hypothesized that opinions about the United States (U.S.) government’s response to COVID-19 would differ based on an individual’s characteristics such as age, race, and racial beliefs. Methods: We utilized an Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research dataset to examine differences in opinion regarding the government’s pandemic response, considering personal characteristics and racial beliefs. Descriptive statistics depicted respondents’ characteristics, and a Chi-square test for independence assessed whether differences emerged based on racial attitude, self-reported racial identity, sex, income, education, and age. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to independently determine which characteristics were associated with differences in evaluating the government’s pandemic response. Results: The sample consisted of 1028 respondents: 47.5% male and 52.5% female. Overall, the group viewed the government unfavorably, with only 40% reporting that the government responded correctly and 54% believing the government is almost always wasteful and inefficient. Hispanics or Latinos were more likely to view the government as wasteful or inefficient, while more Whites rated the government’s pandemic response as appropriate. Individuals who believed that racial discrimination is the main reason why many Black people cannot get ahead generally regarded the government’s pandemic response more favorably. Only 5% deemed the government’s response excessive. Being Black, younger, and female was associated with the view that racial discrimination is the main reason why many Black people cannot get ahead. Individuals who felt this way viewed the government unfavorably by almost a 2:1 ratio. Conclusions: A majority of U.S. residents do not believe the government responded correctly to the pandemic and more than half viewed the government as wasteful and inefficient. Differences emerged by ethnicity and racial attitudes, with individuals of color holding more negative views of the government’s response. Understanding this perspective can help develop messaging and strategies that resonate with communities where racial and minority groups live.