Adolescent Medicine

Experiencing cyberbullying as a victim was a significant risk factor for suicidality in early adolescents aged 10-13 years, based on data from more than 10,000 individuals.

Adolescent suicidality, defined as suicidal ideation or suicide attempts, remains a major public health issue, Shay Arnon, MA, of Reichman University, Herzliya, Israel, and colleagues wrote.

Although cyberbullying experiences and perpetration have been associated with mental health issues, their roles as specific suicidality risk factors have not been explored, they said.

In a study published in JAMA Network Open, the researchers analyzed data on cyberbullying experiences collected between July 2018 and January 2021 as part of the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study, with a diverse population of young adolescents aged 10-13 years.

The study population included 10,414 participants; the mean age was 12 years, 47.6% were female.

Overall, 7.6% of the participants had reported suicidality during the study period. A total of 930 (8.9%) reported experiencing cyberbullying as victims, and 96 (0.9%) reported perpetrating cyberbullying; 66 (69%) of the perpetrators also experienced cyberbullying.

Experiencing cyberbullying was associated with a fourfold increased risk of suicidality (odds ratio, 4.2), that remained significant after controlling for factors including demographics and multiple environmental risk and protective factors, including negative life events, family conflict, parental monitoring, school environment, and racial/ethnic discrimination (OR, 2.5), and after controlling for internalizing and externalizing psychopathology (OR, 1.8).

Adolescents who were both target and perpetrator of offline peer aggression had an increased risk of suicidality (OR, 1.5 for both), and cyberbullying experiences also remained associated with suicidality when included with offline bullying as target and perpetrator (OR, 1.7).

The results contradict previous studies showing an increased risk of suicidality in cyberbullying perpetrators as well as victims, the researchers noted. Some possible reasons for this difference are the anonymity of many cyberbullying perpetrators, and the tendency of many adolescents on social media to make quick-turn comments without thinking of their actions as offensive to others.

The study findings were limited by several factors including the cross-sectional design, which prevented conclusions about causality, a low-resolution screening for cyberbullying experiences, and the effect of unmeasured confounding variables, the researchers noted. Other limitations include the collection of data before the COVID-19 pandemic, so the effects of the pandemic on peer online communication and cyberbullying could not be determined.

However, the results suggest that experiencing cyberbullying is significantly associated with suicidality in young adolescents independent of other peer aggression experiences. “Assessment of cyberbullying experiences among children and adolescents should be a component of the comprehensive suicide risk assessment,” they concluded.
 

Pandemic pushed existing cyberbullying problems

“Electronic media use has increased significantly in the early adolescent demographic, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Peter L. Loper Jr., MD, of the University of South Carolina, Columbia, said in an interview.

“In many cases, the majority of an adolescent’s peer-peer interactions are now occurring on electronic devices. This has dramatically increased the incidence and prevalence of cyberbullying, making this study very timely and relevant,” said Dr. Loper, who was not involved in the study.

“From an experiential, ethnographic standpoint working on a psychiatric acute crisis stabilization unit, we have consistently recognized cyberbullying as a common and frequent etiology of suicidal ideation or attempt in the adolescents admitted to our unit,” said Dr. Loper. 

“Unfortunately, much of the peer-peer interactions vital to supporting healthy adolescent development are now occurring on electronic devices instead of real-time and in person,” said Dr. Loper. “This comes with great risk to our adolescents and makes them susceptible to multiple potential dangers, not the least of which is cyberbullying.

“The biggest challenge in mitigating the impact of cyberbullying is that most adolescences want to have access to electronic media,” he said. “Limiting adolescents’ access to electronic media, and monitoring adolescents’ electronic media use are vital steps to preventing cyberbullying. Apps such as ‘Bark’ can used by parents to monitor their adolescents’ electronic media activity to ensure their safety and well-being.”

Additional research is needed to focus on other areas in which electronic media use may be affecting adolescents’ social, emotional, and psychological well-being and development, “which will become more and more important as electronic media use in this demographic continues to increase,” Dr. Loper said.

The study was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health and the Lifespan Brain Institute of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Penn Medicine, University of Pennsylvania. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose. Dr. Loper had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Experiencing cyberbullying as a victim was a significant risk factor for suicidality in early adolescents aged 10-13 years, based on data from more than 10,000 individuals.

Adolescent suicidality, defined as suicidal ideation or suicide attempts, remains a major public health issue, Shay Arnon, MA, of Reichman University, Herzliya, Israel, and colleagues wrote.

Although cyberbullying experiences and perpetration have been associated with mental health issues, their roles as specific suicidality risk factors have not been explored, they said.

In a study published in JAMA Network Open, the researchers analyzed data on cyberbullying experiences collected between July 2018 and January 2021 as part of the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study, with a diverse population of young adolescents aged 10-13 years.

The study population included 10,414 participants; the mean age was 12 years, 47.6% were female.

Overall, 7.6% of the participants had reported suicidality during the study period. A total of 930 (8.9%) reported experiencing cyberbullying as victims, and 96 (0.9%) reported perpetrating cyberbullying; 66 (69%) of the perpetrators also experienced cyberbullying.

Experiencing cyberbullying was associated with a fourfold increased risk of suicidality (odds ratio, 4.2), that remained significant after controlling for factors including demographics and multiple environmental risk and protective factors, including negative life events, family conflict, parental monitoring, school environment, and racial/ethnic discrimination (OR, 2.5), and after controlling for internalizing and externalizing psychopathology (OR, 1.8).

Adolescents who were both target and perpetrator of offline peer aggression had an increased risk of suicidality (OR, 1.5 for both), and cyberbullying experiences also remained associated with suicidality when included with offline bullying as target and perpetrator (OR, 1.7).

The results contradict previous studies showing an increased risk of suicidality in cyberbullying perpetrators as well as victims, the researchers noted. Some possible reasons for this difference are the anonymity of many cyberbullying perpetrators, and the tendency of many adolescents on social media to make quick-turn comments without thinking of their actions as offensive to others.

The study findings were limited by several factors including the cross-sectional design, which prevented conclusions about causality, a low-resolution screening for cyberbullying experiences, and the effect of unmeasured confounding variables, the researchers noted. Other limitations include the collection of data before the COVID-19 pandemic, so the effects of the pandemic on peer online communication and cyberbullying could not be determined.

However, the results suggest that experiencing cyberbullying is significantly associated with suicidality in young adolescents independent of other peer aggression experiences. “Assessment of cyberbullying experiences among children and adolescents should be a component of the comprehensive suicide risk assessment,” they concluded.
 

Pandemic pushed existing cyberbullying problems

“Electronic media use has increased significantly in the early adolescent demographic, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Peter L. Loper Jr., MD, of the University of South Carolina, Columbia, said in an interview.

“In many cases, the majority of an adolescent’s peer-peer interactions are now occurring on electronic devices. This has dramatically increased the incidence and prevalence of cyberbullying, making this study very timely and relevant,” said Dr. Loper, who was not involved in the study.

“From an experiential, ethnographic standpoint working on a psychiatric acute crisis stabilization unit, we have consistently recognized cyberbullying as a common and frequent etiology of suicidal ideation or attempt in the adolescents admitted to our unit,” said Dr. Loper. 

“Unfortunately, much of the peer-peer interactions vital to supporting healthy adolescent development are now occurring on electronic devices instead of real-time and in person,” said Dr. Loper. “This comes with great risk to our adolescents and makes them susceptible to multiple potential dangers, not the least of which is cyberbullying.

“The biggest challenge in mitigating the impact of cyberbullying is that most adolescences want to have access to electronic media,” he said. “Limiting adolescents’ access to electronic media, and monitoring adolescents’ electronic media use are vital steps to preventing cyberbullying. Apps such as ‘Bark’ can used by parents to monitor their adolescents’ electronic media activity to ensure their safety and well-being.”

Additional research is needed to focus on other areas in which electronic media use may be affecting adolescents’ social, emotional, and psychological well-being and development, “which will become more and more important as electronic media use in this demographic continues to increase,” Dr. Loper said.

The study was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health and the Lifespan Brain Institute of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Penn Medicine, University of Pennsylvania. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose. Dr. Loper had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Experiencing cyberbullying as a victim was a significant risk factor for suicidality in early adolescents aged 10-13 years, based on data from more than 10,000 individuals.

Adolescent suicidality, defined as suicidal ideation or suicide attempts, remains a major public health issue, Shay Arnon, MA, of Reichman University, Herzliya, Israel, and colleagues wrote.

Although cyberbullying experiences and perpetration have been associated with mental health issues, their roles as specific suicidality risk factors have not been explored, they said.

In a study published in JAMA Network Open, the researchers analyzed data on cyberbullying experiences collected between July 2018 and January 2021 as part of the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study, with a diverse population of young adolescents aged 10-13 years.

The study population included 10,414 participants; the mean age was 12 years, 47.6% were female.

Overall, 7.6% of the participants had reported suicidality during the study period. A total of 930 (8.9%) reported experiencing cyberbullying as victims, and 96 (0.9%) reported perpetrating cyberbullying; 66 (69%) of the perpetrators also experienced cyberbullying.

Experiencing cyberbullying was associated with a fourfold increased risk of suicidality (odds ratio, 4.2), that remained significant after controlling for factors including demographics and multiple environmental risk and protective factors, including negative life events, family conflict, parental monitoring, school environment, and racial/ethnic discrimination (OR, 2.5), and after controlling for internalizing and externalizing psychopathology (OR, 1.8).

Adolescents who were both target and perpetrator of offline peer aggression had an increased risk of suicidality (OR, 1.5 for both), and cyberbullying experiences also remained associated with suicidality when included with offline bullying as target and perpetrator (OR, 1.7).

The results contradict previous studies showing an increased risk of suicidality in cyberbullying perpetrators as well as victims, the researchers noted. Some possible reasons for this difference are the anonymity of many cyberbullying perpetrators, and the tendency of many adolescents on social media to make quick-turn comments without thinking of their actions as offensive to others.

The study findings were limited by several factors including the cross-sectional design, which prevented conclusions about causality, a low-resolution screening for cyberbullying experiences, and the effect of unmeasured confounding variables, the researchers noted. Other limitations include the collection of data before the COVID-19 pandemic, so the effects of the pandemic on peer online communication and cyberbullying could not be determined.

However, the results suggest that experiencing cyberbullying is significantly associated with suicidality in young adolescents independent of other peer aggression experiences. “Assessment of cyberbullying experiences among children and adolescents should be a component of the comprehensive suicide risk assessment,” they concluded.
 

Pandemic pushed existing cyberbullying problems

“Electronic media use has increased significantly in the early adolescent demographic, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Peter L. Loper Jr., MD, of the University of South Carolina, Columbia, said in an interview.

“In many cases, the majority of an adolescent’s peer-peer interactions are now occurring on electronic devices. This has dramatically increased the incidence and prevalence of cyberbullying, making this study very timely and relevant,” said Dr. Loper, who was not involved in the study.

“From an experiential, ethnographic standpoint working on a psychiatric acute crisis stabilization unit, we have consistently recognized cyberbullying as a common and frequent etiology of suicidal ideation or attempt in the adolescents admitted to our unit,” said Dr. Loper. 

“Unfortunately, much of the peer-peer interactions vital to supporting healthy adolescent development are now occurring on electronic devices instead of real-time and in person,” said Dr. Loper. “This comes with great risk to our adolescents and makes them susceptible to multiple potential dangers, not the least of which is cyberbullying.

“The biggest challenge in mitigating the impact of cyberbullying is that most adolescences want to have access to electronic media,” he said. “Limiting adolescents’ access to electronic media, and monitoring adolescents’ electronic media use are vital steps to preventing cyberbullying. Apps such as ‘Bark’ can used by parents to monitor their adolescents’ electronic media activity to ensure their safety and well-being.”

Additional research is needed to focus on other areas in which electronic media use may be affecting adolescents’ social, emotional, and psychological well-being and development, “which will become more and more important as electronic media use in this demographic continues to increase,” Dr. Loper said.

The study was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health and the Lifespan Brain Institute of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Penn Medicine, University of Pennsylvania. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose. Dr. Loper had no financial conflicts to disclose.

With suicide rates among young people rising in recent years, the American Academy of Pediatrics is now recommending adolescents 12 and up be screened for suicide risk as a part of regular preventive care.

The group recently added the recommendation on screening for suicide risk to its depression screening guidelines. Health care providers are urged to ask their young patients a set of questions to identify thoughts and plans for suicide, WDEF.com reported.

“Number one we need to screen for depression and the presence of depression, and those people will usually have a feeling of depressed mood, hopelessness, helplessness, and/or basically a lack of interest in pleasure or anticipation of happiness,” Timothy Fuller, DO, medical director of behavioral health and pediatrics for the American Academy of Pediatrics, told WDEF.

It’s a myth that talking about suicide makes it more likely a person will attempt suicide, he said.

“One of the biggest things you can do, as well, if you do have a child or teenager that has suicidality or that have depression with serious, significant suicide risk, is to just ask them how they’re doing every day,” Dr. Fuller said, according to WDEF.

The recommendation comes about 6 months after U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, MD, urged more attention be paid to youth mental health.

“Mental health challenges in children, adolescents, and young adults are real and widespread. Even before the pandemic, an alarming number of young people struggled with feelings of helplessness, depression, and thoughts of suicide – and rates have increased over the past decade,” Dr. Murthy said, according to a news release from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.

Between 2007 and 2018, suicide rates among people ages 10-24 in the United States went up by 57%, the department said. Estimates showed over 6,600 suicides among this age group in 2020, it said.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

With suicide rates among young people rising in recent years, the American Academy of Pediatrics is now recommending adolescents 12 and up be screened for suicide risk as a part of regular preventive care.

The group recently added the recommendation on screening for suicide risk to its depression screening guidelines. Health care providers are urged to ask their young patients a set of questions to identify thoughts and plans for suicide, WDEF.com reported.

“Number one we need to screen for depression and the presence of depression, and those people will usually have a feeling of depressed mood, hopelessness, helplessness, and/or basically a lack of interest in pleasure or anticipation of happiness,” Timothy Fuller, DO, medical director of behavioral health and pediatrics for the American Academy of Pediatrics, told WDEF.

It’s a myth that talking about suicide makes it more likely a person will attempt suicide, he said.

“One of the biggest things you can do, as well, if you do have a child or teenager that has suicidality or that have depression with serious, significant suicide risk, is to just ask them how they’re doing every day,” Dr. Fuller said, according to WDEF.

The recommendation comes about 6 months after U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, MD, urged more attention be paid to youth mental health.

“Mental health challenges in children, adolescents, and young adults are real and widespread. Even before the pandemic, an alarming number of young people struggled with feelings of helplessness, depression, and thoughts of suicide – and rates have increased over the past decade,” Dr. Murthy said, according to a news release from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.

Between 2007 and 2018, suicide rates among people ages 10-24 in the United States went up by 57%, the department said. Estimates showed over 6,600 suicides among this age group in 2020, it said.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

With suicide rates among young people rising in recent years, the American Academy of Pediatrics is now recommending adolescents 12 and up be screened for suicide risk as a part of regular preventive care.

The group recently added the recommendation on screening for suicide risk to its depression screening guidelines. Health care providers are urged to ask their young patients a set of questions to identify thoughts and plans for suicide, WDEF.com reported.

“Number one we need to screen for depression and the presence of depression, and those people will usually have a feeling of depressed mood, hopelessness, helplessness, and/or basically a lack of interest in pleasure or anticipation of happiness,” Timothy Fuller, DO, medical director of behavioral health and pediatrics for the American Academy of Pediatrics, told WDEF.

It’s a myth that talking about suicide makes it more likely a person will attempt suicide, he said.

“One of the biggest things you can do, as well, if you do have a child or teenager that has suicidality or that have depression with serious, significant suicide risk, is to just ask them how they’re doing every day,” Dr. Fuller said, according to WDEF.

The recommendation comes about 6 months after U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, MD, urged more attention be paid to youth mental health.

“Mental health challenges in children, adolescents, and young adults are real and widespread. Even before the pandemic, an alarming number of young people struggled with feelings of helplessness, depression, and thoughts of suicide – and rates have increased over the past decade,” Dr. Murthy said, according to a news release from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.

Between 2007 and 2018, suicide rates among people ages 10-24 in the United States went up by 57%, the department said. Estimates showed over 6,600 suicides among this age group in 2020, it said.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

On the 50th anniversary of Title IX’s inception, the Biden administration has proposed changes to the law that would protect transgender students and assault survivors on college and university campuses.

With these changes, the protections provided by Title IX – a civil rights law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in schools that receive federal funding – would now be extended to students who identify as trans. The update would ensure that government-funded schools make proper accommodations for a trans student population, such as allowing students to use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity, and enforcing the use of students’ correct pronouns.

The revisions also seek to undo amendments made to the law by Betsy DeVos, who was secretary of education during the Trump presidency, which strengthened due process protections for students accused of sexual assault and narrowed the definition of sexual harassment. These rules “weakened protections for survivors of sexual assault and diminished the promise of an education free from discrimination,” the Biden administration said.

“Our proposed changes will allow us to continue that progress and ensure all our nation’s students – no matter where they live, who they are, or whom they love – can learn, grow, and thrive in school,” Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, PhD, said in a news release. “We welcome public comment on these critical regulations so we can further the Biden-Harris Administration’s mission of creating educational environments free from sex discrimination and sexual violence.”

The revisions will go through a long period of public comment before they are set into law. Still, the proposed changes mark a way forward for trans students who are not explicitly protected under Title IX, and they offer solace to assault survivors who may have felt discouraged to come forward and report under Ms. DeVos’s rules.

“The proposed regulations reflect the [Education] Department’s commitment to give full effect to Title IX, ensuring that no person experiences sex discrimination in education, and that school procedures for addressing complaints of sex discrimination, including sexual violence and other forms of sex-based harassment, are clear, effective, and fair to all involved,” said Catherine Lhamon, JD, assistant secretary for the Education Department’s Office Of Civil Rights.

More specific rules about transgender students’ participation in school sports are still to come.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

On the 50th anniversary of Title IX’s inception, the Biden administration has proposed changes to the law that would protect transgender students and assault survivors on college and university campuses.

With these changes, the protections provided by Title IX – a civil rights law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in schools that receive federal funding – would now be extended to students who identify as trans. The update would ensure that government-funded schools make proper accommodations for a trans student population, such as allowing students to use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity, and enforcing the use of students’ correct pronouns.

The revisions also seek to undo amendments made to the law by Betsy DeVos, who was secretary of education during the Trump presidency, which strengthened due process protections for students accused of sexual assault and narrowed the definition of sexual harassment. These rules “weakened protections for survivors of sexual assault and diminished the promise of an education free from discrimination,” the Biden administration said.

“Our proposed changes will allow us to continue that progress and ensure all our nation’s students – no matter where they live, who they are, or whom they love – can learn, grow, and thrive in school,” Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, PhD, said in a news release. “We welcome public comment on these critical regulations so we can further the Biden-Harris Administration’s mission of creating educational environments free from sex discrimination and sexual violence.”

The revisions will go through a long period of public comment before they are set into law. Still, the proposed changes mark a way forward for trans students who are not explicitly protected under Title IX, and they offer solace to assault survivors who may have felt discouraged to come forward and report under Ms. DeVos’s rules.

“The proposed regulations reflect the [Education] Department’s commitment to give full effect to Title IX, ensuring that no person experiences sex discrimination in education, and that school procedures for addressing complaints of sex discrimination, including sexual violence and other forms of sex-based harassment, are clear, effective, and fair to all involved,” said Catherine Lhamon, JD, assistant secretary for the Education Department’s Office Of Civil Rights.

More specific rules about transgender students’ participation in school sports are still to come.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

On the 50th anniversary of Title IX’s inception, the Biden administration has proposed changes to the law that would protect transgender students and assault survivors on college and university campuses.

With these changes, the protections provided by Title IX – a civil rights law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in schools that receive federal funding – would now be extended to students who identify as trans. The update would ensure that government-funded schools make proper accommodations for a trans student population, such as allowing students to use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity, and enforcing the use of students’ correct pronouns.

The revisions also seek to undo amendments made to the law by Betsy DeVos, who was secretary of education during the Trump presidency, which strengthened due process protections for students accused of sexual assault and narrowed the definition of sexual harassment. These rules “weakened protections for survivors of sexual assault and diminished the promise of an education free from discrimination,” the Biden administration said.

“Our proposed changes will allow us to continue that progress and ensure all our nation’s students – no matter where they live, who they are, or whom they love – can learn, grow, and thrive in school,” Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, PhD, said in a news release. “We welcome public comment on these critical regulations so we can further the Biden-Harris Administration’s mission of creating educational environments free from sex discrimination and sexual violence.”

The revisions will go through a long period of public comment before they are set into law. Still, the proposed changes mark a way forward for trans students who are not explicitly protected under Title IX, and they offer solace to assault survivors who may have felt discouraged to come forward and report under Ms. DeVos’s rules.

“The proposed regulations reflect the [Education] Department’s commitment to give full effect to Title IX, ensuring that no person experiences sex discrimination in education, and that school procedures for addressing complaints of sex discrimination, including sexual violence and other forms of sex-based harassment, are clear, effective, and fair to all involved,” said Catherine Lhamon, JD, assistant secretary for the Education Department’s Office Of Civil Rights.

More specific rules about transgender students’ participation in school sports are still to come.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

Racial residential segregation was significantly associated with poor glycemic control in Black adolescents with type 1 diabetes, according to data from 144 individuals.

Racial residential segregation is considered a form of systemic racism that involves limited access to resources, including health care resources, Deborah A. Ellis, MD, of Wayne State University, Detroit, and colleagues wrote in a poster presented at the annual meeting of the American Diabetes Association.

In the study, the researchers recruited youth aged 10-15 years with type 1 diabetes from seven pediatric clinics in two large U.S. cities. The mean age of the participants was 13.3 years, and the mean hemoglobin A1c was 11.5%.

Diabetes management was based on self-reports using the Diabetes Management Scale (DMS). Racial residential segregation, which refers to the separation of groups within a geographic area, was determined using data from the U.S. Census using Location Quotient (LQ) at the block group level; this showed the ratio of the Black population to the total population, compared with the same ratio in the metropolitan area.

The mean family income was $34,163, and the mean LQ was 3.04, “indicating residence in highly segregated neighborhoods,” the researchers wrote.

Overall, racial residential segregation was significantly associated with A1c (P = .001) but not with DMS (P = .311). The researchers also conducted a stepwise multiple regression analysis including age, insulin delivery method, neighborhood adversity (a 9-item composite with variables including percentage of persons living in poverty, percentage of households with no vehicle), and family income. They found that only age, insulin delivery method, and racial residential segregation had significant impacts of A1c levels.

The study was limited by several factors, including the use of self-reports.

However, the results are consistent with previous studies showing the potential negative health effects of structural racism, the researchers wrote. The findings suggest that racial residential segregation has an independent effect on glycemic control in Black youth with type 1 diabetes, and consequently, “advocacy and policy making to address such inequities could improve diabetes population health.”
 

Location makes a difference

“Poor neighborhoods have been associated with high rates of obesity, hypertension, type 2 diabetes and high cholesterol,” Romesh K. Khardori, MD, professor of medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, said in an interview. However, “not much is known about impact of racial segregation on type 1 diabetes,” said Dr. Khardori, who was not involved in the study.

Dr. Khardori was not surprised by the current study findings. “In our practice, Black youth coming from racially segregated or low-income housing projects often tend have poor diabetes control, with repeated admissions to local hospitals for managing acute/chronic complications of type 1 diabetes,” he said.

The current findings reflect Dr. Khardori’s clinical experience and highlight the need for clinicians to recognize the increased risk for poor glycemic control and poor outcomes in this vulnerable population.

More research is needed to expand the observations of the current study, Dr. Khardori said. Future researchers also should “involve community leaders and politicians to educate and garner more support for mitigation efforts.”

The study was supported by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Dr. Ellis and Dr. Khardori had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Racial residential segregation was significantly associated with poor glycemic control in Black adolescents with type 1 diabetes, according to data from 144 individuals.

Racial residential segregation is considered a form of systemic racism that involves limited access to resources, including health care resources, Deborah A. Ellis, MD, of Wayne State University, Detroit, and colleagues wrote in a poster presented at the annual meeting of the American Diabetes Association.

In the study, the researchers recruited youth aged 10-15 years with type 1 diabetes from seven pediatric clinics in two large U.S. cities. The mean age of the participants was 13.3 years, and the mean hemoglobin A1c was 11.5%.

Diabetes management was based on self-reports using the Diabetes Management Scale (DMS). Racial residential segregation, which refers to the separation of groups within a geographic area, was determined using data from the U.S. Census using Location Quotient (LQ) at the block group level; this showed the ratio of the Black population to the total population, compared with the same ratio in the metropolitan area.

The mean family income was $34,163, and the mean LQ was 3.04, “indicating residence in highly segregated neighborhoods,” the researchers wrote.

Overall, racial residential segregation was significantly associated with A1c (P = .001) but not with DMS (P = .311). The researchers also conducted a stepwise multiple regression analysis including age, insulin delivery method, neighborhood adversity (a 9-item composite with variables including percentage of persons living in poverty, percentage of households with no vehicle), and family income. They found that only age, insulin delivery method, and racial residential segregation had significant impacts of A1c levels.

The study was limited by several factors, including the use of self-reports.

However, the results are consistent with previous studies showing the potential negative health effects of structural racism, the researchers wrote. The findings suggest that racial residential segregation has an independent effect on glycemic control in Black youth with type 1 diabetes, and consequently, “advocacy and policy making to address such inequities could improve diabetes population health.”
 

Location makes a difference

“Poor neighborhoods have been associated with high rates of obesity, hypertension, type 2 diabetes and high cholesterol,” Romesh K. Khardori, MD, professor of medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, said in an interview. However, “not much is known about impact of racial segregation on type 1 diabetes,” said Dr. Khardori, who was not involved in the study.

Dr. Khardori was not surprised by the current study findings. “In our practice, Black youth coming from racially segregated or low-income housing projects often tend have poor diabetes control, with repeated admissions to local hospitals for managing acute/chronic complications of type 1 diabetes,” he said.

The current findings reflect Dr. Khardori’s clinical experience and highlight the need for clinicians to recognize the increased risk for poor glycemic control and poor outcomes in this vulnerable population.

More research is needed to expand the observations of the current study, Dr. Khardori said. Future researchers also should “involve community leaders and politicians to educate and garner more support for mitigation efforts.”

The study was supported by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Dr. Ellis and Dr. Khardori had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Racial residential segregation was significantly associated with poor glycemic control in Black adolescents with type 1 diabetes, according to data from 144 individuals.

Racial residential segregation is considered a form of systemic racism that involves limited access to resources, including health care resources, Deborah A. Ellis, MD, of Wayne State University, Detroit, and colleagues wrote in a poster presented at the annual meeting of the American Diabetes Association.

In the study, the researchers recruited youth aged 10-15 years with type 1 diabetes from seven pediatric clinics in two large U.S. cities. The mean age of the participants was 13.3 years, and the mean hemoglobin A1c was 11.5%.

Diabetes management was based on self-reports using the Diabetes Management Scale (DMS). Racial residential segregation, which refers to the separation of groups within a geographic area, was determined using data from the U.S. Census using Location Quotient (LQ) at the block group level; this showed the ratio of the Black population to the total population, compared with the same ratio in the metropolitan area.

The mean family income was $34,163, and the mean LQ was 3.04, “indicating residence in highly segregated neighborhoods,” the researchers wrote.

Overall, racial residential segregation was significantly associated with A1c (P = .001) but not with DMS (P = .311). The researchers also conducted a stepwise multiple regression analysis including age, insulin delivery method, neighborhood adversity (a 9-item composite with variables including percentage of persons living in poverty, percentage of households with no vehicle), and family income. They found that only age, insulin delivery method, and racial residential segregation had significant impacts of A1c levels.

The study was limited by several factors, including the use of self-reports.

However, the results are consistent with previous studies showing the potential negative health effects of structural racism, the researchers wrote. The findings suggest that racial residential segregation has an independent effect on glycemic control in Black youth with type 1 diabetes, and consequently, “advocacy and policy making to address such inequities could improve diabetes population health.”
 

Location makes a difference

“Poor neighborhoods have been associated with high rates of obesity, hypertension, type 2 diabetes and high cholesterol,” Romesh K. Khardori, MD, professor of medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, said in an interview. However, “not much is known about impact of racial segregation on type 1 diabetes,” said Dr. Khardori, who was not involved in the study.

Dr. Khardori was not surprised by the current study findings. “In our practice, Black youth coming from racially segregated or low-income housing projects often tend have poor diabetes control, with repeated admissions to local hospitals for managing acute/chronic complications of type 1 diabetes,” he said.

The current findings reflect Dr. Khardori’s clinical experience and highlight the need for clinicians to recognize the increased risk for poor glycemic control and poor outcomes in this vulnerable population.

More research is needed to expand the observations of the current study, Dr. Khardori said. Future researchers also should “involve community leaders and politicians to educate and garner more support for mitigation efforts.”

The study was supported by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Dr. Ellis and Dr. Khardori had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination coverage of at least one dose significantly increased in U.S. adolescents from 56.1% in 2015 to 75.4% in 2020, according to the National Immunization Survey–Teen (NIS-Teen).

The telephone survey, conducted among the parents or guardians of children ages 13-17, found a faster increase in coverage among males than females: 4.7 percentage points annually versus 2.7 percentage points annually. With yearly overall survey samples ranging from 21,875 to 17,970, these coverage differences between males and females narrowed over the 5 years of the survey period.

The difference between coverage among males and females decreased from 13 to 3 percentage points. Traditionally, parents of boys have been less likely to vaccinate their sons against HPV.

Despite the increase in uptake, however, in 2020 about 25% of adolescents had not received at least one dose of HPV vaccine. “Targeted strategies are needed to increase coverage and narrow down inequalities,” Peng-jun Lu, MD, PhD, of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, and colleagues wrote in Pediatrics.

In other NIS-Teen findings:

• Coverage in 2020 was 73.7% for males and 76.8% for females (P < .05).
• Coverage rose to 80.7% for those with a provider recommendation but was only 51.7% for those without one (P < .05).
• The rate was 80.3% for those with a well-child visit at age 11-12 years and 64.8% for those without (P < .05).
• In multivariable logistic regression, the main characteristics independently associated with a higher likelihood of vaccination included a provider recommendation, age 16-17 years, and being non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, American Indian, or Alaskan Native.
• Other predictors of vaccination included having Medicaid insurance and having a mother who was widowed, divorced, or separated, or had no more than a high school education.
• Also predictive was having two or more provider contacts in the past 12 months, a well-child visit at age 11-12 years, and one or two vaccine providers (P < .05).
• Coverage among adolescents living in non-metropolitan statistical areas was significantly lower than those living in MSA principal cities in all years assessed (P < .05).

Provider recommendation remains significant and has historically been highly associated with HPV vaccination. In the 2012 NIS-Teen, for example, 15% of parents not intending to have their daughters vaccinated in the next 12 months cited the lack of a provider recommendation.

“To increase HPV vaccination coverage and further reduce HPV-related morbidity and mortality, providers, parents, and adolescents should use every health care visit as a chance to review vaccination histories and ensure that every adolescent receives the HPV vaccine and other needed vaccines,” Dr. Lu and associates wrote. But 18.5% of parents in the survey received no provider recommendation.

“Of note, we found that teenagers who had mothers with more education or who live in more rural communities had a lower likelihood of receiving vaccination against HPV,” Dr. Lu told this news organization. “Further research should be conducted to better understand these findings.”

According to Margaret E. Thew, DNP, FNP-BC, director of adolescent medicine at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee, several studies have highlighted resistance to the vaccine among better-educated parents. “Parents with higher education associate the HPV vaccine with sexual activity and consequently refuse,” said Ms. Thew, who was not involved in the NIS-Teen study. “They mistakenly assume that their children are not sexually active and they lack the understanding that HPV is one of the biggest causes of oral cancer.”

Human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination coverage of at least one dose significantly increased in U.S. adolescents from 56.1% in 2015 to 75.4% in 2020, according to the National Immunization Survey–Teen (NIS-Teen).

The telephone survey, conducted among the parents or guardians of children ages 13-17, found a faster increase in coverage among males than females: 4.7 percentage points annually versus 2.7 percentage points annually. With yearly overall survey samples ranging from 21,875 to 17,970, these coverage differences between males and females narrowed over the 5 years of the survey period.

The difference between coverage among males and females decreased from 13 to 3 percentage points. Traditionally, parents of boys have been less likely to vaccinate their sons against HPV.

Despite the increase in uptake, however, in 2020 about 25% of adolescents had not received at least one dose of HPV vaccine. “Targeted strategies are needed to increase coverage and narrow down inequalities,” Peng-jun Lu, MD, PhD, of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, and colleagues wrote in Pediatrics.

In other NIS-Teen findings:

• Coverage in 2020 was 73.7% for males and 76.8% for females (P < .05).
• Coverage rose to 80.7% for those with a provider recommendation but was only 51.7% for those without one (P < .05).
• The rate was 80.3% for those with a well-child visit at age 11-12 years and 64.8% for those without (P < .05).
• In multivariable logistic regression, the main characteristics independently associated with a higher likelihood of vaccination included a provider recommendation, age 16-17 years, and being non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, American Indian, or Alaskan Native.
• Other predictors of vaccination included having Medicaid insurance and having a mother who was widowed, divorced, or separated, or had no more than a high school education.
• Also predictive was having two or more provider contacts in the past 12 months, a well-child visit at age 11-12 years, and one or two vaccine providers (P < .05).
• Coverage among adolescents living in non-metropolitan statistical areas was significantly lower than those living in MSA principal cities in all years assessed (P < .05).

Provider recommendation remains significant and has historically been highly associated with HPV vaccination. In the 2012 NIS-Teen, for example, 15% of parents not intending to have their daughters vaccinated in the next 12 months cited the lack of a provider recommendation.

“To increase HPV vaccination coverage and further reduce HPV-related morbidity and mortality, providers, parents, and adolescents should use every health care visit as a chance to review vaccination histories and ensure that every adolescent receives the HPV vaccine and other needed vaccines,” Dr. Lu and associates wrote. But 18.5% of parents in the survey received no provider recommendation.

“Of note, we found that teenagers who had mothers with more education or who live in more rural communities had a lower likelihood of receiving vaccination against HPV,” Dr. Lu told this news organization. “Further research should be conducted to better understand these findings.”

According to Margaret E. Thew, DNP, FNP-BC, director of adolescent medicine at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee, several studies have highlighted resistance to the vaccine among better-educated parents. “Parents with higher education associate the HPV vaccine with sexual activity and consequently refuse,” said Ms. Thew, who was not involved in the NIS-Teen study. “They mistakenly assume that their children are not sexually active and they lack the understanding that HPV is one of the biggest causes of oral cancer.”

Human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination coverage of at least one dose significantly increased in U.S. adolescents from 56.1% in 2015 to 75.4% in 2020, according to the National Immunization Survey–Teen (NIS-Teen).

The telephone survey, conducted among the parents or guardians of children ages 13-17, found a faster increase in coverage among males than females: 4.7 percentage points annually versus 2.7 percentage points annually. With yearly overall survey samples ranging from 21,875 to 17,970, these coverage differences between males and females narrowed over the 5 years of the survey period.

The difference between coverage among males and females decreased from 13 to 3 percentage points. Traditionally, parents of boys have been less likely to vaccinate their sons against HPV.

Despite the increase in uptake, however, in 2020 about 25% of adolescents had not received at least one dose of HPV vaccine. “Targeted strategies are needed to increase coverage and narrow down inequalities,” Peng-jun Lu, MD, PhD, of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, and colleagues wrote in Pediatrics.

In other NIS-Teen findings:

• Coverage in 2020 was 73.7% for males and 76.8% for females (P < .05).
• Coverage rose to 80.7% for those with a provider recommendation but was only 51.7% for those without one (P < .05).
• The rate was 80.3% for those with a well-child visit at age 11-12 years and 64.8% for those without (P < .05).
• In multivariable logistic regression, the main characteristics independently associated with a higher likelihood of vaccination included a provider recommendation, age 16-17 years, and being non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, American Indian, or Alaskan Native.
• Other predictors of vaccination included having Medicaid insurance and having a mother who was widowed, divorced, or separated, or had no more than a high school education.
• Also predictive was having two or more provider contacts in the past 12 months, a well-child visit at age 11-12 years, and one or two vaccine providers (P < .05).
• Coverage among adolescents living in non-metropolitan statistical areas was significantly lower than those living in MSA principal cities in all years assessed (P < .05).

Provider recommendation remains significant and has historically been highly associated with HPV vaccination. In the 2012 NIS-Teen, for example, 15% of parents not intending to have their daughters vaccinated in the next 12 months cited the lack of a provider recommendation.

“To increase HPV vaccination coverage and further reduce HPV-related morbidity and mortality, providers, parents, and adolescents should use every health care visit as a chance to review vaccination histories and ensure that every adolescent receives the HPV vaccine and other needed vaccines,” Dr. Lu and associates wrote. But 18.5% of parents in the survey received no provider recommendation.

“Of note, we found that teenagers who had mothers with more education or who live in more rural communities had a lower likelihood of receiving vaccination against HPV,” Dr. Lu told this news organization. “Further research should be conducted to better understand these findings.”

According to Margaret E. Thew, DNP, FNP-BC, director of adolescent medicine at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee, several studies have highlighted resistance to the vaccine among better-educated parents. “Parents with higher education associate the HPV vaccine with sexual activity and consequently refuse,” said Ms. Thew, who was not involved in the NIS-Teen study. “They mistakenly assume that their children are not sexually active and they lack the understanding that HPV is one of the biggest causes of oral cancer.”

For generally healthy patients taking isotretinoin for acne and who have no underlying abnormalities or preexisting conditions that warrant further examination, it is sufficient to test ALT and triglycerides once at baseline, ideally within a month prior to the start of treatment, and a second time at peak dose.

Other tests such as complete blood cell counts and basic metabolic panels as well as specific laboratory tests such as LDL and HDL cholesterol should not be routinely monitored.

Those are key conclusions from a Delphi consensus study that included 22 acne experts from five continents and was published in JAMA Dermatology.

“Our results apply findings from recent literature and are in accordance with recent studies that have recommended against excessive laboratory monitoring,” senior corresponding author Arash Mostaghimi, MD, MPA, MPH, and coauthors wrote. “For instance, several studies in both teenagers and adults have shown that routine complete blood cell count laboratory tests are unnecessary without suspicion of an underlying abnormality and that rare abnormalities, if present, either resolved or remained stable without clinical impact on treatment. Likewise, liver function tests and lipid panels ordered at baseline and after 2 months of therapy were deemed sufficient if the clinical context and results do not suggest potential abnormalities.”

The authors also noted that, while published acne management guidelines exist, such as the American Academy of Dermatology work group guidelines and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline, “the specific recommendations surrounding laboratory monitoring frequency are nonstandardized and often nonspecific.”

To establish a consensus for isotretinoin laboratory monitoring, Dr. Mostaghimi, of the department of dermatology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and colleagues used a Delphi process to administer four rounds of electronic surveys to 22 board-certified dermatologists between 2021 and 2022. The primary outcome measured was whether participants could reach consensus on key isotretinoin lab monitoring parameters. Responses that failed to reach a threshold of 70% indicated no consensus.

The surveyed dermatologists had been in practice for a mean of 23.7 years, 54.5% were female, 54.5% practiced in an academic setting, and 63.9% were based in North America. They reached consensus for checking ALT within a month prior to initiation (89.5%) and at peak dose (89.5%), but not checking monthly (76.2%) or after completing treatment (73.7%). They also reached consensus on checking triglycerides within a month prior to initiation (89.5%) and at peak dose (78.9%) but not to check monthly (84.2%) or after completing treatment (73.7%).

Meanwhile, consensus was achieved for not checking complete blood cell count or basic metabolic panel parameters at any point during isotretinoin treatment (all > 70%), as well as not checking gamma-glutamyl transferase (78.9%), bilirubin (81.0%), albumin (72.7%), total protein (72.7%), LDL cholesterol (73.7%), HDL cholesterol (73.7%), or C-reactive protein (77.3%).

“Additional research is required to determine best practices for laboratory measures that did not reach consensus,” the authors wrote. The study results “are intended to guide appropriate clinical decision-making,” they added. “Although our recommendations cannot replace clinical judgment based on the unique circumstances of individual patients, we believe they provide a framework for management of a typical, otherwise healthy patient being treated with isotretinoin for acne. More routine monitoring, or reduced monitoring, should be considered on a case-by-case basis accounting for the unique medical history, circumstances, and baseline abnormalities, if present, of each patient.”

“Practicing dermatologists, including myself, routinely check blood laboratory values during isotretinoin treatment,” said Lawrence J. Green, MD, clinical professor of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington, who was asked to comment on the study. “Even though just a small number of U.S.-based and international acne researchers were involved in this Delphi consensus statement, this article still makes us practicing clinicians feel more comfortable in checking fewer lab chemistries and also less frequently checking labs when we use isotretinoin.

“That said, I don’t think most of us are ready, because of legal reasons, to do that infrequent monitoring” during isotretinoin therapy, Dr. Green added. “I think most dermatologists do not routinely perform CBCs anymore, but we still feel obligated to check triglycerides and liver function more frequently” than recommended in the new study.

Dr. Mostaghimi reported receiving grants and personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Eli Lilly, personal fees and licensing from Concert, personal fees from Bioniz, holds equity and advisory board membership from Hims & Hers and Figure 1, personal fees from Digital Diagnostics, and personal fees from AbbVie outside the submitted work. Other authors reported serving as an adviser, a speaker consultant, investigator, and/or board member, or having received honoraria from different pharmaceutical companies; several authors had no disclosures. Dr. Green disclosed that he is a speaker, consultant, or investigator for numerous pharmaceutical companies.

For generally healthy patients taking isotretinoin for acne and who have no underlying abnormalities or preexisting conditions that warrant further examination, it is sufficient to test ALT and triglycerides once at baseline, ideally within a month prior to the start of treatment, and a second time at peak dose.

Other tests such as complete blood cell counts and basic metabolic panels as well as specific laboratory tests such as LDL and HDL cholesterol should not be routinely monitored.

Those are key conclusions from a Delphi consensus study that included 22 acne experts from five continents and was published in JAMA Dermatology.

“Our results apply findings from recent literature and are in accordance with recent studies that have recommended against excessive laboratory monitoring,” senior corresponding author Arash Mostaghimi, MD, MPA, MPH, and coauthors wrote. “For instance, several studies in both teenagers and adults have shown that routine complete blood cell count laboratory tests are unnecessary without suspicion of an underlying abnormality and that rare abnormalities, if present, either resolved or remained stable without clinical impact on treatment. Likewise, liver function tests and lipid panels ordered at baseline and after 2 months of therapy were deemed sufficient if the clinical context and results do not suggest potential abnormalities.”

The authors also noted that, while published acne management guidelines exist, such as the American Academy of Dermatology work group guidelines and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline, “the specific recommendations surrounding laboratory monitoring frequency are nonstandardized and often nonspecific.”

To establish a consensus for isotretinoin laboratory monitoring, Dr. Mostaghimi, of the department of dermatology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and colleagues used a Delphi process to administer four rounds of electronic surveys to 22 board-certified dermatologists between 2021 and 2022. The primary outcome measured was whether participants could reach consensus on key isotretinoin lab monitoring parameters. Responses that failed to reach a threshold of 70% indicated no consensus.

The surveyed dermatologists had been in practice for a mean of 23.7 years, 54.5% were female, 54.5% practiced in an academic setting, and 63.9% were based in North America. They reached consensus for checking ALT within a month prior to initiation (89.5%) and at peak dose (89.5%), but not checking monthly (76.2%) or after completing treatment (73.7%). They also reached consensus on checking triglycerides within a month prior to initiation (89.5%) and at peak dose (78.9%) but not to check monthly (84.2%) or after completing treatment (73.7%).

Meanwhile, consensus was achieved for not checking complete blood cell count or basic metabolic panel parameters at any point during isotretinoin treatment (all > 70%), as well as not checking gamma-glutamyl transferase (78.9%), bilirubin (81.0%), albumin (72.7%), total protein (72.7%), LDL cholesterol (73.7%), HDL cholesterol (73.7%), or C-reactive protein (77.3%).

“Additional research is required to determine best practices for laboratory measures that did not reach consensus,” the authors wrote. The study results “are intended to guide appropriate clinical decision-making,” they added. “Although our recommendations cannot replace clinical judgment based on the unique circumstances of individual patients, we believe they provide a framework for management of a typical, otherwise healthy patient being treated with isotretinoin for acne. More routine monitoring, or reduced monitoring, should be considered on a case-by-case basis accounting for the unique medical history, circumstances, and baseline abnormalities, if present, of each patient.”

“Practicing dermatologists, including myself, routinely check blood laboratory values during isotretinoin treatment,” said Lawrence J. Green, MD, clinical professor of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington, who was asked to comment on the study. “Even though just a small number of U.S.-based and international acne researchers were involved in this Delphi consensus statement, this article still makes us practicing clinicians feel more comfortable in checking fewer lab chemistries and also less frequently checking labs when we use isotretinoin.

“That said, I don’t think most of us are ready, because of legal reasons, to do that infrequent monitoring” during isotretinoin therapy, Dr. Green added. “I think most dermatologists do not routinely perform CBCs anymore, but we still feel obligated to check triglycerides and liver function more frequently” than recommended in the new study.

Dr. Mostaghimi reported receiving grants and personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Eli Lilly, personal fees and licensing from Concert, personal fees from Bioniz, holds equity and advisory board membership from Hims & Hers and Figure 1, personal fees from Digital Diagnostics, and personal fees from AbbVie outside the submitted work. Other authors reported serving as an adviser, a speaker consultant, investigator, and/or board member, or having received honoraria from different pharmaceutical companies; several authors had no disclosures. Dr. Green disclosed that he is a speaker, consultant, or investigator for numerous pharmaceutical companies.

For generally healthy patients taking isotretinoin for acne and who have no underlying abnormalities or preexisting conditions that warrant further examination, it is sufficient to test ALT and triglycerides once at baseline, ideally within a month prior to the start of treatment, and a second time at peak dose.

Other tests such as complete blood cell counts and basic metabolic panels as well as specific laboratory tests such as LDL and HDL cholesterol should not be routinely monitored.

Those are key conclusions from a Delphi consensus study that included 22 acne experts from five continents and was published in JAMA Dermatology.

“Our results apply findings from recent literature and are in accordance with recent studies that have recommended against excessive laboratory monitoring,” senior corresponding author Arash Mostaghimi, MD, MPA, MPH, and coauthors wrote. “For instance, several studies in both teenagers and adults have shown that routine complete blood cell count laboratory tests are unnecessary without suspicion of an underlying abnormality and that rare abnormalities, if present, either resolved or remained stable without clinical impact on treatment. Likewise, liver function tests and lipid panels ordered at baseline and after 2 months of therapy were deemed sufficient if the clinical context and results do not suggest potential abnormalities.”

The authors also noted that, while published acne management guidelines exist, such as the American Academy of Dermatology work group guidelines and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline, “the specific recommendations surrounding laboratory monitoring frequency are nonstandardized and often nonspecific.”

To establish a consensus for isotretinoin laboratory monitoring, Dr. Mostaghimi, of the department of dermatology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and colleagues used a Delphi process to administer four rounds of electronic surveys to 22 board-certified dermatologists between 2021 and 2022. The primary outcome measured was whether participants could reach consensus on key isotretinoin lab monitoring parameters. Responses that failed to reach a threshold of 70% indicated no consensus.

The surveyed dermatologists had been in practice for a mean of 23.7 years, 54.5% were female, 54.5% practiced in an academic setting, and 63.9% were based in North America. They reached consensus for checking ALT within a month prior to initiation (89.5%) and at peak dose (89.5%), but not checking monthly (76.2%) or after completing treatment (73.7%). They also reached consensus on checking triglycerides within a month prior to initiation (89.5%) and at peak dose (78.9%) but not to check monthly (84.2%) or after completing treatment (73.7%).

Meanwhile, consensus was achieved for not checking complete blood cell count or basic metabolic panel parameters at any point during isotretinoin treatment (all > 70%), as well as not checking gamma-glutamyl transferase (78.9%), bilirubin (81.0%), albumin (72.7%), total protein (72.7%), LDL cholesterol (73.7%), HDL cholesterol (73.7%), or C-reactive protein (77.3%).

“Additional research is required to determine best practices for laboratory measures that did not reach consensus,” the authors wrote. The study results “are intended to guide appropriate clinical decision-making,” they added. “Although our recommendations cannot replace clinical judgment based on the unique circumstances of individual patients, we believe they provide a framework for management of a typical, otherwise healthy patient being treated with isotretinoin for acne. More routine monitoring, or reduced monitoring, should be considered on a case-by-case basis accounting for the unique medical history, circumstances, and baseline abnormalities, if present, of each patient.”

“Practicing dermatologists, including myself, routinely check blood laboratory values during isotretinoin treatment,” said Lawrence J. Green, MD, clinical professor of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington, who was asked to comment on the study. “Even though just a small number of U.S.-based and international acne researchers were involved in this Delphi consensus statement, this article still makes us practicing clinicians feel more comfortable in checking fewer lab chemistries and also less frequently checking labs when we use isotretinoin.

“That said, I don’t think most of us are ready, because of legal reasons, to do that infrequent monitoring” during isotretinoin therapy, Dr. Green added. “I think most dermatologists do not routinely perform CBCs anymore, but we still feel obligated to check triglycerides and liver function more frequently” than recommended in the new study.

Dr. Mostaghimi reported receiving grants and personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Eli Lilly, personal fees and licensing from Concert, personal fees from Bioniz, holds equity and advisory board membership from Hims & Hers and Figure 1, personal fees from Digital Diagnostics, and personal fees from AbbVie outside the submitted work. Other authors reported serving as an adviser, a speaker consultant, investigator, and/or board member, or having received honoraria from different pharmaceutical companies; several authors had no disclosures. Dr. Green disclosed that he is a speaker, consultant, or investigator for numerous pharmaceutical companies.

It’s no secret that the fitness level of all age groups in our country is poor. A recent study in Pediatrics sharpens the focus on the question of how we might address the problem in the teenage population. Based in England, the investigators placed wrist accelerometers on their 13- and 14-year-old subjects who were then assessed using shuttle runs at progressively faster speeds.

The researchers found that the participants’ cardiorespiratory fitness improved as the subjects’ time doing vigorous activity increased up to 20 minutes and then plateaued. The study authors could not prove that the vigorous activity caused the increased in fitness. However, they were impressed by the plateau phenomenon and suggest that this might suggest a change in the recommendations by the World Health Organization and U.S. Department of Health & Human Services which currently call for 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity per day for adolescents

At first blush a shift down to 20 minutes of vigorous activity would appear to be workable and achievable. This would be particularly true for public school systems that are already struggling to get any kind of activity shoehorned into their schedules that are already crammed in an attempt to address mandated academic achievement goals. Freeing up an additional 40 minutes of the school day and yielding improved cardiorespiratory fitness sounds like a win-win.

But, let’s take a deep breath and for a few moments return to the world of reality. First, how many school systems are providing that 60 minutes of moderate activity (let’s forget the vigorous piece for the moment) included in the current WHO/HHS recommendations? Next, let’s take a look at what “vigorous” activity means. There are variety of definitions but in general they include sweating, flushing, and dyspnea to the point of having difficulty speaking.

Let’s just focus on the “sweating” part. To me that sounds like an activity that would require some wardrobe alteration at a minimum and very likely a locker room and a shower. Those can be fightin’ words for many teenagers. Even if a school can provide adequate locker room and shower infrastructure change-ups and showers are time-gobbling activities. And, more realistically, what are the chances of getting body image–challenged adolescents to willingly take advantage of them? You don’t have to talk to very many adults before you will hear stories of discomfort and embarrassment resulting from forced locker room and shower experiences. When I was a teenager the only way you could flunk physical education was to refuse to go in the locker room and “change up.” I think or at least hope that physical educators are more sensitive to the fragility of their adolescents students. But, the bottom line is that creating a curriculum that will improve cardiorespiratory fitness is fraught with challenges most school systems can’t address. It’s sad but true.

So, where does that leave us? This new study from England may be helpful for families who are caught in a time crunch and looking improve their fitness or for the physical educator who would like to help his/her motivated students get on a healthier track. But, this study should not prompt us to throw up our hands and toss out the current recommendations of an hour of moderate activity. As unrealistic as it may be for most school systems it allows for the injection of physical activity into academic settings where creative educators can offer things like walking lectures and field trips. It all boils down to the fact that some activity is better than none at all with or without the sweat equity.

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Other than a Littman stethoscope he accepted as a first-year medical student in 1966, Dr. Wilkoff reports having nothing to disclose. Email him at [email protected].

It’s no secret that the fitness level of all age groups in our country is poor. A recent study in Pediatrics sharpens the focus on the question of how we might address the problem in the teenage population. Based in England, the investigators placed wrist accelerometers on their 13- and 14-year-old subjects who were then assessed using shuttle runs at progressively faster speeds.

The researchers found that the participants’ cardiorespiratory fitness improved as the subjects’ time doing vigorous activity increased up to 20 minutes and then plateaued. The study authors could not prove that the vigorous activity caused the increased in fitness. However, they were impressed by the plateau phenomenon and suggest that this might suggest a change in the recommendations by the World Health Organization and U.S. Department of Health & Human Services which currently call for 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity per day for adolescents

At first blush a shift down to 20 minutes of vigorous activity would appear to be workable and achievable. This would be particularly true for public school systems that are already struggling to get any kind of activity shoehorned into their schedules that are already crammed in an attempt to address mandated academic achievement goals. Freeing up an additional 40 minutes of the school day and yielding improved cardiorespiratory fitness sounds like a win-win.

But, let’s take a deep breath and for a few moments return to the world of reality. First, how many school systems are providing that 60 minutes of moderate activity (let’s forget the vigorous piece for the moment) included in the current WHO/HHS recommendations? Next, let’s take a look at what “vigorous” activity means. There are variety of definitions but in general they include sweating, flushing, and dyspnea to the point of having difficulty speaking.

Let’s just focus on the “sweating” part. To me that sounds like an activity that would require some wardrobe alteration at a minimum and very likely a locker room and a shower. Those can be fightin’ words for many teenagers. Even if a school can provide adequate locker room and shower infrastructure change-ups and showers are time-gobbling activities. And, more realistically, what are the chances of getting body image–challenged adolescents to willingly take advantage of them? You don’t have to talk to very many adults before you will hear stories of discomfort and embarrassment resulting from forced locker room and shower experiences. When I was a teenager the only way you could flunk physical education was to refuse to go in the locker room and “change up.” I think or at least hope that physical educators are more sensitive to the fragility of their adolescents students. But, the bottom line is that creating a curriculum that will improve cardiorespiratory fitness is fraught with challenges most school systems can’t address. It’s sad but true.

So, where does that leave us? This new study from England may be helpful for families who are caught in a time crunch and looking improve their fitness or for the physical educator who would like to help his/her motivated students get on a healthier track. But, this study should not prompt us to throw up our hands and toss out the current recommendations of an hour of moderate activity. As unrealistic as it may be for most school systems it allows for the injection of physical activity into academic settings where creative educators can offer things like walking lectures and field trips. It all boils down to the fact that some activity is better than none at all with or without the sweat equity.

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Other than a Littman stethoscope he accepted as a first-year medical student in 1966, Dr. Wilkoff reports having nothing to disclose. Email him at [email protected].

It’s no secret that the fitness level of all age groups in our country is poor. A recent study in Pediatrics sharpens the focus on the question of how we might address the problem in the teenage population. Based in England, the investigators placed wrist accelerometers on their 13- and 14-year-old subjects who were then assessed using shuttle runs at progressively faster speeds.

The researchers found that the participants’ cardiorespiratory fitness improved as the subjects’ time doing vigorous activity increased up to 20 minutes and then plateaued. The study authors could not prove that the vigorous activity caused the increased in fitness. However, they were impressed by the plateau phenomenon and suggest that this might suggest a change in the recommendations by the World Health Organization and U.S. Department of Health & Human Services which currently call for 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity per day for adolescents

At first blush a shift down to 20 minutes of vigorous activity would appear to be workable and achievable. This would be particularly true for public school systems that are already struggling to get any kind of activity shoehorned into their schedules that are already crammed in an attempt to address mandated academic achievement goals. Freeing up an additional 40 minutes of the school day and yielding improved cardiorespiratory fitness sounds like a win-win.

But, let’s take a deep breath and for a few moments return to the world of reality. First, how many school systems are providing that 60 minutes of moderate activity (let’s forget the vigorous piece for the moment) included in the current WHO/HHS recommendations? Next, let’s take a look at what “vigorous” activity means. There are variety of definitions but in general they include sweating, flushing, and dyspnea to the point of having difficulty speaking.

Let’s just focus on the “sweating” part. To me that sounds like an activity that would require some wardrobe alteration at a minimum and very likely a locker room and a shower. Those can be fightin’ words for many teenagers. Even if a school can provide adequate locker room and shower infrastructure change-ups and showers are time-gobbling activities. And, more realistically, what are the chances of getting body image–challenged adolescents to willingly take advantage of them? You don’t have to talk to very many adults before you will hear stories of discomfort and embarrassment resulting from forced locker room and shower experiences. When I was a teenager the only way you could flunk physical education was to refuse to go in the locker room and “change up.” I think or at least hope that physical educators are more sensitive to the fragility of their adolescents students. But, the bottom line is that creating a curriculum that will improve cardiorespiratory fitness is fraught with challenges most school systems can’t address. It’s sad but true.

So, where does that leave us? This new study from England may be helpful for families who are caught in a time crunch and looking improve their fitness or for the physical educator who would like to help his/her motivated students get on a healthier track. But, this study should not prompt us to throw up our hands and toss out the current recommendations of an hour of moderate activity. As unrealistic as it may be for most school systems it allows for the injection of physical activity into academic settings where creative educators can offer things like walking lectures and field trips. It all boils down to the fact that some activity is better than none at all with or without the sweat equity.

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Other than a Littman stethoscope he accepted as a first-year medical student in 1966, Dr. Wilkoff reports having nothing to disclose. Email him at [email protected].

During the coronavirus pandemic, several substance use behaviors decreased among youths, namely drinking, smoking, vaping, and cannabis use, according to a recent study published in the journal Current Psychiatry Reports.

That likely happened because they had to spend more time at home and less time with their friends, the study authors wrote, adding that youth substance use should be monitored in the post-pandemic years.

“One of the driving factors for youth substance use is access to substances,” Hannah Layman, one of the co-authors and a social and behavioral sciences doctoral student at West Virginia University, said in a statement.

“With stay-at-home orders, virtual schooling, and social distancing, children have been spending more time with family and are more socially isolated from peers than before,” she said. “Although social isolation from peers may have a negative impact on their mental health, it may just be one of the desirable outcomes of the pandemic when considering substance use in children.”

Ms. Layman and colleagues analyzed 49 studies that followed substance use of alcohol, cannabis, tobacco, e-cigarettes/vaping, and other drugs among children, teens, and youths under age 24. The studies spanned across several countries, including 22 in North America and 19 in Europe.

The research team found that most studies across all categories reported reductions in prevalence, except for the category of “other drugs and unspecific drugs,” which included three studies that showed an increase in use and three studies that showed a decrease in use.

Teens and preteens tend to have easier access to alcohol, tobacco, cannabis products, and vaping products and see them as less serious than “hard drugs,” the authors said.

Future research should analyze the long-term effects of the pandemic on youth substance use, the study authors wrote, paying attention to differences by gender and those who face the highest risks for substance use. Previous studies have shown an increase in substance use among youths, particularly among those in low-income neighborhoods or in difficult family circumstances.

“Substance use can affect a young person’s body in many ways, such as the development of mental health issues (depression, anxiety, conduct problems, personality disorders, and suicidal thoughts), injuries due to accidents, decreased bone mineral density, preventing proper brain growth and function, delayed puberty, liver damage, and so much more,” Ms. Layman said.

Increased parent or caregiver supervision can help prevent substance use problems, she noted. Early intervention, open support in conversations, and ongoing education about the dangers of substance use can help as well.

“Our findings also identified the importance of improving youth mental health and the value of telemedicine to address young people’s needs during the pandemic,” she said.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

During the coronavirus pandemic, several substance use behaviors decreased among youths, namely drinking, smoking, vaping, and cannabis use, according to a recent study published in the journal Current Psychiatry Reports.

That likely happened because they had to spend more time at home and less time with their friends, the study authors wrote, adding that youth substance use should be monitored in the post-pandemic years.

“One of the driving factors for youth substance use is access to substances,” Hannah Layman, one of the co-authors and a social and behavioral sciences doctoral student at West Virginia University, said in a statement.

“With stay-at-home orders, virtual schooling, and social distancing, children have been spending more time with family and are more socially isolated from peers than before,” she said. “Although social isolation from peers may have a negative impact on their mental health, it may just be one of the desirable outcomes of the pandemic when considering substance use in children.”

Ms. Layman and colleagues analyzed 49 studies that followed substance use of alcohol, cannabis, tobacco, e-cigarettes/vaping, and other drugs among children, teens, and youths under age 24. The studies spanned across several countries, including 22 in North America and 19 in Europe.

The research team found that most studies across all categories reported reductions in prevalence, except for the category of “other drugs and unspecific drugs,” which included three studies that showed an increase in use and three studies that showed a decrease in use.

Teens and preteens tend to have easier access to alcohol, tobacco, cannabis products, and vaping products and see them as less serious than “hard drugs,” the authors said.

Future research should analyze the long-term effects of the pandemic on youth substance use, the study authors wrote, paying attention to differences by gender and those who face the highest risks for substance use. Previous studies have shown an increase in substance use among youths, particularly among those in low-income neighborhoods or in difficult family circumstances.

“Substance use can affect a young person’s body in many ways, such as the development of mental health issues (depression, anxiety, conduct problems, personality disorders, and suicidal thoughts), injuries due to accidents, decreased bone mineral density, preventing proper brain growth and function, delayed puberty, liver damage, and so much more,” Ms. Layman said.

Increased parent or caregiver supervision can help prevent substance use problems, she noted. Early intervention, open support in conversations, and ongoing education about the dangers of substance use can help as well.

“Our findings also identified the importance of improving youth mental health and the value of telemedicine to address young people’s needs during the pandemic,” she said.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

During the coronavirus pandemic, several substance use behaviors decreased among youths, namely drinking, smoking, vaping, and cannabis use, according to a recent study published in the journal Current Psychiatry Reports.

That likely happened because they had to spend more time at home and less time with their friends, the study authors wrote, adding that youth substance use should be monitored in the post-pandemic years.

“One of the driving factors for youth substance use is access to substances,” Hannah Layman, one of the co-authors and a social and behavioral sciences doctoral student at West Virginia University, said in a statement.

“With stay-at-home orders, virtual schooling, and social distancing, children have been spending more time with family and are more socially isolated from peers than before,” she said. “Although social isolation from peers may have a negative impact on their mental health, it may just be one of the desirable outcomes of the pandemic when considering substance use in children.”

Ms. Layman and colleagues analyzed 49 studies that followed substance use of alcohol, cannabis, tobacco, e-cigarettes/vaping, and other drugs among children, teens, and youths under age 24. The studies spanned across several countries, including 22 in North America and 19 in Europe.

The research team found that most studies across all categories reported reductions in prevalence, except for the category of “other drugs and unspecific drugs,” which included three studies that showed an increase in use and three studies that showed a decrease in use.

Teens and preteens tend to have easier access to alcohol, tobacco, cannabis products, and vaping products and see them as less serious than “hard drugs,” the authors said.

Future research should analyze the long-term effects of the pandemic on youth substance use, the study authors wrote, paying attention to differences by gender and those who face the highest risks for substance use. Previous studies have shown an increase in substance use among youths, particularly among those in low-income neighborhoods or in difficult family circumstances.

“Substance use can affect a young person’s body in many ways, such as the development of mental health issues (depression, anxiety, conduct problems, personality disorders, and suicidal thoughts), injuries due to accidents, decreased bone mineral density, preventing proper brain growth and function, delayed puberty, liver damage, and so much more,” Ms. Layman said.

Increased parent or caregiver supervision can help prevent substance use problems, she noted. Early intervention, open support in conversations, and ongoing education about the dangers of substance use can help as well.

“Our findings also identified the importance of improving youth mental health and the value of telemedicine to address young people’s needs during the pandemic,” she said.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

Longer circadian periods and irregular sleep were significantly associated with mental health problems in adolescents including depression, anxiety, suicidality, social anxiety, and panic disorder, according to results from a European study.

A range of psychiatric symptoms and conditions has been linked to sleep pathologies, wrote Liisa Kuula, PhD, of the University of Helsinki, Finland, and colleagues. Some research suggests that late circadian rhythms and irregular sleep patterns increase the risk for psychiatric conditions, but the association has not been well studied, especially in adolescents, although the onset of psychiatric problems often occurs at this age, they said.

In a study published in the Journal of Psychiatric Research (2022 Apr 4. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2022.03.056.), the investigators reviewed data from 342 adolescents who were part of SleepHelsinki! a large cohort study of delayed sleep phase disorder (DSPD) in adolescents. The mean age of the participants was 17.4 years, and 70% were female.

The participants completed the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) and wore temperature loggers for 3 days to assess circadian rhythms. The primary outcome was the impact of circadian dynamics on different psychiatric problems. Delayed Sleep Phase (DSP) behavior was defined as going to sleep later than 1 a.m. at least three times a week.

Circadian length was determined through the temperature loggers worn for 3 days. Most participants also completed 1-week GeneActiv Original actigraphy measurements (wearing the actigraph for 1 week) and responded to the Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire, which divided participants into three circadian preference groups: morning, intermediate, and evening. Sleep duration was calculated as total sleep time, sleep quality was estimated by sleep efficiency, and sleep timing was assessed by the midpoint of the sleep period.

Overall, the MINI interview results suggested that approximately one-third (36%) of the teens had at least one psychiatric problem, and 21% had comorbid conditions.

Severe depression was significantly associated with a longer circadian period (P = .002), while suicidality was significantly associated with a later midpoint and more irregular sleep (P = .007 for both).

Participants with agoraphobia slept longer than did those without, the researchers noted (P = .013). However, sleep duration was not significantly associated with other psychiatric conditions.

Manic episodes and psychotic disorders were associated with irregular sleep timing (P < .018 and P < .017, respectively).

When the researchers examined DSP and circadian preferences, they found that 21.5% of individuals with suicidality had characteristics of DSP, as did 21.5% of those with panic disorder.

Individuals with a preference for eveningness were significantly more likely to meet criteria for severe depression, panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder than were those without a preference for eveningness, the researchers noted.

“Our findings are the first to encompass diverse circadian measures alongside an array of psychiatric symptoms in such a focused age range,” the researchers wrote in their discussion. The data reflect results from other studies and extend the likely role of circadian patterns in mental wellbeing, they said.

The study findings were limited by several factors including the lack of actual diagnoses from medical records and use of self-reported symptoms, the researchers noted. Other limitations included the lack of polysomnography data and small size of subgroups of the study sample.

However, the results were strengthened by the heterogenous study population and use of multiple measures to examine sleep and circadian rhythms, as well as consideration of personal circadian preferences, the researchers said.

“The importance of overall synchronization with environment is perhaps best highlighted by response to treatment: most psychopathologic symptoms benefit from sleep-targeted therapeutic approaches,” they concluded.

The study received no outside funding. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Longer circadian periods and irregular sleep were significantly associated with mental health problems in adolescents including depression, anxiety, suicidality, social anxiety, and panic disorder, according to results from a European study.

A range of psychiatric symptoms and conditions has been linked to sleep pathologies, wrote Liisa Kuula, PhD, of the University of Helsinki, Finland, and colleagues. Some research suggests that late circadian rhythms and irregular sleep patterns increase the risk for psychiatric conditions, but the association has not been well studied, especially in adolescents, although the onset of psychiatric problems often occurs at this age, they said.

In a study published in the Journal of Psychiatric Research (2022 Apr 4. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2022.03.056.), the investigators reviewed data from 342 adolescents who were part of SleepHelsinki! a large cohort study of delayed sleep phase disorder (DSPD) in adolescents. The mean age of the participants was 17.4 years, and 70% were female.

The participants completed the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) and wore temperature loggers for 3 days to assess circadian rhythms. The primary outcome was the impact of circadian dynamics on different psychiatric problems. Delayed Sleep Phase (DSP) behavior was defined as going to sleep later than 1 a.m. at least three times a week.

Circadian length was determined through the temperature loggers worn for 3 days. Most participants also completed 1-week GeneActiv Original actigraphy measurements (wearing the actigraph for 1 week) and responded to the Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire, which divided participants into three circadian preference groups: morning, intermediate, and evening. Sleep duration was calculated as total sleep time, sleep quality was estimated by sleep efficiency, and sleep timing was assessed by the midpoint of the sleep period.

Overall, the MINI interview results suggested that approximately one-third (36%) of the teens had at least one psychiatric problem, and 21% had comorbid conditions.

Severe depression was significantly associated with a longer circadian period (P = .002), while suicidality was significantly associated with a later midpoint and more irregular sleep (P = .007 for both).

Participants with agoraphobia slept longer than did those without, the researchers noted (P = .013). However, sleep duration was not significantly associated with other psychiatric conditions.

Manic episodes and psychotic disorders were associated with irregular sleep timing (P < .018 and P < .017, respectively).

When the researchers examined DSP and circadian preferences, they found that 21.5% of individuals with suicidality had characteristics of DSP, as did 21.5% of those with panic disorder.

Individuals with a preference for eveningness were significantly more likely to meet criteria for severe depression, panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder than were those without a preference for eveningness, the researchers noted.

“Our findings are the first to encompass diverse circadian measures alongside an array of psychiatric symptoms in such a focused age range,” the researchers wrote in their discussion. The data reflect results from other studies and extend the likely role of circadian patterns in mental wellbeing, they said.

The study findings were limited by several factors including the lack of actual diagnoses from medical records and use of self-reported symptoms, the researchers noted. Other limitations included the lack of polysomnography data and small size of subgroups of the study sample.

However, the results were strengthened by the heterogenous study population and use of multiple measures to examine sleep and circadian rhythms, as well as consideration of personal circadian preferences, the researchers said.

“The importance of overall synchronization with environment is perhaps best highlighted by response to treatment: most psychopathologic symptoms benefit from sleep-targeted therapeutic approaches,” they concluded.

The study received no outside funding. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Longer circadian periods and irregular sleep were significantly associated with mental health problems in adolescents including depression, anxiety, suicidality, social anxiety, and panic disorder, according to results from a European study.

A range of psychiatric symptoms and conditions has been linked to sleep pathologies, wrote Liisa Kuula, PhD, of the University of Helsinki, Finland, and colleagues. Some research suggests that late circadian rhythms and irregular sleep patterns increase the risk for psychiatric conditions, but the association has not been well studied, especially in adolescents, although the onset of psychiatric problems often occurs at this age, they said.

In a study published in the Journal of Psychiatric Research (2022 Apr 4. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2022.03.056.), the investigators reviewed data from 342 adolescents who were part of SleepHelsinki! a large cohort study of delayed sleep phase disorder (DSPD) in adolescents. The mean age of the participants was 17.4 years, and 70% were female.

The participants completed the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) and wore temperature loggers for 3 days to assess circadian rhythms. The primary outcome was the impact of circadian dynamics on different psychiatric problems. Delayed Sleep Phase (DSP) behavior was defined as going to sleep later than 1 a.m. at least three times a week.

Circadian length was determined through the temperature loggers worn for 3 days. Most participants also completed 1-week GeneActiv Original actigraphy measurements (wearing the actigraph for 1 week) and responded to the Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire, which divided participants into three circadian preference groups: morning, intermediate, and evening. Sleep duration was calculated as total sleep time, sleep quality was estimated by sleep efficiency, and sleep timing was assessed by the midpoint of the sleep period.

Overall, the MINI interview results suggested that approximately one-third (36%) of the teens had at least one psychiatric problem, and 21% had comorbid conditions.

Severe depression was significantly associated with a longer circadian period (P = .002), while suicidality was significantly associated with a later midpoint and more irregular sleep (P = .007 for both).

Participants with agoraphobia slept longer than did those without, the researchers noted (P = .013). However, sleep duration was not significantly associated with other psychiatric conditions.

Manic episodes and psychotic disorders were associated with irregular sleep timing (P < .018 and P < .017, respectively).

When the researchers examined DSP and circadian preferences, they found that 21.5% of individuals with suicidality had characteristics of DSP, as did 21.5% of those with panic disorder.

Individuals with a preference for eveningness were significantly more likely to meet criteria for severe depression, panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder than were those without a preference for eveningness, the researchers noted.

“Our findings are the first to encompass diverse circadian measures alongside an array of psychiatric symptoms in such a focused age range,” the researchers wrote in their discussion. The data reflect results from other studies and extend the likely role of circadian patterns in mental wellbeing, they said.

The study findings were limited by several factors including the lack of actual diagnoses from medical records and use of self-reported symptoms, the researchers noted. Other limitations included the lack of polysomnography data and small size of subgroups of the study sample.

However, the results were strengthened by the heterogenous study population and use of multiple measures to examine sleep and circadian rhythms, as well as consideration of personal circadian preferences, the researchers said.

“The importance of overall synchronization with environment is perhaps best highlighted by response to treatment: most psychopathologic symptoms benefit from sleep-targeted therapeutic approaches,” they concluded.

The study received no outside funding. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Two new studies point to an ever-increasing number of young people in the United States who identify as transgender and nonbinary, with the figures doubling among 18- to 24-year-olds in one institute’s research – from 0.66% of the population in 2016 to 1.3% (398,900) in 2022.

In addition, 1.4% (300,100) of 13- to 17-year-olds identify as trans or nonbinary, according to the report from that group, the Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law.

Williams, which conducts independent research on sexual orientation and gender identity law and public policy, did not contain data on 13- to 17-year-olds in its 2016 study, so the growth in that group over the past 5+ years is not as well documented.

Overall, some 1.6 million Americans older than age 13 now identify as transgender, reported the Williams researchers.

And in a new Pew Research Center survey, 2% of adults aged 18-29 identify as transgender and 3% identify as nonbinary, a far greater number than in other age cohorts.

These reports are likely underestimates. The Human Rights Campaign estimates that some 2 million Americans of all ages identify as transgender.

The Pew survey is weighted to be representative but still has limitations, said the organization. The Williams analysis, based on responses to two CDC surveys – the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) – is incomplete, say researchers, because not every state collects data on gender identity.
 

Transgender identities more predominant among youth

The Williams researchers report that 18.3% of those who identified as trans were 13- to 17-year-olds; that age group makes up 7.6% of the United States population 13 and older.

And despite not having firm figures from earlier reports, they comment: “Youth ages 13-17 comprise a larger share of the transgender-identified population than we previously estimated, currently comprising about 18% of the transgender-identified population in the United State, up from 10% previously.”  

About one-quarter of those who identified as trans in the new 2022 report were aged 18-24; that age cohort accounts for 11% of Americans.

The number of older Americans who identify as trans are more proportionate to their representation in the population, according to Williams. Overall, about half of those who said they were trans were aged 25-64; that group accounts for 62% of the overall American population. Some 10% of trans-identified individuals were over age 65. About 20% of Americans are 65 or older, said the researchers.

The Pew research – based on the responses of 10,188 individuals surveyed in May – also found growing numbers of young people who identify as trans. “The share of U.S. adults who are transgender is particularly high among adults younger than 25,” reported Pew in a blog post.

In the 18- to 25-year-old group, 3.1% identified as a trans man or a trans woman, compared with just 0.5% of those ages 25-29.  

That compares to 0.3% of those aged 30-49 and 0.2% of those older than 50.
 

Racial and state-by-state variation

Similar percentages of youth aged 13-17 of all races and ethnicities in the Williams study report they are transgender, ranging from 1% of those who are Asian, to 1.3% of White youth, 1.4% of Black youth, 1.8% of American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1.8% of Latinx youth. The institute reported that 1.5% of biracial and multiracial youth identified as transgender.

The researchers said, however, that “transgender-identified youth and adults appear more likely to report being Latinx and less likely to report being White, as compared to the United States population.”

Transgender individuals live in every state, with the greatest percentage of both youth and adults in the Northeast and West, and lesser percentages in the Midwest and South, reported the Williams Institute.

Williams estimates as many as 3% of 13- to 17-year-olds in New York identify as trans, while just 0.6% of that age group in Wyoming is transgender. A total of 2%-2.5% of those aged 13-17 are transgender in Hawaii, New Mexico, Maryland, and Washington, D.C.

Among the states with higher percentages of trans-identifying 18- to 24-year-olds: Arizona (1.9%), Arkansas (3.6%), Colorado (2%), Delaware (2.4%), Illinois (1.9%), Maryland (1.9%), North Carolina (2.5%), Oklahoma (2.5%), Massachusetts (2.3%), Rhode Island (2.1%), and Washington (2%).

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Two new studies point to an ever-increasing number of young people in the United States who identify as transgender and nonbinary, with the figures doubling among 18- to 24-year-olds in one institute’s research – from 0.66% of the population in 2016 to 1.3% (398,900) in 2022.

In addition, 1.4% (300,100) of 13- to 17-year-olds identify as trans or nonbinary, according to the report from that group, the Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law.

Williams, which conducts independent research on sexual orientation and gender identity law and public policy, did not contain data on 13- to 17-year-olds in its 2016 study, so the growth in that group over the past 5+ years is not as well documented.

Overall, some 1.6 million Americans older than age 13 now identify as transgender, reported the Williams researchers.

And in a new Pew Research Center survey, 2% of adults aged 18-29 identify as transgender and 3% identify as nonbinary, a far greater number than in other age cohorts.

These reports are likely underestimates. The Human Rights Campaign estimates that some 2 million Americans of all ages identify as transgender.

The Pew survey is weighted to be representative but still has limitations, said the organization. The Williams analysis, based on responses to two CDC surveys – the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) – is incomplete, say researchers, because not every state collects data on gender identity.
 

Transgender identities more predominant among youth

The Williams researchers report that 18.3% of those who identified as trans were 13- to 17-year-olds; that age group makes up 7.6% of the United States population 13 and older.

And despite not having firm figures from earlier reports, they comment: “Youth ages 13-17 comprise a larger share of the transgender-identified population than we previously estimated, currently comprising about 18% of the transgender-identified population in the United State, up from 10% previously.”  

About one-quarter of those who identified as trans in the new 2022 report were aged 18-24; that age cohort accounts for 11% of Americans.

The number of older Americans who identify as trans are more proportionate to their representation in the population, according to Williams. Overall, about half of those who said they were trans were aged 25-64; that group accounts for 62% of the overall American population. Some 10% of trans-identified individuals were over age 65. About 20% of Americans are 65 or older, said the researchers.

The Pew research – based on the responses of 10,188 individuals surveyed in May – also found growing numbers of young people who identify as trans. “The share of U.S. adults who are transgender is particularly high among adults younger than 25,” reported Pew in a blog post.

In the 18- to 25-year-old group, 3.1% identified as a trans man or a trans woman, compared with just 0.5% of those ages 25-29.  

That compares to 0.3% of those aged 30-49 and 0.2% of those older than 50.
 

Racial and state-by-state variation

Similar percentages of youth aged 13-17 of all races and ethnicities in the Williams study report they are transgender, ranging from 1% of those who are Asian, to 1.3% of White youth, 1.4% of Black youth, 1.8% of American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1.8% of Latinx youth. The institute reported that 1.5% of biracial and multiracial youth identified as transgender.

The researchers said, however, that “transgender-identified youth and adults appear more likely to report being Latinx and less likely to report being White, as compared to the United States population.”

Transgender individuals live in every state, with the greatest percentage of both youth and adults in the Northeast and West, and lesser percentages in the Midwest and South, reported the Williams Institute.

Williams estimates as many as 3% of 13- to 17-year-olds in New York identify as trans, while just 0.6% of that age group in Wyoming is transgender. A total of 2%-2.5% of those aged 13-17 are transgender in Hawaii, New Mexico, Maryland, and Washington, D.C.

Among the states with higher percentages of trans-identifying 18- to 24-year-olds: Arizona (1.9%), Arkansas (3.6%), Colorado (2%), Delaware (2.4%), Illinois (1.9%), Maryland (1.9%), North Carolina (2.5%), Oklahoma (2.5%), Massachusetts (2.3%), Rhode Island (2.1%), and Washington (2%).

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Two new studies point to an ever-increasing number of young people in the United States who identify as transgender and nonbinary, with the figures doubling among 18- to 24-year-olds in one institute’s research – from 0.66% of the population in 2016 to 1.3% (398,900) in 2022.

In addition, 1.4% (300,100) of 13- to 17-year-olds identify as trans or nonbinary, according to the report from that group, the Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law.

Williams, which conducts independent research on sexual orientation and gender identity law and public policy, did not contain data on 13- to 17-year-olds in its 2016 study, so the growth in that group over the past 5+ years is not as well documented.

Overall, some 1.6 million Americans older than age 13 now identify as transgender, reported the Williams researchers.

And in a new Pew Research Center survey, 2% of adults aged 18-29 identify as transgender and 3% identify as nonbinary, a far greater number than in other age cohorts.

These reports are likely underestimates. The Human Rights Campaign estimates that some 2 million Americans of all ages identify as transgender.

The Pew survey is weighted to be representative but still has limitations, said the organization. The Williams analysis, based on responses to two CDC surveys – the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) – is incomplete, say researchers, because not every state collects data on gender identity.
 

Transgender identities more predominant among youth

The Williams researchers report that 18.3% of those who identified as trans were 13- to 17-year-olds; that age group makes up 7.6% of the United States population 13 and older.

And despite not having firm figures from earlier reports, they comment: “Youth ages 13-17 comprise a larger share of the transgender-identified population than we previously estimated, currently comprising about 18% of the transgender-identified population in the United State, up from 10% previously.”  

About one-quarter of those who identified as trans in the new 2022 report were aged 18-24; that age cohort accounts for 11% of Americans.

The number of older Americans who identify as trans are more proportionate to their representation in the population, according to Williams. Overall, about half of those who said they were trans were aged 25-64; that group accounts for 62% of the overall American population. Some 10% of trans-identified individuals were over age 65. About 20% of Americans are 65 or older, said the researchers.

The Pew research – based on the responses of 10,188 individuals surveyed in May – also found growing numbers of young people who identify as trans. “The share of U.S. adults who are transgender is particularly high among adults younger than 25,” reported Pew in a blog post.

In the 18- to 25-year-old group, 3.1% identified as a trans man or a trans woman, compared with just 0.5% of those ages 25-29.  

That compares to 0.3% of those aged 30-49 and 0.2% of those older than 50.
 

Racial and state-by-state variation

Similar percentages of youth aged 13-17 of all races and ethnicities in the Williams study report they are transgender, ranging from 1% of those who are Asian, to 1.3% of White youth, 1.4% of Black youth, 1.8% of American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1.8% of Latinx youth. The institute reported that 1.5% of biracial and multiracial youth identified as transgender.

The researchers said, however, that “transgender-identified youth and adults appear more likely to report being Latinx and less likely to report being White, as compared to the United States population.”

Transgender individuals live in every state, with the greatest percentage of both youth and adults in the Northeast and West, and lesser percentages in the Midwest and South, reported the Williams Institute.

Williams estimates as many as 3% of 13- to 17-year-olds in New York identify as trans, while just 0.6% of that age group in Wyoming is transgender. A total of 2%-2.5% of those aged 13-17 are transgender in Hawaii, New Mexico, Maryland, and Washington, D.C.

Among the states with higher percentages of trans-identifying 18- to 24-year-olds: Arizona (1.9%), Arkansas (3.6%), Colorado (2%), Delaware (2.4%), Illinois (1.9%), Maryland (1.9%), North Carolina (2.5%), Oklahoma (2.5%), Massachusetts (2.3%), Rhode Island (2.1%), and Washington (2%).

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.