Faculty Bibliography

Policy Points We can leverage data science and artificial intelligence to inform state and local resource allocation for overdose prevention. Data science and artificial intelligence can help us answer four questions: (1) What is the impact of laws on access to interventions and overdose risk? (2) Where should interventions be targeted? (3) Which types of demographic subgroups benefit the most and the least from interventions? and (4) Which types of interventions should they invest in for each setting and population? Advances in data science and artificial intelligence can accelerate the pace at which we can answer these critical questions and help inform an effective overdose prevention response.

Between May 2020 and December 2021, there were 159,872 drug overdose deaths in the US. Higher eviction rates have been associated with higher overdose mortality. Amid the economic turmoil caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, 43 states and Washington, DC, implemented eviction moratoria of varying durations. These moratoria reduced eviction filing rates, but their impact on fatal drug overdoses remains unexplored. We evaluated the effect of these policies on county-level overdose death rates by focusing on the dates the state eviction moratoria were lifted. We obtained mortality data from NCHS and eviction moratoria dates from the COVID-19 US State Policy Database. We employed a longitudinal targeted minimum-loss-based estimation with Super Learner to flexibly estimate the average treatment effect (ATE) of never lifting the moratoria. Lifting state eviction moratoria was associated with a 0.14 per 100,000 higher rate of monthly overdose mortality (95%CI: -0.03, 0.32), although confidence intervals were wide and included zero. Eviction moratoria may not be sufficient to prevent overdose mortality during crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Evidence from high-income countries has linked duration and compliance with treatment for substance use disorders (SUDs) with reductions in substance use and improvements in mental health. Generalizing these findings to other regions like South America, where opioid and injection drug use is uncommon, is not straightforward. We examined if length of time in treatment and compliance with treatment reduced subsequent substance use and presence of psychiatric comorbidities. DESIGN/METHODS:Prospective cohort analysis (3 assessments, 18 months) using inverse probability weighting to account for confounding and loss to follow-up. SETTINGS/METHODS:Outpatient/inpatient programs in Región Metropolitana, Chile. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Individuals initiating publicly funded treatment (n = 399). MEASUREMENTS/METHODS:Exposures included length of time in (0-3, 4-7, 8 + months, currently in) and compliance with treatment (not completed, completed, currently in) measured in the intermediate assessment (12 months). Primary outcomes were past-month use of primary substance (most problematic) and current psychiatric comorbidities (major depressive episode, panic, anxiety or post-traumatic stress disorders) measured 6 months later (18 months). Secondary outcomes included past month use of alcohol, cannabis, cocaine powder and cocaine paste. FINDINGS/RESULTS:18.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 14.7%-22.6%] of individuals participated for 3 or fewer months in treatment and 50.1% (95% CI = 45.2%-55.1%) did not complete their treatment plan at 12 months. Participating for 8 + months in treatment was associated with lower risk of past month use of primary substance at 18 months [vs. 0-3 months, risk ratio (RR) = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.38-1.00] and completion of treatment (vs. not completed, RR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.30-0.80). Neither participating 8 + months (vs. 0-3 months, RR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.57-1.22) nor treatment completion (vs. not completed, RR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.72-1.46) were associated with lower risk of psychiatric comorbidity at 18 months. CONCLUSIONS:Longer time in treatment and compliance with treatment for substance use disorders in Chile appears to be associated with lower risk of substance use but not current comorbid psychiatric conditions 18 months after treatment initiation.

Growing evidence suggests exposure to high temperatures may result in increased urban crime, a known driver of health and health inequity. Theoretical explanations have been developed to describe the heat-crime relationship without consensus yet achieved among experts. This scoping review aims to summarize evidence of heat-crime associations in U.S. cities. Further examination of empirical and translational inconsistencies in this literature will ensure future studies of urban heat-crime relationships in the U.S., and their policy impacts are informed by a thorough understanding of existing evidence. We performed a comprehensive literature search of empirical studies on heat-crime relationships in U.S. cities published between January 2000 and August 2023. The included studies were qualitatively synthesized based on operationalized exposures, outcomes, covariates, methodologies, theoretical framing, and policy implications. In total, 46 studies were included in this review. Most studies (93%) reported significant, positive associations between urban heat exposure and both violent and non-violent crime outcomes. The shape and strength of these associations varied based on operational definitions of urban heat exposures, crime outcomes, and relevant covariates in employed methods. We also found inconsistencies in the theoretical explanations and policy implications reported across studies. Climate-driven extreme heat events are projected to increase in frequency and severity. Our findings underscore the urgency of refining the understanding and translation of the complex relationship between urban heat and crime. In this review, we highlight opportunities to improve the methodological quality and responsible policy translation of future research in U.S. cities, which has implications for research globally.

BACKGROUND:Firearm violence remains a leading cause of death and injury in the United States. Prior research supports that alcohol exposures, including individual-level alcohol use and alcohol control policies, are modifiable risk factors for firearm violence, yet additional research is needed to support prevention efforts. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:This scoping review aims to update a prior 2016 systematic review on the links between alcohol exposure and firearm violence to examine whether current studies indicate causal links between alcohol use, alcohol interventions, and firearm violence-related outcomes. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA/METHODS:Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, a comprehensive search of published studies was conducted, replicating the search strategy of the prior review but focusing on studies published since 2015. The review included published studies of humans, conducted in general populations of any age, gender, or racial/ethnic group, that examined the relationship between an alcohol-related exposure and an outcome involving firearm violence or risks for firearm violence. Excluded were small studies restricted to special populations, forensic or other technical studies, non-original research articles such as reviews, and studies that relied solely on descriptive statistics or did not adjust for confounders. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:The review included published studies indexed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus. Eligible articles were published on or after January 1, 2015. The latest search was conducted on December 15, 2023. CHARTING METHODS/METHODS:Using a structured data collection instrument, data were extracted on the characteristics of each study, including the dimension of alcohol exposure, the dimension of firearm violence, study population, study design, statistical analysis, source of funding, main findings, and whether effect measure modification was assessed and, if so, along what dimensions. Two authors independently conducted title/abstract screening, full-text screening, and data extraction until achieving 95% agreement, with discrepancies resolved through discussion. RESULTS:The search yielded 797 studies. Of these, 754 were excluded and 43 met the final inclusion criteria. Studies addressed a range of alcohol exposures and firearm violence-related outcomes, primarily with cross-sectional study designs; 40% considered effect measure modification by any population characteristic. Findings from the 21 studies examining the relationship of individual-level alcohol use or alcohol use disorder (AUD) with firearm ownership, access, unsafe storage, or carrying indicated a strong and consistent positive association. Seven studies examined associations of individual-level alcohol use or AUD with firearm injury or death; these also indicated a pattern of positive associations, but the magnitude and precision of the estimates varied. Eight studies examined the impact of neighborhood proximity or density of alcohol outlets and found mixed results that were context- and study design-dependent. Two studies linked prior alcohol-related offenses to increased risk of firearm suicide and perpetration of violent firearm crimes among a large cohort of people who purchased handguns, and two studies linked policies prohibiting firearm access among individuals with a history of alcohol-related offenses to reductions in firearm homicide and suicide. Finally, four studies examined alcohol control policies and found that greater restrictiveness was generally associated with reductions in firearm homicide or firearm suicide. CONCLUSIONS:Findings from this scoping review continue to support a causal relationship between alcohol exposures and firearm violence that extends beyond acute alcohol use to include AUD and alcohol-related policies. Policies controlling the availability of alcohol and prohibiting firearm access among individuals with alcohol-related offense histories show promise for the prevention of firearm violence. Additional research examining differential impacts by population subgroup, alcohol use among perpetrators of firearm violence, policies restricting alcohol outlet density, and randomized or quasi-experimental study designs with longitudinal follow-up would further support inferences to inform prevention efforts.

BACKGROUND:Cannabis use and alcohol use are associated with self-harm injuries, but little research has assessed links between recreational cannabis outlet openings on rates of self-harm within communities or the interactions of cannabis outlets with the density of alcohol outlets. We estimated the associations of recreational cannabis outlets, alcohol outlets, and their interaction on rates of fatal and nonfatal self-harm injuries in California, 2017-2019. METHODS:Using California statewide data on recreational cannabis outlets, alcohol outlets, and hospital discharges and deaths due to self-harm injuries, we conducted Bayesian spatiotemporal analyses of quarterly ZIP code-level data over 3 years, accounting for confounders and spatial autocorrelation. Using the model posteriors, we estimated parameters corresponding to hypothetical shifts in outlet densities. RESULTS:If recreational cannabis outlets had never opened, we estimated that nonfatal self-harm injuries would have been -0.35 per 100,000 lower (95% credible interval: -1.25, 0.51), while fatal self-harm injuries would have been -0.004 per 100,000 lower (95%CI: -0.26, 0.25). These associations did not depend on alcohol outlet density, but a hypothetical 20% reduction in alcohol outlet densities was associated with fewer self-harm injuries (RD per 100,000, nonfatal: -1.59; 95%CI: -2.60, -0.59; fatal: -0.10; 95%CI: -0.37, 0.16). Associations for nonfatal incidents were strongest for people aged 15-34 years, and White and Hispanic people. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:We did not find evidence that the introduction of recreational cannabis outlets was associated with self-harm injuries or that cannabis and alcohol outlet densities interact, but alcohol outlet density had a strong association with nonfatal self-harm injuries.

In 1992, Wacholder and colleagues developed a theoretical framework for case-control studies to minimize bias in control selection. They described three comparability principles (study base, deconfounding, and comparable accuracy) to reduce the potential for selection bias, confounding, and information bias in case-control studies. Wacholder et al. explained how these principles apply to traditional sources of controls for case-control studies, including population controls, hospital controls, controls from a medical practice, friend or relative controls, and deceased controls. The goal of the current manuscript is to extend this seminal work on case-control studies by providing a modern perspective on sources of controls. Today, there are many more potential sources of controls for case-control studies than there were in the 1990s. This is due to technological advances in computing power, internet access, and availability of 'big data' resources. These advances have vastly expanded the quantity and diversity of data available for case-control studies. In this manuscript, we discuss control selection from electronic health records, health insurance claims databases, publicly available online data sources, and social media-based data. We focus on practical considerations for unbiased control selection, emphasizing the strengths and weaknesses of each modern source of controls for case-control studies.

Recreational cannabis outlets may influence rates of interpersonal violence, but research has yielded inconsistent findings. Modification by alcohol outlet density may help explain inconsistencies. We estimated the impacts of recreational cannabis outlets on neighborhood-level assault injury rates in California and evaluated whether alcohol outlet density moderated these associations. We applied Bayesian spatiotemporal analyses to ZIP code-level statewide data on alcohol outlets, recreational cannabis outlets, and injuries and deaths due to firearm and nonfirearm assault, 2017-2019, accounting for confounders and spatial autocorrelation. Using the model posteriors, we estimated parameters corresponding to hypothetical shifts in outlet densities, overall and by age, sex, and race/ethnicity. If recreational cannabis outlets were never introduced, we estimated that nonfirearm assault injuries would have been 1.63 per 100,000 lower (95%CI: -3.08, 0.01) but we observed no association with firearm assault injuries (RD per 100,000: -0.07; 95%CI: -0.34, 0.21). These associations did not depend on alcohol outlet density, but a hypothetical 20% reduction in alcohol outlet densities was associated with fewer firearm (RD per 100,000: -1.89; 95%CI: -0.46, 0.09) and nonfirearm (RD per 100,000: -5.67; 95%CI: -7.44, -3.95) assault injuries. The introduction of recreational cannabis outlets may have contributed to a small increase in nonfirearm assault injuries.

BACKGROUND:Cannabis exposures reported to the California Poison Control System increased following the initiation of recreational cannabis sales on 1 January 2018 (i.e., "commercialization"). We evaluated whether local cannabis control policies adopted by 2021 were associated with shifts in harmful cannabis exposures. METHODS:Using cannabis control policies collected for all 539 California cities and counties in 2020-2021, we applied a differences-in-differences design with negative binomial regression to test the association of policies with harmful cannabis exposures reported to California Poison Control System (2011-2020), before and after commercialization. We considered three policy categories: bans on storefront recreational retail cannabis businesses, overall restrictiveness, and specific recommended provisions (restricting product types or potency, packaging and labeling restrictions, and server training requirements). RESULTS:Localities that ultimately banned storefront recreational retail cannabis businesses had fewer harmful cannabis exposures for children aged <13 years (rate ratio = 0.82; 95% confidence interval = 0.65, 1.02), but not for people aged >13 years (rate ratio = 0.97; 95% confidence interval = 0.85, 1.11). Of 167 localities ultimately permitting recreational cannabis sales, overall restrictiveness was not associated with harmful cannabis exposures among children aged <13 years, but for people aged >13 years, a 1-standard deviation increase in ultimate restrictiveness was associated with fewer harmful cannabis exposures (rate ratio = 0.93; 95% confidence interval = 0.86, 1.01). For recommended provisions, estimates were generally too imprecise to detect associations with harmful cannabis exposures. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Bans on storefront retail and other restrictive approaches to regulating recreational cannabis may be associated with fewer harmful cannabis exposures for some age groups following statewide commercialization.