Faculty Bibliography

Background/UNASSIGNED:The extent to which differences in homicide and suicide rates in black versus white men vary by U.S. state is unknown. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To compare the rates of firearm and nonfirearm homicide and suicide in black and white non-Hispanic men by U.S. state and to examine whether these deaths are associated with state prevalence of gun ownership. Design/UNASSIGNED:Surveillance study. Setting/UNASSIGNED:50 states and the District of Columbia, 2008 to 2016. Cause-of-death data were abstracted by using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's WONDER (Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research) database. Participants/UNASSIGNED:Non-Hispanic black and non-Hispanic white males, all ages. Measurements/UNASSIGNED:Absolute rates of and rate differences in firearm and nonfirearm homicide and suicide in black and white men. Results/UNASSIGNED:During the 9-year study period, 84 113 homicides and 251 772 suicides occurred. Black-white differences in rates of firearm homicide and suicide varied widely across states. Relative to white men, black men had between 9 and 57 additional firearm homicides per 100 000 per year, with black men in Missouri, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, and Pennsylvania having more than 40 additional firearm homicides per 100 000 per year. White men had between 2 fewer and 16 more firearm suicides per 100 000 per year, with the largest inequalities observed in southern and western states and the smallest in the District of Columbia and densely populated northeastern states. Limitations/UNASSIGNED:Some homicides and suicides may have been misclassified as deaths due to unintentional injury. Survey data on state household gun ownership were collected in 2004 and may have shifted during the past decade. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:The large state-to-state variation in firearm homicide and suicide rates, as well as the racial inequalities in these numbers, highlights states where policies may be most beneficial in reducing homicide and suicide deaths and the racial disparities in their rates. Primary Funding Source/UNASSIGNED:McGill University and the National Institutes of Health.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Providing HIV healthcare and Treatment as Prevention both depend on diagnosing HIV cases, preferably soon after initial infection. We hypothesized that tracing risk networks recruits higher proportions of undiagnosed positives than outreach-based testing or respondent-driven sampling (RDS) in Odessa, Ukraine. METHODS:The Transmission Reduction Intervention Project (TRIP) used risk network tracing to recruit sexual and injection networks of recently-infected and longer-term infected (LTs) seeds (2013 to 2016). Integrated Biobehavioural Surveillance (IBBS) (2013) used RDS to recruit people who inject drugs (PWID). Outreach Testing tested PWID for HIV at community outreach sites (2013 to 2016). Proportions of undiagnosed positives among those tested were compared TRIP versus IBBS; TRIP versus Outreach Testing and between TRIP arms. Costs were compared across the projects. RESULTS:TRIP tested 1252 people (21% women) in seeds' risk networks; IBBS tested 400 (18% women); Outreach Testing 13,936 (31% women). TRIP networks included a higher proportion of undiagnosed positives (14.6%) than IBBS (5.0%) or Outreach Testing (2.4%); odds ratio (OR) 3.25 (95% CI 2.07, 5.12) versus IBBS and 7.03 (CI 5.95, 8.31) versus Outreach Testing respectively. Findings remained significant in analyses stratified by sex and when PWID in TRIP networks were compared with Outreach Testing and IBBS. Within TRIP, recently-infected participants' networks contained higher proportions of undiagnosed positives (16.3%) than LTs' networks (12.2%); OR 1.41 (CI 1.01, 1.95). TRIP located undiagnosed positives less expensively than did RDS or Outreach Testing. CONCLUSIONS:TRIP's recruiting techniques, including prioritizing networks of the recently infected, find undiagnosed HIV-positive people efficiently. They should be integrated with standard practice to improve case-finding. Research should test these techniques in other socio-epidemiologic contexts. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY/UNASSIGNED:Registered ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01827228.

Alcohol and marijuana are two of the most prevalent psychoactive substances and each may result in distinct psychosocial and physical sexual experiences and different sexual risk behaviors. With marijuana becoming more accepted in the US along with more liberal state-level policies, it is important to examine and compare users' psychosocial and physical sexual experiences and sexual risk behavior associated with these drugs. In this study, we interviewed 24 adults who recently used marijuana before sex. Participants were 50 % female and all self-identified as heterosexual and HIV-negative. Using thematic analysis, we compared self-reported psychosocial and physical sexual experiences of alcohol and marijuana. Participants described differences between drugs with regard to psychosocial (e.g., partner interactions and contexts before sex, partner choice, perceived attractiveness of self and others, disinhibition, and feelings of regret after sex) and physical sexual experiences (e.g., sexual dysfunction, dose effects, sensations of body/sex organs, length and intensity of sex, and orgasm). Alcohol use was commonly associated with social outgoingness and use facilitated connections with potential sexual partners; however, alcohol was more likely than marijuana to lead to atypical partner choice or post-sex regret. Both alcohol and marijuana had a variety of negative sexual effects, and the illegality of marijuana reportedly facilitated intimate encounters. While sexual experiences tended to be similar across males and females, we did find some variation by gender. Results can inform prevention and harm reduction programming that will allow us to design more realistic programs and to craft interventions, which guide potential users to make safer choices.

"Why do our movement veterans' websites still sing the songs of hope?" -- "In the coming years" -- "Flopping"