RSS Feeds

Bob Wilbur thought he’d found a retirement home that would be a place of peace. Nestled against Admiralty Bay on the western edge of Whidbey Island, the three-story house is surrounded by trees and shoreline. It offers the kind of quiet that only an island can provide. Except when the Growlers fly. 

As often as four days a week, Boeing EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft based at the nearby Naval Air Station Whidbey Island fly loops overhead as pilots practice touch-and-go landings. The noise is immense, around the level of a loud rock concert. “It interrupts your day,” Wilbur said. “You’re unable to have a pleasant evening at home. You can’t communicate. You constantly try to organize your day around being gone when the jets are flying.” 

New research from the University of Washington shows that the noise isn’t just disruptive — it presents a substantial risk to public health. Published May 9 in the Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology, an analysis of the Navy’s own acoustic monitoring data found that more than 74,000 people are exposed to noise levels associated with adverse health effects.  

“Military aircraft noise is substantially more intense and disturbing than commercial jet noise,” said lead author Giordano Jacuzzi, a graduate student in the UW College of the Environment. “Noise exposure has many downstream effects beyond just annoyance and stress — high levels of sleep disturbance, hearing impairment, increased risk of cardiovascular disease — these have real impacts on human health and quality of life. We also found that several schools in the area are exposed to levels that have been shown to put children at risk of delayed learning.”

Guided by conversations with community members and local advocacy groups, researchers analyzed four weeks of acoustic and flight operations data collected by the Navy in 2020 and 2021, in addition to prior-year data collected by a private acoustics company and the National Park Service. Researchers then mapped noise exposure across the region to estimate how much noise specific communities were exposed to in an average year. 

Researchers estimated that two-thirds of Island County residents, including everyone in the cities of Oak Harbor and Coupeville, were exposed to potentially harmful levels of noise, as was 85% of the population of the Swinomish Indian Reservation.  

In total, an estimated 74,316 people were exposed to average noise levels that posed a risk of annoyance, 41,089 of whom were exposed to nighttime noise levels associated with adverse effects on sleep. Another 8,059 people — most of whom lived within fairly close proximity to aircraft landing strips – were exposed to noise levels that can pose a risk of hearing impairment over time. 

“Our bodies produce a lot of stress hormone response to noise in general, it doesn’t matter what kind of noise it is. But particularly if it’s this repeated acute noise, you might expect that stress hormone response to be exacerbated,” said co-author Edmund Seto, a UW professor of environmental and occupational health sciences. “What was really interesting was that we’re reaching noise exposure levels that are actually harmful for hearing. Usually I only think of hearing in the context of working in factories or other really, really loud occupational settings. But here, we’re reaching those levels for the community.”  

Taken as a whole, the potential harms can be quite serious, Seto said. “Imagine people trying to sleep, or children in school trying to understand their teachers and you’ve got these jets flying.” 

Every monitoring station on Whidbey Island measured noise events in excess of 100 decibels when jets were flying. In some instances, noise levels were “off the charts” — exceeding the limits of models used to predict the health effects of noise exposure around the world.  

“We found it striking that Growler noise exceeds the scientific community’s current understanding of the potential health outcomes,” said co-author Julian Olden, a UW professor of aquatic and fishery sciences. “For this reason, our estimates of health impacts are conservative.” 

The noise has been the subject of community disputes and legal controversy since 2013, when the U.S. Navy moved more Growler jets onto Whidbey Island and increased the number of flights to more than 110,000 per year. Bob Wilbur is a member and the current chair of Citizens of Ebey’s Reserve, a community group that has sued the Navy over the jet noise and increased flight operations. The group also helped facilitate the UW study, and Wilbur is a co-author.  

Like other military aircraft, the Growlers’ noise differs significantly from commercial jets — louder and deeper, the kind of sound that people feel before they hear.  

“It’s the intensity, the intermittent nature of the noise, and the low-frequency energy specifically,” Jacuzzi said. “Those three things are very different than what you experience from normal commercial flights, which are predictable and high in altitude. When Growlers fly over a home, they emit a rumbling noise that penetrates windows and shakes walls.”  

While commercial jet noise has been the subject of extensive study, research into military aircraft noise is relatively rare. Previous UW-led research found that military flights were the largest cause of noise pollution on the Olympic Peninsula. While discussing that study, Whidbey residents complained that the noise disturbed their sleep and interfered with students’ schoolwork, which prompted this new line of inquiry. While conducting this study, researchers worked closely with community members and advocacy groups and held multiple webinars to share results and shape future work.  

“Our research was motivated by the growing chorus of complaints by Washingtonians across multiple counties,” Olden said. “We believe the science speaks for itself. It’s no longer a question of whether noise impacts people, but how, where and how much these effects are experienced.” 

Other authors are Lauren Kuehne of Omfishient Consulting, and Anne Harvey and Christine Hurley of Sound Defense Alliance. This research was funded by the UW Population Health Initiative.

For more information, contact Jacuzzi at gioj@uw.edu. 

Social media. The climate crisis. Political polarization. The tumult of a pandemic and online learning. Teens today are dealing with unprecedented stressors, and over the past decade their mental health has been in sustained decline. Levels of anxiety and depression rose after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Compounding the problem is a shortage of mental health providers — for every 100,000 children in the U.S., there are only 14 child and adolescent psychiatrists.

In response to this crisis, University of Washington researchers studied whether virtual reality might help reduce stress for teens and boost mental health. Working with adolescents, the team designed a snowy virtual world with six activities — such as stacking rocks and painting — based on practices shown to improve mental health.

In a 3-week study of 44 Seattle teens, researchers found that teens used the technology an average of twice a week without being prompted and reported lower stress levels and improved mood while using it, though their levels of anxiety and depression didn’t decline overall.

The researchers published their findings April 22 in the journal JMIR XR and Spatial Computing. The system is not publicly available.

 

“We know what works to help support teens, but a lot of these techniques are inaccessible because they’re locked into counseling, which can be expensive, or the counselors just aren’t available,” said lead author Elin Björling, a UW senior research scientist in the human centered design and engineering department. “So we tried to take some of these evidence-based practices, but put them in a much more engaging environment, like VR, so the teens might want to do them on their own.”

The world of Relaxation Environment for Stress in Teens, or RESeT, came from conversations the researchers had with groups of teens over two years at Seattle Public Library sites. From these discussions, the team built RESeT as an open winter world with a forest that users could explore by swinging their arms (a behavior known to boost mood) to move their avatar. A signpost with six arrows on it sent users to different activities, each based on methods shown to improve mental health, such as dialectical behavior therapy and mindfulness-based stress reduction.

In one exercise, “Riverboat,” users put negative words in paper boats and send them down a river. Another, “Rabbit Hole,” has players stand by a stump; the longer they’re still, the more rabbits appear.

“In the co-design process, we learned some teens were really afraid of squirrels, which I wouldn’t have thought of,” Björling said. “So we removed all the squirrels. I still have a Post-It in my office that says ‘delete squirrels.’ But all ages and genders loved rabbits, so we designed Rabbit Hole, where the reward for being calm and paying attention is a lot of rabbits surrounding you.”

To test the potential effects of RESeT on teens’ mental health, the team enrolled 44 teens between ages 14 and 18 in the study. Each teen was given a Meta Quest 2 headset and asked to use RESeT three to five times a week Because the researchers were trying to see if teens would use RESeT regularly on their own, they did not give prompts or incentives to use the headsets after the start of the study. Teens were asked to complete surveys gauging their stress and mood before and after each session.

On average, the teens used RESeT twice a week for 11.5 minutes at a time. Overall, they reported feeling significantly less stressed while using RESeT, and also reported smaller improvements in mood. They said they liked using the headset in general. However, the study found no significant effects on anxiety and depression.

“Reduced stress and improved mood are our key findings and exactly what we hoped for,” said co-author Jennifer Sonney, an associate professor in the UW School of Nursing who works with children and families. “We didn’t have a big enough participant group or a design to study long-term health impacts, but we have promising signals that teens liked using RESeT and could administer it themselves, so we absolutely want to move the project forward.”

The researchers aim to conduct a larger, longer-term study with a control group to see if a VR system could impart lasting effects on mood and stress. They’re also interested in incorporating artificial intelligence to personalize the VR experience and in exploring offering VR headsets in schools or libraries to improve community access.

Additional co-authors were Himanshu Zade, a UW lecturer and researcher at Microsoft; Sofia Rodriguez, a senior manager at Electronic Arts who completed this research as a UW master’s student in human centered design and engineering; Michael D. Pullmann, a research professor in psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the UW School of Medicine; and Soo Hyun Moon, a senior product designer at Statsig who completed this research as a UW master’s student in human centered design and engineering. This research was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health through the UW ALACRITY Center, which supports UW research on mental health.

For more information, contact Björling at bjorling@uw.edu and Sonney at jsonney@uw.edu.

As unprecedented as the outbreak of COVID-19 felt, it was far from the first time a deadly disease has swept the globe. Historians have identified epidemics and pandemics dating as far back as 430 B.C. Records tell us how these diseases spread and how many people died, but not people’s personal experiences of the crises.  

COVID-19 presented a rare opportunity to document in real-time how people processed the tumult of a pandemic, and how necessary public health measures affected their lives. Starting in the earliest days of the 2020 outbreak, a team of researchers at the University of Washington conducted real-time surveys of King County residents, asking what measures people had taken to protect themselves, how their daily lives had been affected and what worried them most.  

The results, published in February in the journal PLOS One, provide a glimpse into the subtle effects that public health measures like social distancing and stay-at-home orders had on the community.  

UW News spoke with Kathleen Moloney, research scientist at the UW Collaborative on Extreme Event Resilience, and Nicole Errett, a UW assistant professor of environmental and occupational health sciences and director of the new Center for Disaster Resilient Communities, to discuss the study, how people experienced those early months and what public health practitioners can learn for future pandemics.  

It’s been four years since COVID-19 changed all our lives, and more than two years since we started to emerge into this new normal. Why is it important to share this research now, to understand people’s experiences of the pandemic and collective efforts to limit COVID’s spread?  

Kathleen Moloney: Unfortunately, COVID-19 is unlikely to be the last pandemic we face. To fully understand this pandemic’s impacts and better prepare for the next, we need research studies like ours — where data was collected in real time, from March to May of 2020 — that document the lived experiences of communities during the pandemic. For example, by documenting how people in King County experienced the social distancing measures in real-time, our study provides valuable insights into which negative impacts were most acute during the early stages of the pandemic. Our results, combined with evidence from other research studies, can provide direction for researchers and policymakers to explore effective interventions for future pandemics. 

Nicole Errett: It is really important to start collecting data in the immediate aftermath of a disaster to understand effects on health and well-being, but researchers face a variety of administrative, logistical and ethical challenges when designing rapid-response research studies. By sharing our approach in this paper, we can provide ideas and guidance for other investigators while designing studies for future disasters, whether those are caused by an infectious disease or natural hazard.  

The COVID-19 pandemic has been unprecedented in a lot of ways, and was for most Americans the most significant disruption to our daily lives ever. How unusual are events like this in human history? What do we know about how past pandemics and epidemics have affected the people who lived through them?  

KM: During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, we often heard comparisons to the 1918 influenza pandemic, as closures of schools, businesses and other community gathering spaces were implemented in response to both. However, it isn’t really possible to compare the experiences of those who lived through COVID-19 with those who lived through the 1918 Flu and other pandemics throughout history, because there weren’t any research studies conducted at the time to document those experiences. That’s why rapid-response disaster research, like our study, is so important.  

In the paper you evaluate the unintended impacts of efforts to slow the pandemic, like people losing their jobs and students falling behind in school. How do you think about that delicate balance between public health and individual well-being?  

KM: I don’t think of protecting public health and individual well-being as opposing priorities that need to be balanced. Public health, as a field, is dedicated to protecting and improving the health and well-being of the individuals that make up communities. Disruptions to employment and schooling can negatively impact long-term health outcomes, and ideally, these potential consequences should be considered when thinking through the type and duration of social distancing measures. Unfortunately, all the empirical research needed to inform those decisions was limited prior to this pandemic.  

You asked participants about steps they took to protect themselves at the height of the pandemic. Some steps had pretty low rates of participation — for example, only 63% of people said they stopped going to the gym, and 82% of people avoided large gatherings. What does that say about the effectiveness of our collective response to the pandemic?  

KM: I want to give the caveat that our survey only captured participants’ self-reported behavior at a single point in time. For example, someone who responded to the survey on March 19th, 2020, that they had not stopped going to the gym might have stopped the next week, when the statewide Stay Home, Stay Safe order was issued. Our survey was also a convenience sample, and therefore shouldn’t be considered representative of the compliance of King County residents as a whole with various social distancing recommendations.  

With that said, those numbers were still slightly surprising. The narrative we often hear of public acceptance of COVID-19 social distancing measures is that compliance was initially high, and then decreased over time due to factors such as message fatigue — there’s research documenting this phenomenon. We need additional research to confirm this, but our results might indicate that there was also an initial lag in compliance with the social distancing recommendations implemented in response to COVID-19.  

Overall, these measures still appear to have been effective, despite imperfect or slightly delayed compliance among certain residents. 

NE: At the time of our survey, our understanding of disease transmission was still evolving. It’s possible that people took measures they thought were protective (like hand washing) while attending these gatherings, based on their understanding of transmission at the time. It would have been interesting to re-survey folks at various time points throughout the pandemic to see how their behavior evolved as the pandemic, and our understanding of the disease, progressed. 

You evaluated participants’ well-being as described in their written stories about their experience. What trends appeared there, and were they what you expected to find?  

KM: Two findings surprised me in particular. First, less than half of our participants described impacts to their social life — I expected the percentage to be much higher. It would be interesting to know how that result might change if we surveyed the same participants at a later point in the pandemic, when social distancing measures had been in place for longer. I was also surprised to see the poorest average well-being reported by those over the age 65, and the highest average well-being reported by 18-to-34 year olds. This is in contrast to several other national-scale studies in the US and Europe, which found worse mental health impacts in young adults.  

Given that older adults are more likely to reside alone in the U.S. than in most other countries and report high rates of social isolation and loneliness even during non-pandemic times, interventions to mitigate the mental health impacts of future pandemics on older adults probably deserve special attention.  

In their written responses, participants most frequently described a negative financial or employment-related impact, even more than social impacts. How might that change how we prepare to help people through future crises?  

KM: Knowing which negative impacts are most prevalent at various points in the pandemic, and how these impacts differ between groups, can help us develop more specific, more effective interventions to prevent these unintended consequences in the future. We saw that employment and financial impacts were the top concern for every age group except those 65 and older — this group expressed higher concern about physical health and social impacts. So while an early intervention to mitigate the financial impacts of a future crisis on younger adults could be effective, we would likely want to prioritize different resources for older adults.  

What’s also interesting is that many of the concerns our participants reported, both in written narratives and the close-ended survey questions, were about impacts to others, rather than themselves. Concern and empathy for fellow community members’ well-being is something that we should want to cultivate for many reasons, but specifically in a pandemic context, there’s evidence that decreased concern for others’ well-being is correlated with decreased compliance with non-pharmaceutical interventions. Something we should also think about while preparing for future crises is how we can foster the concern for others and the sense of community that were clearly present during the early stages of the pandemic to make sure they endure.  

NE: The pandemic influenced the development — or at least accelerated the uptake — of systems that allowed many folks to work safely from the comfort of their own home without financial or employment impacts. However, folks with jobs in “essential” services and sectors often had to physically report to work, and often interface with the public. My colleague, Marissa Baker, found that folks that couldn’t work from home are lower paid. Accordingly, I’d suspect that employment and financial concerns would be disproportionately borne among lower wage workers, who would have to choose between their health and safety and their income. In advance of the next pandemic, we need to figure out ways to keep these folks safe and at work.  

For more information, contact Errett at nerrett@uw.edu or Moloney at kmoloney@uw.edu. 

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, as it became clear that people with suppressed immune systems were particularly vulnerable to the worst of the virus, public health officials prioritized their protection. Leaders presented stay-at-home orders and masking requirements as measures to prevent the virus from spreading to high-risk individuals. And when vaccines became available, many governments placed immunocompromised  people near the front of the line.  

All the while, public health officials believed only about 3% of the American population was immunocompromised.  

New research from the University of Washington suggests that number may have been a drastic undercount. The study, published in the March 12 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, places the prevalence of immunosuppression at around 6.6% of American adults — more than twice as high as previously understood. That rise could have broad implications for how we navigate the late stages of COVID-19 and prepare for future pandemics.  

UW News spoke with co-author Melissa Martinson, a UW associate professor of social work, about the reasons behind the rise and how public health officials can better serve this growing population. 

Immunosuppression and the experiences of immunocompromised people have become more visible in recent years, with the COVID-19 pandemic and our collective attempts to slow its spread. How has that added visibility affected people’s experiences?  

Melissa Martinson: The COVID-19 pandemic really brought the experiences of immunosuppressed (more commonly called immunocompromised) people to the public attention, and the voices of this population and other medically vulnerable people were important to how people interacted in their communities in the early days of the pandemic. Early in the pandemic, public health guidance was focused on protecting medically vulnerable people. Four years on, that guidance has changed, and most folks are engaging in activities similarly to before the pandemic.  

However, for some immunocompromised people, the lack of community protections today despite their continued risk of contracting COVID-19, can be an isolating experience.  

You set out to find a better estimate of the prevalence of immunosuppression nationwide. Why is a more accurate number important?  

MM: We were surprised by reports in the popular media that said about 3% of American adults were immunocompromised. Much of my research focuses on framing U.S. health in an international context, and we had seen estimates of immunocompromise prevalence in countries like the United Kingdom and Canada that were much higher than the widely reported American estimate.  

Getting an updated and accurate estimate is important because immunosuppressed people are more likely to experience viral and bacterial infections, and these infections are more likely to be severe. We also now know that this population is still advised to take precautions against COVID-19 due to the higher risk of serious outcomes like hospitalization, death, and long COVID. This is a group who also has access to public health tools like additional vaccine doses and antiviral treatment (such as Paxlovid) regardless of age, so it is important that these tools are readily available to this population.Having an accurate estimate of the prevalence of immunosuppression can ensure that we have adequate supply of these tools. 

You estimate that about 6.6% of American adults have immunosuppression, which is more than twice as high as the figure in 2013 (2.7%). That’s quite the jump. What’s behind it?  

MM: Unfortunately, we can’t answer this question definitively with the available data. However, we know that since prevalence was last estimated, immunosuppressive therapies for autoimmune diseases have been prescribed much more frequently and more of these medications are available. It might also be that more people have a better understanding of their immunocompromised health status due to conversations with their healthcare providers during the COVID-19 pandemic, along with awareness from public health guidance.

We also found that the proportional increase in prevalence was almost 2.5 times between 2013 and 2021, and this increase was even higher for some subpopulations including males, people with Hispanic ethnicity, adults under 50, and older adults ages 70 to 79.  

You write that the COVID-19 pandemic may have contributed to the increase of immunosuppression prevalence. One obvious possibility is that the virus itself weakened people’s immune systems, but do you see any other ways in which the pandemic might have contributed to that rise? 

MM: New evidence does suggest that COVID-19 leads to an increased risk of autoimmune conditions that may result in immunosuppression either through the condition itself or medication to treat the condition. We also looked at the data available for the second half of 2020, and the rates were similar to 2021. To us, this suggests that more people may have been informed about their immunosuppressed status in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and conversations they may have had with their healthcare providers due to their increased risk of serious outcomes from infection.  

From a public health perspective, what changes might we need to consider making in the face of these findings? How do we help to protect a population that might be twice as large as previously thought?  

MM: It is important to note that almost 1 in 15 adults is immunosuppressed and that this population may need additional precautions in workplaces, schools and universities, and especially medical settings. Making sure that our gatherings and built environment are accessible to people who are at greater risk is something that we can all do. Measures such as ventilation, air filtration, and mask use can protect immunocompromised people in public settings.  

The pandemic has been a difficult time for everyone, but this is a medically vulnerable group who is still advised to follow precautions that many people have given up at the end of the public health emergency in 2023. Given the recent changes in COVID-19 isolation guidelines from the CDC, it is important for the public — and policymakers — to consider that between older adults and this immunosuppressed population at high risk, it is worthwhile to use and promote tools like testing, vaccines, sick leave and staying home when ill, and use of masks or respirators to reduce virus spread to vulnerable people. 

For more information, contact Martinson at melmart@uw.edu.  

Of the 38 million Americans who have diabetes at least 90% have Type 2, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Type 2 diabetes occurs over time and is characterized by a loss of the cells in the pancreas that make the hormone insulin, which helps the body manage sugar.

These cells make another protein, called islet amyloid polypeptide or IAPP, which has been found clumped together in many Type 2 diabetes patients. The formation of IAPP clusters is comparable to how a protein in the brains of Alzheimer’s disease patients sticks together to eventually form the signature plaques associated with that disease.

Researchers at the University of Washington have demonstrated more similarities between IAPP clusters and those in Alzheimer’s. The team previously showed that a synthetic peptide can block the formation of small, toxic Alzheimer’s protein clusters. Now, in a recently published paper in Protein Science, the researchers used a similar peptide to block the formation of IAPP clusters.

UW News asked co-senior author Valerie Daggett, a UW professor of bioengineering and faculty member in the UW Molecular Engineering & Sciences Institute, for details about protein aggregation and how these synthetic peptides work.

Alzheimer’s and Type 2 diabetes are part of a family of amyloid diseases that are characterized by having proteins that cluster together. What’s happening?

Valerie Daggett: There are over 50 of these amyloid diseases, and they start out with their respective proteins in their biologically active, good form. But then the proteins start changing structure and globbing together. These aggregates can be different sizes. They can have different underlying structures and different effects on the cells around them.

Early in the process there are smaller clusters, which are toxic, and they set off all kinds of problems. This leads to a very complicated disease because lots of other things go awry in response to these toxic clusters. Over time, these clusters combine to form non-toxic structures: longer strands and finally large deposits, such as the Alzheimer’s plaques.

Many people know that protein aggregation plays a role in neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease. Can you describe what’s happening here?

VD: In the case of Alzheimer’s, these small, toxic protein clusters are running around the brain attacking neurons and then over time there’s enough damage that we start to see symptoms. By the time these clusters have combined to form the non-toxic plaques, there’s already been a lot of damage. It becomes similar to trying to treat stage 4 cancer. That’s why we want to get in early.

What’s happening with Type 2 diabetes?

VD: It’s similar, except it’s happening in the pancreas instead of the brain. In healthy people, cells in the pancreas, called beta cells, secrete IAPP along with insulin. The normal, active form of IAPP helps with metabolism maintenance. But when IAPP changes shape, it starts to form these toxic clusters and then it starts attacking the beta cells. And these clusters are equal-opportunity toxins. We, and many others, have shown that you can put them on different cell types and they will kill the cells.

In this paper, you show that the IAPP clusters go through an “alpha sheet” phase. What does this mean and why is it significant?

VD: We’ve been looking at these amyloid systems for a long time and we started seeing this weird protein structure. It’s like every other one of the protein building blocks, called amino acids, has had this crankshaft motion on it. Half of them are rotated the wrong way.

At first we thought: “That’s got to be an artifact. Nobody discovers a new structure.” But we’ve since shown that this “alpha sheet” structure is real. And proteins in all the amyloid systems we’ve looked at — 14 now including Type 2 diabetes — form these alpha sheet structures when they’re in these small, toxic clusters. No one had seen that for IAPP before this paper.

Also in this paper, you showed that a synthetic peptide was able to bind and neutralize the toxic IAPP clusters and keep beta cells alive. What’s special about this peptide and how does it work?

VD: Previously, we designed synthetic peptides to bind to the toxic protein clusters in Alzheimer’s disease. The idea here is for these peptides to take these clusters out of commission before they can wreak havoc on the cells. The peptide we made also forms an alpha sheet structure, but it is not toxic to the cells. It binds really tightly to the clusters, and we’re currently studying what happens to the clusters after it binds.

In this paper, we showed that our synthetic peptides also work against the toxic IAPP clusters, which means this could be a potential therapeutic in the future.

Type 2 diabetes is the most prevalent amyloid disease — it affects half a billion people worldwide. A lot of people associate Type 2 diabetes treatment with changing lifestyle measures, but that doesn’t work for everyone. A drug that could help minimize the damage IAPP does to the pancreas could be really helpful.

This paper had two lead authors: Cheng-Chieh Hsu, who completed this research as a UW doctoral student of molecular engineering and is now at Columbia University, and Andrew T. Templin, who completed this research as an acting instructor of medicine in the UW School of Medicine and is now at Indiana University. Additional co-authors on this paper are Tatum Prosswimmer, a UW doctoral student of molecular engineering; Dylan Shea, who completed this research as a UW doctoral student of molecular engineering and is now at Ambit Inc; Jinzheng Li, who completed this research as a UW undergraduate student majoring in biochemistry and is now a student at Pacific Northwest University of Health Sciences; Barbara Brooks-Worrell, who completed this research as a senior research scientist in the Division of Metabolism, Endocrinology and Nutrition in the UW School of Medicine and is now at Tacoma Community College; and Dr. Steven E. Kahn, professor of medicine in the UW School of Medicine.

This research was funded by the National Institutes of Health, the University of Washington Office of Research, the UW Department of Bioengineering, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the American Diabetes Association and a UW Mary Gates Research Scholarship.

For more information, contact Daggett at daggett@uw.edu.

DALLAS, May 15, 2024 — Despite strides in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training, consumer research from the American Heart Association reveals only 1 in 4 Asian American individuals are confident they could correctly perform Hands-Only CPR, compared with a comparable confidence rate of more 1/3 of the general population. The same survey showed nearly 70% of Asian American adults are hesitant to perform Hands-Only CPR because they are worried they will hurt the person who has suffered a cardiac arrest. Among the general population, 57% still express this fear. To build CPR skills, knowledge, and confidence and close these gaps, the American Heart Association, the leading global voluntary health organization focused on heart and brain health and celebrating 100 years of lifesaving service, is launching the “Today You Were Ready” nationwide awareness campaign aimed at empowering Asian American communities to learn Hands-Only CPR and be ready to save a life.

The campaign launch coincides with Asian American Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander Heritage (AANHP) Month and includes community outreach to emphasize the importance of being prepared to respond to a cardiac emergency. The effort is part of the overarching American Heart Association's Nation of Lifesavers^TM movement, which is focused on turning bystanders into lifesavers and doubling survival rates from sudden cardiac arrest by 2030.

“Unless we share these critical public health messages, Asian American Pacific Islander communities and other historically excluded groups will remain more likely to die of sudden cardiac arrest than other groups,” said Joseph C. Wu, M.D., Ph.D., FAHA, current volunteer president of the American Heart Association, director of the Stanford Cardiovascular Institute and the Simon H. Stertzer Professor of Medicine and Radiology at Stanford School of Medicine. “The ’Today You Were Ready’ campaign will address those barriers and will provide these communities with the tools and resources they need to learn and perform Hands-Only CPR.”

Cardiac arrest can happen to anyone at any time, and without quick bystander CPR, it is typically fatal. According to research in the Journal of the American Heart Association, about 72% of cardiac arrests that occur outside of a hospital happen at home. That means that if you are called on to perform CPR, it will likely be to save the life of someone you love. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation is an emergency response that can help save a person’s life if their breathing or heart stops. At the forefront of resuscitation science, education, and training, the American Heart Association is the worldwide leader and publisher of the official scientific guidelines for CPR.

By showcasing the two easy steps to help save a life, the Association aims to change and break through the hesitancy barrier. Hands-Only CPR is CPR without breaths. It is for teens and adults only and is performed in two steps: 1) Call 911 and 2) push hard and fast in the center of the chest to a beat of 100- 120 beats per minute.

When it comes specifically for women, studies show that women who have a cardiac arrest outside a hospital setting are less likely than men to receive lifesaving CPR.[1] This gap is even larger for Asian American and Pacific Islander women.[2] According to data from the American Heart Association, these women are less likely to receive bystander CPR compared to other populations, contributing to lower survival rates. Cultural factors, language barriers and limited access to CPR education may further exacerbate these disparities. The fear of accusations of inappropriate touching or injuring the person and lack of knowledge about their state’s Good Samaritan Laws contribute to some people’s hesitance to perform CPR.[3] [4] Improving CPR awareness and accessibility within the Asian American Pacific Islander community is crucial to increasing survival rates for women experiencing cardiac emergencies.

“By inspiring our Asian American Pacific Islander community to learn Hands-Only CPR, we can improve health outcomes for Asian American women and their loved ones, especially those suffering cardiac arrest,” said Wu.

In the United States, the Asian American Pacific Islander communities and other people of underrepresented populations are at a higher risk of poor outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest than the general population, in part due to longstanding structural racism and social policies that have limited access to quality education and health care.[5][6]

Survey findings from the Association show that historically excluded populations are more likely to incorrectly believe that special training and certification are required to perform Hands-Only CPR on an adult or teen and more likely to be hesitant to perform the skill for fear of causing injury.[7] These misperceptions contribute to poor survival rates (less than 10%) from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, which affects more than 350,000 Americans annually.[8]

To learn more about the campaign or to get involved, visit heart.org/nation.

• Multimedia is available on the right column of the release link.
• Release in Tagalog, Chinese Simplified and Chinese Traditional (docs)
• Understanding the Importance of the Lay Responder Experience in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Difference in Cardiac Arrest vs. Heart Attack
• Learn Hands-Only CPR/use an AED (Video) (English, Spanish, Mandarin)
• AHA health information: Bystander CPR
• AHA health information: Hands-Only CPR Resources
• Follow AHA/ASA news on X (formerly known as Twitter) @HeartNews

# # #

About the American Heart Association

The American Heart Association is a relentless force for a world of longer, healthier lives. We are dedicated to ensuring equitable health in all communities. Through collaboration with numerous organizations, and powered by millions of volunteers, we fund innovative research, advocate for the public’s health and share lifesaving resources. The Dallas-based organization has been a leading source of health information for a century. During 2024 - our Centennial year - we celebrate our rich 100-year history and accomplishments. As we forge ahead into our second century of bold discovery and impact our vision is to advance health and hope for everyone, everywhere. Connect with us on heart.org, Facebook, X or by calling 1-800-AHA-USA1.    

For Media Inquiries: 214-706-1173

Elizabeth Nickerson: Elizabeth.nickerson@heart.org

For Public Inquiries: 800-AHA-USA1 (242-8721)

heart.org and stroke.org

DALLAS, 9 de mayo de 2024 — Un estudio recientemente realizado reveló que, en Estados Unidos, los empresarios locales negros y latinos reciben solo el 2.6 % de toda la inversión de capital de riesgo.[1]  Con el objetivo de reducir esta brecha y, al mismo tiempo, hacer frente a las desigualdades en salud que existen dentro de estas comunidades, la American Heart Association (la Asociación Americana del Corazón), que celebra 100 años de servicio salvando vidas, otorga subvenciones y ofrece consultoría empresarial especializada para emprendedores locales con impacto social cuyo objetivo principal sea garantizar la equidad en materia de salud.  Con motivo de la celebración de sus cien años de servicio salvando vidas como la principal organización sin fines de lucro del mundo, dedicada a fomentar una vida más larga y saludable para todos, la Asociación realiza su última convocatoria para la presentación formal de propuestas para su programa EmPOWERED to Serve Business Accelerator™.

El programa Accelerator se creó con el fin de impulsar y acelerar el cambio a nivel local mediante el apoyo a las comunidades locales, a los emprendedores de innovaciones de tecnología social y de la salud, y a las nuevas empresas cuyo objetivo específico es cerrar la brecha en equidad en la salud.  Accelerator busca una vez más reunir a un grupo diverso de emprendedores de tecnologías de salud digital y social pertenecientes a organizaciones sin fines de lucro y a nuevas entidades con fines de lucro que generen un impacto significativo en la salud y aborden uno o varios de los factores sociales de la salud, es decir, las condiciones sociales y económicas en las que las personas nacen, viven, aprenden, trabajan y juegan.  

Los emprendedores que resulten seleccionados se someterán a un asesoramiento y entrenamiento rigurosos de seis semanas de duración, que se centrarán en un espectro de competencias fundamentales: desde la exploración del uso de la neurociencia y la ciencia de datos hasta la creación de narrativas para comunicación de marcas convincentes. La cohorte de emprendedores expondrá sus “propuestas” de comunicación de marcas en una final virtual que tendrá lugar el 9 de octubre de 2024.    Los ganadores serán seleccionados por un panel de jueces expertos y recibirán una de las tres subvenciones no participativas, por un total de $75,000 y la posibilidad de asistir a las Sesiones Científicas que se llevarán a cabo en Chicago en noviembre. Las Sesiones Científicas son el principal acontecimiento mundial sobre los avances de la ciencia y la medicina cardiovasculares.

“Durante ocho años, el programa Business Accelerator de la American Heart Association (la Asociación Americana del Corazón) ha sido un recurso extraordinario para emprendedores y organizaciones locales que se ocupan de los factores sociales de la salud en algunas de las zonas con menos recursos del país”, así lo manifestó Marsha Jones, Presidenta y Directora Voluntaria de la American Heart Association (la Asociación Americana del Corazón). “A través de nuestras valiosas tutorías, el apoyo y la financiación, para muchos, que proporcionamos, estos emprendedores y agentes de cambio locales pueden dar nuevos pasos para mejorar la salud y el bienestar de sus comunidades de formas novedosas e innovadoras”.

Hasta la fecha, EmPOWERED to Serve Business Accelerator ha brindado capacitación y tutorías a 166 emprendedores que se ocupan de una serie de disparidades de la salud y ha aportado más de $1.33 millones en subvenciones. Muchos han completado con éxito las rondas de financiación inicial y de serie A, lo que valida la eficacia del programa para impulsar el talento empresarial. El plan de estudios básico de Accelerator ofrece capacitación formal sobre pensamiento de diseño, comprensión de las necesidades del cliente, posicionamiento de mercado, desarrollo de marca, recaudación de fondos y otras funciones comerciales esenciales para ayudar a los empresarios a mejorar sus modelos comerciales y demostrar la viabilidad de los proyectos.

El plazo para la presentación de solicitudes se extenderá desde el 1 de mayo hasta el 28 de junio de 2024.  Para obtener más información sobre las calificaciones y las condiciones para postularse, haga clic aquí.

Recursos adicionales:

• comunicado de prensa en inglés

###

Acerca de la American Heart Association

La American Heart Association es una fuerza incansable cuyo objetivo es prolongar la vida y la salud de todos. Nos dedicamos a garantizar la igualdad en materia de salud en todas las comunidades. A través de la colaboración con numerosas organizaciones y el impulso de millones de voluntarios, financiamos investigaciones innovadoras, defendemos la salud pública y compartimos recursos para salvar vidas. La organización con sede en Dallas ha sido una fuente de información sobre salud líder durante un siglo. Durante 2024, el año de nuestro centenario, celebraremos 100 años de historia y logros relevantes. Mientras nos preparamos para el segundo siglo de descubrimiento e impacto, nuestra visión es promover la salud y la esperanza para todos, en todo el mundo. Conéctese con nosotros a través de heart.org, Facebook, X o llamando al 1-800-AHA-USA1.    

Para consultas de medios de comunicación:

Jennifer Braxton, 214-706-1173 o Jennifer.Braxton@heart.org
Para consultas públicas: 1-800-AHA-USA1 (242-8721)
heart.org y stroke.org

DALLAS, 2 de mayo de 2024 — Según un aviso presidencial de 2020 de la American Heart Association, existe actualmente una brecha de tres años en la expectativa de vida entre las poblaciones rurales y urbanas en Estados Unidos. Además, los datos de mortalidad de los Centros para el Control y la Prevención de Enfermedades (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC) muestran que la tasa de mortalidad por enfermedades cardíacas en las zonas rurales es ahora un 21 % más alta que en las zonas urbanas[1]. Una nueva serie documental original en video del equipo de producción de contenidos de la American Heart Association, AHA Studios: “Health Wanted: Finding Care in Rural America”, ofrece una perspectiva más clara de las barreras únicas en la equidad en salud que enfrentan las comunidades rurales en todo Estados Unidos. 

La serie utiliza una narración de estilo documental en primera persona, que abarca desde Alaska hasta los Apalaches, para destacar los obstáculos del mundo real para la prevención y el tratamiento exitosos de las enfermedades cardíacas, el tratamiento de los problemas de salud mental y la reducción de las tasas de mortalidad materna en las zonas rurales de Estados Unidos. Además, se centra en los desafíos específicos que enfrentan los hospitales y las clínicas de salud rurales con escasez de personal, al tiempo que destaca los esfuerzos complejos, aunque innovadores, para promover mejores resultados de salud, principalmente a través de la participación de la comunidad local y mejores sistemas de atención locales.  

  “Los pacientes y los profesionales de la salud en áreas rurales enfrentan desafíos y oportunidades únicos. Al centrarse en eliminar las barreras, la American Heart Association tiene como objetivo mejorar la atención cardiovascular equitativa para todos en los Estados Unidos, independientemente de dónde vivan”, afirmó Karen E. Joynt Maddox, MD, MPH, voluntaria de la American Heart Association, coautora de Llamada a la acción: Salud rural: Un aviso presidencial de la American Heart Association y la American Stroke Association, y codirectora del Centro de Política y Economía de la Salud del Instituto de Salud Pública de la Washington University en St. Louis, Missouri.

Mediante el uso de impactantes narraciones gráficas, la Asociación espera ampliar la concientización sobre los desafíos únicos que enfrentan las poblaciones rurales y, al mismo tiempo, inspirar cambios positivos en los sistemas a través de la colaboración, la innovación y el apoyo. Cada episodio presenta relatos convincentes y auténticos de primera mano de individuos, sus familias y sus comunidades, cada uno de los cuales lucha contra la desigualdad en la salud, lo que subraya la necesidad urgente de actuar.  

“Con Health Wanted: Finding Care in Rural America, buscamos aprovechar el poder de la narración para iniciar una conversación nacional sobre las disparidades de la salud en las zonas rurales y crear un cambio positivo y duradero”, afirma Katrina McGhee, Vicepresidenta Ejecutiva y Directora de Marketing de la American Heart Association. “La marca confiable de la American Heart Association y su trayectoria rica en historias la ubican en una posición única para ser un agente de cambio que impulse esta importante conversación nacional”.

Como defensora comprometida de la salud cardíaca y el bienestar general de todos, la American Heart Association históricamente se ha centrado en la equidad en la salud, incluidas tareas para cerrar la brecha entre la calidad de la atención hospitalaria rural y urbana. En 2020, la Asociación lanzó Llamada a la acción: Salud rural: Un aviso presidencial de la American Heart Association y la American Stroke Association, que enfatiza  la necesidad de un mayor acceso a la atención, una mejor calidad de la atención de salud y un enfoque mejor orientado para reducir los factores de riesgo. En 2021, la Asociación anunció una iniciativa de tres años para ayudar a los hospitales y médicos rurales a brindar atención basada en evidencia de alta calidad, consistente, oportuna y adecuada, conocida como Rural Health Care Outcomes Accelerator. La organización lanzó HeartCorps en 2022 en respaldo a 100 miembros de Public Health AmeriCorps cada año en áreas rurales con el fin de desarrollar una cartera sostenible de trabajadores de salud pública, reducir los riesgos cardiovasculares entre los residentes rurales y acelerar la adopción e implementación de cambios en los sistemas para mejorar la salud cardiovascular. Este verano, la Asociación anunció una inversión de $20 millones en la investigación científica de los desafíos de salud en las zonas rurales.  Además, la American Heart Association aboga por que los estados y las comunidades aprueben políticas públicas que aumenten el acceso a la atención médica, eviten el consumo de tabaco, fortalezcan los sistemas de atención, mejoren la disponibilidad de los alimentos saludables, creen oportunidades para la actividad física y garanticen que los gobiernos puedan abordar los problemas de salud de sus residentes. Además, con el apoyo de la Fundación Caritativa Leona M. y Harry B. Helmsley en los últimos 15 años, la American Heart Association ha implementado soluciones clave de salud rural, incluyendo sistemas estatales de atención del corazón y los accidentes cerebrovasculares en todo el Alto Medio Oeste; el desarrollo e implementación de nuevos estándares de calidad para guiar el cuidado de accidentes cerebrovasculares post-agudos; el desarrollo del programa HeartCorps; y ampliar las oportunidades de educación profesional y capacitación para que todos los proveedores de atención médica estén equipados para ofrecer la telesalud de la más alta calidad a los pacientes a través del establecimiento del Centro de Telesalud de la American Heart Association.

El público, los canales y las plataformas de medios, así como las partes interesadas de la salud pública y la comunidad están invitados a actuar ahora y apoyar a sus compatriotas estadounidenses que viven en zonas rurales, así como a ver la impactante serie documental, que estará disponible a partir de 1 de mayo de 2024. La serie está disponible en el canal de YouTube de la American Heart Association, una fuente de salud verificada, identificada y designada como una fuente de salud autorizada por YouTube, que proporciona contenidos en video fáciles de comprender con el fin de educar e inspirar. Para ofrecerse como voluntario o realizar donaciones destinadas a mejorar el acceso a la atención en comunidades y zonas rurales en todo el país, visite heart.org/ruralhealth.  

comunicado de prensa en inglés

###  

Acerca de la American Heart Association  

La American Heart Association es una fuerza implacable para un mundo de vidas más largas y saludables. Estamos dedicados a garantizar una salud equitativa en todas las comunidades. A través de la colaboración con numerosas organizaciones y el impulso de millones de voluntarios, financiamos investigaciones innovadoras, defendemos la salud pública y compartimos recursos para salvar vidas. La organización con sede en Dallas ha sido una fuente líder de información de salud durante un siglo. Durante 2024 - nuestro año del centenario - celebramos nuestra rica historia de 100 años y logros. Comuníquese con nosotros a través de  heart.org, Facebook, X o llamando al 1-800-AHA-USA1.     

  Para consultas de medios de comunicación:   

Joseph Marks, Joseph.Marks@heart.org

Para consultas públicas: 1-800-AHA-USA1 (242-8721)  

heart.org o stroke.org  

DALLAS, 1 de mayo de 2024 — Cada 40 segundos alguien en los EE. UU. sufre un ataque o derrame cerebral[[1], y 1 de cada 4 supervivientes tendrá otro a lo largo de su vida[2].Durante mayo, el Mes del Derrame Cerebral en Estados Unidos, la American Stroke Association, una división de la American Heart Association (la Asociación Americana del Corazón), generará conciencia en todo el país de que el derrame cerebral es en gran medida prevenible, tratable y superable.
Las siguientes son 3 formas en que puede actuar ahora para vencer un ataque cerebral:

1. Aprenda a reconocer un derrame cerebral R.Á.P.I.D.O. Rostro caído, Alteración del equilibrio, Pérdida de fuerza en el brazo, Impedimento visual repentino, Dificultad para hablar, entonces Obtenga ayuda y llame al 911.
2. Conozca sus valores de presión arterial y manténgalos en un rango saludable. La presión arterial alta es una de las principales causas y un factor de riesgo controlable del derrame cerebral y las enfermedades cardíacas. Reducir la presión arterial disminuye el riesgo de sufrir un derrame cerebral.
3. Prevenga otro derrame cerebral. Conviértase en un defensor audaz de usted mismo al hablar con el médico acerca de cómo controlar los factores de riesgo de derrames cerebrales para ayudar a prevenir un segundo ataque.

Un derrame cerebral ocurre cuando se interrumpe el flujo sanguíneo normal en el cerebro. Cuando partes del cerebro no reciben sangre con suficiente cantidad de oxígeno, las células cerebrales afectadas mueren. La rápida identificación y tratamiento del derrame cerebral aumenta las posibilidades de supervivencia y recuperación. Sufrir un derrame cerebral lo pone en mayor riesgo de tener un segundo ataque. Existen medidas que puede tomar para reducir su riesgo, comenzando por identificar la causa de su derrame cerebral y descubrir sus factores de riesgo personales.

Un derrame cerebral puede ocurrirle a cualquier persona en cualquier momento. Sin embargo, la carga y el riesgo de sufrir un derrame cerebral son mayores entre los adultos negros e hispanos en los EE. UU. Esto se debe en parte a factores de riesgo no controlados, como la presión arterial alta, la obesidad y la diabetes. Cerca del 50 % de los adultos hispanos en los EE. UU. son obesos[3]. Las proyecciones muestran que para el año 2030, la prevalencia de derrames cerebrales entre los hombres hispanos aumentará un 29 %[4].

La gran mayoría de los derrames cerebrales se pueden prevenir mediante la información y los cambios en el estilo de vida, como realizar más actividad física, comer sano y controlar las enfermedades, como la fibrilación auricular (AFib) y la presión arterial alta.

En el Mes del Derrame Cerebral en Estados Unidos, sea un defensor audaz de usted mismo y de los demás al conocer los signos de un derrame cerebral y hablar con su equipo de atención médica para controlar sus factores de riesgo.El derrame cerebral es una emergencia. Si alguien está teniendo un derrame cerebral, debe recibir atención médica de inmediato.

Identifique un derrame cerebral R.Á.P.I.D.O.:

• R - Rostro caído​ (Face drooping)
• Á - Alteración del equilibrio​ (Loss of Balance, or Lack of Coordination)
• P - Pérdida de fuerza en el brazo​ (Arm weakness)
• I - Impedimento visual repentino​ (Sudden vision difficulty)
• D - Dificultad para hablar​ (Slurred or Strange Speech)
• O - Obtener ayuda, llamar al 911 (Get help, call 911)

Tome medidas para prevenir el derrame cerebral ahora para poder estar presente más adelante. Obtenga más información en Stroke.org/Espanol.

La HCA Healthcare Foundation es un patrocinador nacional de la iniciativa Together to End Stroke® y del Mes del Derrame Cerebral en Estados Unidos de la American Stroke Association.

###

Recursos adicionales: 

• En la columna derecha del enlace del comunicado se ofrece material multimedia para consultar.
• Comunicado de prensa en inglés
• Comunicado de prensa de la AHA - Comunidades hispanas empoderadas: Entender el acrónimo R.Á.P.I.D.O. salva vidas
• Comunicado de prensa de la AHA:  Las personas negras e hispanas en los EE. UU. tienen menos probabilidades de recibir tratamiento por complicaciones de un ataque cerebral
• AHA, síganos en X (antes conocido como Twitter) en @HeartNews.

Acerca de la American Heart Association

La American Heart Association es una fuerza incansable cuyo objetivo es prolongar la vida y la salud de todos. Estamos dedicados a garantizar la equidad en la salud en todas las comunidades. A través de la colaboración con numerosas organizaciones y el impulso de millones de voluntarios, financiamos investigaciones innovadoras, defendemos la salud pública y compartimos recursos para salvar vidas. La organización con sede en Dallas ha sido una fuente de información sobre salud líder durante un siglo. Durante 2024, nuestro año del centenario, celebraremos nuestra rica historia de 100 años y nuestros logros. A medida que avanzamos hacia nuestro segundo siglo de audaces descubrimientos e impacto, nuestra visión es promover la salud y la esperanza para todos, en todas partes. Comuníquese con nosotros en heart.org, Facebook, X o llamando al 1-800-AHA-USA1.   

Acerca de la American Stroke Association

La American Stroke Association es una fuerza incansable para un mundo con menos accidentes cerebrovasculares, y vidas más largas y saludables. Nos asociamos con millones de voluntarios y donantes para asegurar una salud equitativa y la atención a los ataques cerebrales en todas las comunidades. Trabajamos para prevenir, tratar y vencer el ataque cerebral mediante el financiamiento de investigaciones innovadoras, la lucha por la salud pública y el suministro de recursos que salvan vidas. La asociación con sede en Dallas fue creada en 1998, como una división de la American Heart Association. Para obtener más información o ser parte, llame al 1-888-4STROKE o visite stroke.org. Síganos en  Facebook y X.

Para consultas de medios de comunicación: 214-706-1173

Darcy Wallace: 303-801-4683; Darcy.Wallace@heart.org
Para consultas públicas: 1-800-AHA-USA1 (242-8721)
heart.org y stroke.org 

Highlights:

• The American Heart Association awarded four new scientific research grants to evaluate the role of race in measuring heart disease risk.
• The funded studies are focused on multi-ethnic groups and studying how race, considered a social rather than biological construct, affects health risk prediction when it is incorporated as a variable in algorithms.
• This research is funded by a grant from the Doris Duke Foundation to study the complex issue of how race and ethnicity, when factored into cardiovascular clinical care algorithms and risk prediction tools, affect equitable decision-making resulting from those algorithms.

DALLAS, April 29, 2024 — People with heart disease may receive different care because of how race is interpreted in health risk calculators and other tools that help clinicians make treatment decisions. The American Heart Association, a global force for healthier lives for all celebrating 100 years of lifesaving service, awarded four new grants this month to support scientific research that will evaluate the use of race in predicting heart disease risk and in turn help develop tools that are free of bias.

The newly funded principal investigators join six previous awardees who are part of a two-year scientific research strategy funded by a grant from the Doris Duke Foundation to study the complex issue of how race and ethnicity factor into clinical care algorithms and risk prediction tools. The grants are $50,000 each.

Clinical algorithms are formulas used to analyze health data and help determine a person’s risk for disease or guide their treatment decisions. Age, weight, information from blood or imaging tests, personal health history and health habits — like physical activity and smoking — are among the many types of data used by clinical algorithms. Some algorithms include race or ethnicity in their analysis to account for disproportionate disease rates among individuals of certain races or ethnicities. However, there has been growing scientific interest in reconsidering how race is used in risk calculators because race-corrected algorithms can negatively impact patient care and outcomes.

“These innovative research projects are focused on testing many different risk models that include a variety of health variables in an effort to remove racial bias from clinical algorithms. Our hope is that this research helps change the discourse about how race is considered in risk calculation,” said Jennifer Hall, Ph.D., FAHA, chief of data science for the American Heart Association.

The teams of scientists who received funding for the Debiasing Clinical Care Algorithms Data Grants are from Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, Arizona, University of Miami in Florida, University of Washington in Seattle and Boston University in Massachusetts.

The four research projects launched April 1, 2024, and will end March 31, 2025:

• Fair opportunistic risk estimation model for ASCVD using routine non-contrast chest computed tomography exams – led by Amara Tariq, Ph.D., at Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, Arizona. This study aims to develop a machine learning model to estimate risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), including stroke and heart attack, using non-contrast computed tomography (CT) imaging of the chest. A deep learning-based pipeline will be developed to derive imaging biomarkers like coronary artery calcium, thoracic aortic calcium, intrathoracic fat and body composition metrics, from chest CT scans. These biomarkers are known to predict the risk of future ASCVD. This study is particularly focused on ensuring that the developed tool is fair and unbiased for all racial subgroups by incorporating adversarial debiasing techniques during model development. The developed model will be evaluated on diverse patient populations from large academic healthcare institutions.

• Performance of race-based versus non race-based CVD risk calculators in a multi-racial/ethnic sample – led by Robert A. Mesa, M.P.H., a doctoral candidate in epidemiology at the University of Miami in Miami, Florida. This study will assess the American Heart Association’s Predicting Risk of CVD EVENTs (PREVENT) calculator in a multi-ethnic/multi-racial population. Researchers will use data from the Northern Manhattan Study, which is made up of more than 3,000 community-based participants. The group is 37% male and 63% female with 20% identified as non-Hispanic white, 25% non-Hispanic Black and 53% Hispanic background. The team will estimate ASCVD risk among these participants using both the race-specific pooled cohort equation (PCE) and the race-free PREVENT equation. They will then determine which equation better predicts 10-year risk of coronary heart disease or stroke.

• Re-evaluating the role of race/ethnicity in the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis (MESA) and coronary heart disease risk – led by Quinn White, B.A., a Ph.D. student in biostatistics at the University of Washington in Seattle, Washington. This study will examine a race-free version of the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) Risk Score. Researchers will update the model to remove race and ethnicity.

• Assessing the role and importance of race and ethnicity in the clinical algorithm for predicting ASCVD – led by Yixin Zhang, M.S., a biostatistics Ph.D. candidate at Boston University in Massachusetts. This study has two objectives. One objective is to assess whether self-reported race and ethnicity affect atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk prediction. The researchers will compare the Pooled Cohorts Equation, which considers race, with the new AHA Predicting Risk of Cardiovascular Disease Events (PREVENT) calculator that does not consider race. The second objective evaluates the extent to which a combined effect of social and environmental determinants explains the association between race/ethnicity and risk. They will assess whether social determinants of health and social deprivation index can replace race/ethnicity as representations of health disparities.

The American Heart Association has funded more than $5 billion in cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and brain health research since 1949. New knowledge resulting from this funding benefits millions of lives in every corner of the U.S. and around the world.

The Association receives funding primarily from individuals; foundations and corporations (including pharmaceutical, device manufacturers and other companies) also make donations and fund specific Association programs and events. The Association has strict policies to prevent these relationships from influencing the science content. Revenues from pharmaceutical and biotech companies, device manufacturers and health insurance providers and the Association’s overall financial information are available here.

Additional Resources:

• New scientific research will test PREVENT risk calculator among diverse groups (Feb. 2024)
• $150,000 awarded to research race in clinical algorithms (Aug. 2023)
• Call to Action: Structural Racism as a Fundamental Driver of Health Disparities (Nov. 2020)
• Follow AHA/ASA news on Twitter @HeartNews.

###

About the American Heart Association

The American Heart Association is a relentless force for a world of longer, healthier lives. We are dedicated to ensuring equitable health in all communities. Through collaboration with numerous organizations, and powered by millions of volunteers, we fund innovative research, advocate for the public’s health and share lifesaving resources. The Dallas-based organization has been a leading source of health information for a century. During 2024 - our Centennial year - we celebrate our rich 100-year history and accomplishments. As we forge ahead into our second century of bold discovery and impact our vision is to advance health and hope for everyone, everywhere. Connect with us on heart.org, Facebook, X or by calling 1-800-AHA-USA1.

For Media Inquiries: 214-706-1173

Maggie Francis: 214-706-1382; maggie.francis@heart.org  

For Public Inquiries: 1-800-AHA-USA1 (242-8721)

heart.org and stroke.org