Hannes Schwandt’s research while affiliated with Northwestern University and other places

This paper estimates the effects of fatal school shootings on youth psychotropic drug use over the subsequent five and a half years. Using an event study approach that compares trends in drugs prescribed by providers practicing close to a school shooting relative to those practicing slightly farther away, we find that fatal school shootings lead to large increases in youth psychotropic drug use that persist for years after the event. These effects are driven primarily by increases in prescriptions for antid epressants and antipsychotics and are observed among both youths who were previously taking psychotropic medication and those who were not.

We use natality microdata covering the universe of US. births for 2015 to 2021 and California births from 2015 through February 2023 to examine childbearing responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. We find that 60% of the 2020 decline in US fertility rates was driven by sharp reductions in births to foreign-born mothers although births to this group comprised only 22% of all US births in 2019. This decline started in January 2020. In contrast, the COVID-19 recession resulted in an overall "baby bump" among US-born mothers, which marked the first reversal in declining fertility rates since the Great Recession. Births to US-born mothers fell by 31,000 in 2020 relative to a prepandemic trend but increased by 71,000 in 2021. The data for California suggest that US births remained elevated through February 2023. The baby bump was most pronounced for first births and women under age 25, suggesting that the pandemic led some women to start families earlier. Above age 25, the baby bump was most pronounced for women aged 30 to 34 and women with a college education. The 2021 to 2022 baby bump is especially remarkable given the large declines in fertility rates that would have been projected by standard statistical models.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic caused a large decrease in US life expectancy in 2020, but whether a similar decrease occurred in 2021 and whether the relationship between income and life expectancy intensified during the pandemic are unclear. Objective: To measure changes in life expectancy in 2020 and 2021 and the relationship between income and life expectancy by race and ethnicity. Design, setting, and participants: Retrospective ecological analysis of deaths in California in 2015 to 2021 to calculate state- and census tract-level life expectancy. Tracts were grouped by median household income (MHI), obtained from the American Community Survey, and the slope of the life expectancy-income gradient was compared by year and by racial and ethnic composition. Exposures: California in 2015 to 2019 (before the COVID-19 pandemic) and 2020 to 2021 (during the COVID-19 pandemic). Main outcomes and measures: Life expectancy at birth. Results: California experienced 1 988 606 deaths during 2015 to 2021, including 654 887 in 2020 to 2021. State life expectancy declined from 81.40 years in 2019 to 79.20 years in 2020 and 78.37 years in 2021. MHI data were available for 7962 of 8057 census tracts (98.8%; n = 1 899 065 deaths). Mean MHI ranged from $21 279 to$232 261 between the lowest and highest percentiles. The slope of the relationship between life expectancy and MHI increased significantly, from 0.075 (95% CI, 0.07-0.08) years per percentile in 2019 to 0.103 (95% CI, 0.098-0.108; P < .001) years per percentile in 2020 and 0.107 (95% CI, 0.102-0.112; P < .001) years per percentile in 2021. The gap in life expectancy between the richest and poorest percentiles increased from 11.52 years in 2019 to 14.67 years in 2020 and 15.51 years in 2021. Among Hispanic and non-Hispanic Asian, Black, and White populations, life expectancy declined 5.74 years among the Hispanic population, 3.04 years among the non-Hispanic Asian population, 3.84 years among the non-Hispanic Black population, and 1.90 years among the non-Hispanic White population between 2019 and 2021. The income-life expectancy gradient in these groups increased significantly between 2019 and 2020 (0.038 [95% CI, 0.030-0.045; P < .001] years per percentile among Hispanic individuals; 0.024 [95% CI: 0.005-0.044; P = .02] years per percentile among Asian individuals; 0.015 [95% CI, 0.010-0.020; P < .001] years per percentile among Black individuals; and 0.011 [95% CI, 0.007-0.015; P < .001] years per percentile among White individuals) and between 2019 and 2021 (0.033 [95% CI, 0.026-0.040; P < .001] years per percentile among Hispanic individuals; 0.024 [95% CI, 0.010-0.038; P = .002] years among Asian individuals; 0.024 [95% CI, 0.011-0.037; P = .003] years per percentile among Black individuals; and 0.013 [95% CI, 0.008-0.018; P < .001] years per percentile among White individuals). The increase in the gradient was significantly greater among Hispanic vs White populations in 2020 and 2021 (P < .001 in both years) and among Black vs White populations in 2021 (P = .04). Conclusions and relevance: This retrospective analysis of census tract-level income and mortality data in California from 2015 to 2021 demonstrated a decrease in life expectancy in both 2020 and 2021 and an increase in the life expectancy gap by income level relative to the prepandemic period that disproportionately affected some racial and ethnic minority populations. Inferences at the individual level are limited by the ecological nature of the study, and the generalizability of the findings outside of California are unknown.

Significance From 1990 to 2018, the Black–White American life expectancy gap fell 48.9% and mortality inequality decreased, although progress stalled after 2012 as life expectancy plateaued. Had improvements continued at the 1990 to 2012 rate, the racial gap in life expectancy would have closed by 2036. Despite decreasing mortality inequality, income-based life expectancy gaps remain starker in the United States than in European countries. At the same time, European mortality improved strongly and even those U.S. populations with the longest life spans–White Americans living in the highest-income areas–experience higher mortality at all ages than Europeans in high-income areas in 2018. Hence, mortality rates of both Black and White Americans could fall much further in both high-income and low-income areas.

Without the opioid epidemic, American life expectancy would not have declined prior to 2020. The epidemic was sparked by the development and marketing of a new generation of prescription opioids, and the behavior of opioid providers is still helping to drive it. Little relationship exists between the opioid crisis and contemporaneous measures of labor market opportunity: cohorts and areas that experienced poor labor market conditions do show lagged increases in opioid mortality, but the effect is modest relative to the scale of the epidemic. We argue that specific policies and features of the U.S. health care market, especially liberal prescribing of opioids, led to the current crisis. It will not be possible to quickly reverse depressed economic conditions, but it is possible to implement policies that would reduce the number of new opioid addicts and save the lives of many who are already addicted.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted medical care, impacting prescribing of opioid analgesics and buprenorphine for opioid use disorder. Understanding these patterns can help address barriers to care. Objective: To evaluate how prescribing of opioid analgesics and buprenorphine for opioid use disorder changed throughout the COVID-19 pandemic among both new and existing patients. Design, setting, and participants: In this cross-sectional study, use of opioid analgesics and buprenorphine for opioid use disorder from March 18 to September 1, 2020, was projected using a national database of retail prescriptions from January 1, 2018, to March 3, 2020. Actual prescribing was compared with projected levels for all, existing, and new patients. Exposures: The data include prescriptions to patients independent of insurance status or type and cover 90% of retail prescriptions, 70% of mail-order prescriptions, and 70% of nursing home prescriptions. Main outcomes and measures: Prescriptions for opioid analgesics and buprenorphine for opioid use disorder. Outcomes included total number of prescriptions, total morphine milligram equivalents, mean morphine milligram equivalents per prescription, mean dispensed units per prescription, and number of patients filling prescriptions. Results: A total of 452 691 261 prescriptions for opioid analgesics and buprenorphine for opioid use disorder were analyzed for 90 420 353 patients (50 921 535 female patients [56%]; mean [SD] age, 49 [20] years). From March 18 to May 19, 2020, 1877 million total morphine milligram equivalents of opioid analgesics were prescribed weekly vs 1843 million projected, a ratio of 102% (95% prediction interval [PI], 94%-111%; P = .71). The weekly number of opioid-naive patients receiving opioids was 370 051 vs 564 929 projected, or 66% of projected (95% PI, 63%-68%; P < .001). Prescribing of buprenorphine was as projected for existing patients, while the number of new patients receiving buprenorphine weekly was 9865 vs 12 008 projected, or 82% (95% PI, 76%-88%; P < .001). From May 20 to September 1, 2020, opioid prescribing for new patients returned to 100% of projected (95% PI, 96%-104%; P = .95), while the number of new patients receiving buprenorphine weekly was 10 436 vs 11 613 projected, or 90% (95% PI, 83%-97%; P = .009). Conclusions and relevance: In this cross-sectional study, existing patients receiving opioid analgesics and buprenorphine for opioid use disorder generally maintained access to these medications during the COVID-19 pandemic. Opioid prescriptions for opioid-naive patients decreased briefly and then rebounded, while initiation of buprenorphine remained at a low rate through August 2020. Reductions in treatment entry may be associated with increased overdose deaths.

This cross-sectional study uses data from the Ohio Department of Health to evaluate trends in drug overdose mortality in that state by type of drug and user age during the first 7 months of the COVID-19 epidemic.

This study provides comparisons of inequalities in mortality between the United States, Canada and France using the most recent available data. The period between 2010 and 2018 saw increases in mortality and in inequality in mortality for most age and gender groups in the United States. The main exceptions were children under 5 and adults over 65. In contrast, Canada saw a further flattening of mortality gradients in most groups, as well as further declines in overall mortality. The sole exception was Canadian women over 80 years old, who saw small increases in mortality rates. France saw continuing improvements in mortality rates in all groups. Both Canada and France have distributions of mortality that are much more equal than those in the United States, demonstrating the importance of public policy in the achievement of equality in health.