About the Study: This cross-sectional study examines trends in cancer medicine approvals by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for adult solid tumors between 2006 and 2025, including both original and supplemental indication approvals.

About this Study: This cohort study evalutes trends in US Department of Veterans Affairs disability compensation receipt and benefit amounts from 2010 to 2024 and their association with sociodemographic characteristics and disability type.

About the Study: To what extent do obstetrician-gynecologists (OB-GYNs) experience clinical constraints associated with their state’s abortion laws, and are those constraints associated with moral distress? In a cross-sectional study surveying 864 OB-GYNs, those in abortion-restrictive states endorsed higher levels of 3 specific clinical constraints (counseling, care provision, and care for patients with potentially life-threatening pregnancy complications) compared with OB-GYNs in protective states. Greater levels of each clinical constraint were associated with higher moral distress scores in restrictive and protective states. These findings suggest that OB-GYN moral distress, associated with inability to provide certain forms of care to pregnant patients, transcends abortion policy context; institution-level policies and practices to support OB-GYNs are indicated nationally, not only in states with the most restrictive abortion laws.

About the Study: How do individuals traveling from states with abortion restrictions perceive options for remote medication abortion, and what factors affect their care decisions? This qualitative study’s 37 participants traveling to Kansas for in-person medication abortion care described mistrust of online medication sources, legal concerns, knowledge gaps about remote services, and a preference for in-person care. These findings suggest that misconceptions and concerns about the legitimacy and legality of remote medication abortion may limit uptake, despite broad awareness; health services and policy strategies should move beyond awareness campaigns to build trust, clarify the legal landscape, and improve understanding of safe, reliable, evidence-based options.

Wildfires are becoming an increasingly severe and complex risk across Europe, driven by climate change, land-use transformations, and socio-economic pressures. A new CMCC study analyses how wildfire risk is governed in Italy, Greece and the German federal state of Land Brandenburg, revealing how the institutions responsible for managing this risk actually work together, revealing governance networks that are dense and cross-sectoral, yet strongly hierarchical and still under-using scientific expertise. The study aims to help national and regional authorities identify both strengths and blind spots in wildfire risk governance.