Announcements

Name: Dr. Jamaji Nwanaji-Enwerem
Affiliations: ¹ Center for Health Justice, Department of Emergency Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; ² Center of Excellence in Environmental Toxicology, Department of Emergency Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
Interests: disease prevention and health promotion; emergency care; population health; social drivers of health

“U.S. Federal and State Medicaid Spending: Health Policy Patterns by Political Party Leadership and Census Demographics”
by Jamaji C. Nwanaji-Enwerem and Pamaji Nwanaji-Enwerem.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2025, 22(7), 1074; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22071074
Article Link: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/22/7/1074

1. Congratulations on your recent publication! Could you briefly introduce yourself and your current research focus?
Hi, my name is Dr. Jamaji Nwanaji-Enwerem. I’m an emergency medicine physician and a researcher at the University of Pennsylvania, USA, where I’m a Presidential Assistant Professor. My research spans a broad range of areas, but I would describe it as exploring both physical and social factors that influence health and working to understand how we can use insights from that work to not only help people live healthier lives, but also to inform people of the policies that can help facilitate healthy living. I approach this work through a range of topics from biological aging to environmental exposures to healthcare access.

2. What inspired you to focus on this topic?
As mentioned, I’m deeply interested in understanding how both physical and social factors affect health. At the time of this research, Medicaid was a major issue in the United States new cycles.
A series of legislative efforts were being discussed to reform Medicaid, but there was widespread concern that these changes might not adequately consider their real impact on people’s lives.
While there were many news stories and research articles on the topic, I felt most of the work was not presented in a way that was easily understandable to the public.
So, my team and I focused on analyzing publicly available data in a way that was both simple and rigorous—to show that this isn’t just a left-wing or right-wing issue, but one that affects everyone.
By making this information clear and meaningful, we hoped to contribute to the ongoing dialogue.

3. Could you share your vision for the future of your research and the contributions you aspire to make in your field?
As mentioned in our article, we recognize that neither Medicaid nor any public social program is perfect—there will always be room for improvement. However, we hope that reforms are approached comprehensively, considering both funding and efficiency, while never losing sight of the fact that these programs support millions of people in caring for their families and loved ones. If this human impact is overlooked, we miss what truly matters. We hope others also maintain this humanistic focus in their research, as we will continue to do.
There is value in examining data and numbers, but the stories behind them are equally meaningful and must not be lost in the process. Moreover, the impacts of legislation are often not immediate. It’s not only the stories we hear today, but also those we will hear months and years from now, that will remain meaningful as we continue to engage in these issues.

4. What was the biggest challenge you faced while writing this paper, and how did you overcome it?
One of our biggest hurdles was figuring out how to deliver the message in a highly understandable way. I think that’s something that we always have in mind with any type of research. Yes, you know, there’s an academic style of writing and you want to meet that, but you always hope that your research is read by many and read far. Yes, you want other scientists to read it. But you also want doctors to read it. You want policymakers to read it; you want someone who’s sitting at home who is interested in the topic but doesn’t have a background in research to be able to read it and get something from it. So, making sure, especially with the important issue of Medicaid, that it was written in an accessible way was the greatest – but a welcome – challenge.

5. Based on your experience publishing with us, what aspects of our editorial process most impacted your author’s experience?
It was a smooth process from submission all the way through revisions. I felt like we got very useful feedback from the editors, and we were able to incorporate that feedback to make the article even stronger than it was.
One of the things that I appreciated a lot was the timeliness of the whole process. I think it’s important to recognize that you can be rigorous in reviewing research but also realize that often people are studying topics that are being acted on in real time. Thus, being able to get research at a high standard out in a timely manner is very, very significant. I appreciate IJERPH for making that possible.

6. What advice would you give to young scholars seeking to get into academia or publish their work?
For many of us, the reason why we start doing research or science is because we’ve been inspired by something in our lives. Either we’ve been sick, or a family member’s been sick, or we were excited about science very early in life. Whenever we made our first rocket ship, or we spent time with a loved one in a museum, or experienced the benefits of engineering, or saw an experiment in a lab, there was some experience that drew us to science and research. I think it’s important to keep that in mind and to continue to use real life experiences to inspire you. The topic of this work remains very important to the lived experiences of many, and it was a timely issue that a lot of folks were speaking about. Being able to say, ‘hey, this is something that seems to matter. I’m interested in it. Is there a way that I can look at this, apply the scientific method, and produce something that I think could be meaningful and could help move the conversation forward?’ was what we did here and is a framework that I would advise future or younger scientists to consider as they decide what they want to work on next.

We are profoundly grateful to Dr. Jamaji Nwanaji-Enwerem for taking the time to share his expertise with us today. His insights into the intersection of healthcare policy, social drivers of health, and scientific communication were truly invaluable. We are confident that he will continue to make groundbreaking contributions to the field. We wish him the very best in his future endeavors.

MDPI will be attending the GSA 2025 Annual Scientific Meeting (GSA 2025), which will be held from 12 to 15 November 2025 in Boston, the USA. 

The Gerontological Society of America (GSA) is the oldest and largest interdisciplinary organization dedicated to research, education, and practice in the field of aging. The GSA’s principal mission, shared by its 6,000+ members in more than 50 countries, is to promote the study of aging and disseminate information to scientists, decision-makers, and the general public. Founded in 1945, the GSA is pivotal in advancing innovation in the study of aging domestically and internationally. It garners approximately 4,500 professionals from across the world for its Annual Scientific Meeting, which features over 500 sessions, and it additionally publishes leading peer-reviewed journals in this research area. 

The following open access journals will be represented at this conference:

• Healthcare;
• IJERPH;
• Societies;
• EJIHPE;
• JCDD;
• JCM;
• Nutrients;
• Epidemiologia;
• Behavioral Sciences;
• JAL. 

If you are planning to attend this event, please feel free to visit our booth and speak to our representatives. We look forward to meeting you in person and will assist you with any queries that you may have. 

In commemoration of World Patient Safety Day on 17 September 2025, we are delighted to bring together healthcare professionals, researchers, and advocates from around the world to focus on this year’s theme— “Safe care for every newborn and every child”, with the slogan “Patient safety from the start!” 

This event is dedicated to fostering collaboration, sharing knowledge, and exploring innovative strategies that ensure safer care, reduce patient harm, and improve health outcomes—especially for the most vulnerable among us. Together, we will discuss policies, practices, and research that can strengthen health systems and make patient safety a universal priority from the very beginning of life. 

Let us work hand in hand to create a future where every newborn and every child receives the safest possible care. 

Date: 17 September 2025 at 10:00 a.m. CEST | 4:00 a.m. EDT | 4:00 p.m. CST Asia
Webinar ID: 832 1056 2103
Website: https://sciforum.net/event/WPSD-1 

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information on how to join the webinar. Registrations made with academic institutional email addresses will be prioritized. 

Unable to attend? Register anyway and we will let you know when the recording is available to watch online. 

Register now for free!

Program:

 Webinar Chair and Speakers:

• Dr. Adriano Friganovic, University of Applied Health Sciences Zagreb, Croatia;
• Prof. Dr. Fabio Petrelli, University of Camerino, Camerino, Italy;
• Dr. Giovanni Cangelosi, University of Camerino, Camerino, Italy;
• Prof. Dr. Sandra C. Buttigieg, University of Malta, Faculty of Health Sciences, Msida, Malta.

We are pleased to announce the recent appointment of three new scholars as Editorial Board Members for the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH, ISSN: 1660-4601). We wish our new members success in both their research and in their efforts to develop the journal.

Name: Prof. Dr. Randolph Hall
Affiliations: Epstein Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089, USA
Interests: disease modeling; healthcare resource allocation; patient flow; healthcare system scheduling

Name: Dr. Kevin M. Kelly
Affiliations: Department of Anthropology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA
Interests: biological anthropology; medical anthropology; total worker health; environmental health; occupational health; population health; mixed methods

Name: Prof. Dr. Danlin Yu
Affiliations: Department of Earth and Environmental Studies, Montclair State University, Montclair, NJ 07043, USA
Interests: urban environmental studies; urban public health; GIS/remote sensing; spatiotemporal data analysis

Further details about the Editorial Board Members of the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health can be found at the following link: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph/editors. 

Name: Prof. Dr. Kimberly Mitchell
Affiliations: Crimes Against Children Research Center, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824, USA
Interests: adolescent health; adolescent sexual behavior; at risk/high risk populations (health); child abuse/neglect; child/maternal health; cyberbullying; firearms/guns; hate/hate crime/hate speech; opiates/opioids; resilience; suicide; trauma; violence prevention

Name: Prof. Dr. Victoria Banyard
Affiliations: New Brunswick School of Social Work, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA
Interests: interpersonal violence; sexual violence; dating violence; adolescence

“The Contribution of Social and Structural Determinants of Health Deficits to Mental and Behavioral Health Among a Diverse Group of Young People”
by Kimberly J. Mitchell, Victoria Banyard and Deirdre Colburn
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2025, 22(7), 1013; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22071013
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/22/7/1013

The following is a short interview with Prof. Dr. Kimberly Mitchell and Prof. Dr. Victoria Banyard:

1. Congratulations on your recent publication. Could you briefly introduce yourself and your current research focus?

Kimberly Mitchell: Sure. My name is Kimberly Mitchell. I’m a research professor at the Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire, and I’ve been working in this field for about 30 years. I’ve done work, more broadly, with child victimization and adversity, and more recently, I’ve started moving towards suicidal thoughts and behaviors.

Victoria Banyard: And I’m Vicki Banyard. I’m a distinguished professor in the School of Social Work and at the Center for Research on ending violence at Rutgers New Brunswick in New Jersey. I’ve been in the field, similar to Kim, for about 30 years, and have been working with her for a number of years. My research is very centered on violence prevention and particularly studying resilience-based strategies, which include understanding bystander intervention and mobilization across a number of different types of violence, and looking at bystander intervention as well as looking at strengths and risk factors related to mental health.

2. Your recent joint study highlights the social and structural determinants affecting young people’s mental health. What would you say are the most overlooked “invisible” determinants in this field, and how do you think we can make them more visible?

Kimberly Mitchell: You know, we know a lot about individual-level risk, and I think we know less about the larger community and societal-level factors that influence and interact with that risk. And that was one of our motivations for working on this paper, in particular, in the context of different health risk behaviours that are really critical to adolescents and young adults right now.

Victoria Banyard: As Kim said, we tend to focus very much on aspects of the individual. We see a lot of analysis of demographic groupings without really unpacking what that means. And I think measuring the social determinants of health in a more fine-grained way helps us to unpack what some of the Community social structural kinds of factors are impacting mental health. And I think we need to study that much more. And I think with this paper, we started that by particularly looking at risk factors. I think in the future, we need to do a lot more to also measure strength as not just the inverse of risk or lack of risk, but strengths in and of themselves. And that’s something for the future.

Kimberly Mitchell: I think it’s also important to add that there is a growing body of literature looking at social and structural determinants of health. A lot of them utilize external kinds of secondary county-level or state-level constructs, which are super important. And what we did in this study is we really looked around to see if there was a way we could ask these questions directly of youth, and we had a hard time finding them. Typically, they’re asked in clinical settings of adults or they’re asked of parents about their children. So, we took those types of screening tools and we adapted them in such a way that would be meaningful to youth. And then we pilot tested them with youth. So it’s also that this paper is exciting to us because it’s the first time we’ve really put some of that stuff out there and shown that kids can answer these questions and how important this is to look at!

Victoria Banyard: I would just add one thing on to that, that the other piece of what I think is novel and exciting to us about this paper is using the latent class analysis to not only, as Kim said, measure a whole variety of social determinants of health, but really trying to see how they go together in different profiles and I think that’s been really interesting. You know, sometimes people may just measure one of the social determinants of health and look at, say, the impact of poverty or income, right? Or they might investigate a variety of them, but what we were also really trying to do was look at: how do these things group together into different profiles of experiences that young people may have, and how we can understand how that affects their mental health?

3. With the development of technology, the impact factors like social media on the mental health of teenagers has become a very important topic. So how would you suggest we equip young people to navigate online risks like cyberbullying while still maximizing digital opportunities? How do you think we could use digital tools to bridge, rather than replace, the human-centered care in the field of mental health?

Kimberly Mitchell: Yeah, I feel like so much research on technology and kids has been negative, and there are certainly risks out there. But we know that there are a lot of great benefits to kids, too. You know, there are whole populations of kids that are otherwise hard to reach, but they’re online. Reaching out to them this way is a way to have their voices heard and their experiences shared. So I think, more and more, there are prevention programs, there are data methodologies where it’s all moved online because that’s where kids are.

4. What advice would you give to early career researchers aiming to make an impact in adolescent health?

Victoria Banyard: I would say study strengths and study context. Don’t just focus on the individual and what attitudes and things may be going on inside their heads. That’s important to understand. But I think we need to keep understanding and bridging disciplines to really look at both what’s going on inside the individual and what is happening around them. And as I said before, to measure strengths in their own right rather than just the inverse of risk. So, I think that’s an important future direction.

5. Our last question is what motivated you to choose the IJERPH journal for your submission, and how did you find the submission process?

Kimberly Mitchell: We’ve published there before. I think Vicki was actually on the Editorial Board for a while. So, we’ve heard good things about it. The journal has published a lot of great information in diverse areas; going back to what Vicki was speaking about, areas that cross disciplines. And I feel like the journal does a good job with that. And in terms of the whole submission process, I thought it was pretty straightforward. I thought the Editors were very responsive. I appreciated having the template to work from; that was really helpful because I think it reduces a lot of the back and forth once it’s accepted.

Victoria Banyard: Yeah, I thought so. As Kim said, you know, we published with you all before, I was an Editorial Board Member for a bit, and I think the turnaround time is also pretty amazing. I mean, we did get very helpful comments from reviewers, but also, just the timeframe is really quite quick compared to other places.

Kimberly Mitchell: Yeah. I also appreciate that there are a lot of Special Issues. I think that draws a lot of people in.

We sincerely thank Dr. Mitchell and Dr. Banyard for sharing their invaluable insights on adolescent mental health, social determinants, and innovative research approaches. Their groundbreaking work in developing youth-centered assessment tools and examining contextual factors provides crucial direction for the field. We wish them continued success in their important contributions to violence prevention and child wellbeing research.

Name: Dr. Laura Campo-Tena
Affiliations: Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 9DA, UK
Research interests: violence prevention, abuse of older people, violence against women

“Assessing Neighborhood Characteristics and Their Association with Prenatal Maternal Stress, Depressive Symptoms, and Well-Being in Eight Culturally Diverse Cities: A Cross-Sectional Study”
by Laura Campo-Tena, Gabriela Diana Roman, Aja Louise Murray, Bao Yen Luong-Thanh, Marguerite Marlow, Yasmeen Anwer, Awurabena Dadzie, Sarah Foley, Sandra Stuart Hernandez, Carene Lindsay et al.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2025, 22(3), 456; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22030456
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/22/3/456

The following is a short interview with Dr. Laura Campo-Tena:

1. Could you briefly introduce yourself and your current research focus?
I currently work as a violence prevention consultant for the World Health Organization, focusing on the abuse of older people and violence against women. Since 2020, I’ve collaborated with the WHO on several initiatives, including the Global Report on Ageism and, more recently, a global initiative aimed at accelerating the development of effective interventions to prevent and respond to the abuse of older people.
Alongside this, I am currently supporting a systematic review and meta-analysis on the global prevalence of violence against women with disabilities. Previously, I coordinated the Evidence for Better Lives Study (EBLS, https://www.vrc.crim.cam.ac.uk/vrcresearch/EBLS), a birth-cohort study led by the University of Cambridge and conducted in collaboration with 13 universities across eight sites in low- and middle-income countries. The goal of the EBLS was to examine how exposure to violence and other adversities affects early childhood development and to contribute to achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals related to violence prevention.

2. What were the main challenges or breakthroughs in conducting this research?
A major challenge we faced was the lack of culturally validated instruments to measure neighborhood characteristics, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Most existing tools had been developed in high-income settings, which made it difficult to assess key constructs—like neighborhood cohesion or social disorder—in more diverse contexts. This gap was one of the main motivations behind our study. We aimed to evaluate the conceptual and measurement equivalence of these scales across multiple international sites. Another key difficulty was the scarcity of prior research on how neighborhood factors affect maternal mental health during the perinatal period, especially in lower-resource settings. This lack of existing evidence made it challenging to build on previous knowledge but underscored the need for studies like ours.

3. What motivates your work in this field?
The motivation behind this research comes from an interest in understanding how the social and physical environments in which women live during pregnancy affect their health and well-being. There is significant research on individual-level factors like income and education, but far less attention has been paid to how the broader ecological context, such as neighborhood environment, influences well-being, particularly during pregnancy. This stage is incredibly sensitive, not only concerning the mother’s well-being but also for fetal development and early childhood outcomes: maternal stress and poor mental health are linked to a range of negative outcomes, including preterm birth, low birth weight, and long-term developmental challenges. The perinatal period also presents a unique opportunity for intervention, as women may be more receptive to support, having regular contact with healthcare providers. We were particularly motivated to understand these dynamics in underrepresented contexts and to contribute evidence on tools with demonstrated cross-cultural applicability, which can help inform both public health interventions and urban planning.

4. How do you assess current trends in your research field, and what advice would you offer to PhD students or early career researchers?
There is a growing recognition of the need for multidisciplinary approaches, combining insights from public health, urban planning, and social sciences, to better understand how neighborhood environments are associated with health and well-being. I would strongly encourage early career researchers to adopt this integrative mindset. Longitudinal research, like the EBLS, also offers deeper insight into relationships that may suggest causality and should be prioritized when possible. In our study, we examined a handful of neighborhood characteristics, but many others (such as access to healthcare, green spaces, and community resources) may also play an important role. Future research should explore these additional factors to develop a more comprehensive understanding of how environments shape maternal and child health outcomes.

5. Why did you choose to publish your research with IJERPH, and how was your experience with the journal?
We selected IJERPH because its scope aligned closely with our research goals and because it is open access. Accessibility was a key consideration. We wanted this work to be available not just to academics, but also to NGOs, practitioners, students, and anyone engaged in public health or violence prevention. The publishing experience was very smooth. The peer review process was efficient, and the comments we received helped improve the quality of our work. Communication with the editorial team was also excellent. Overall, we were very satisfied with the process.

We are pleased to announce that the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH, ISSN: 1660-4601) ranked first in the latest Google Scholar Metrics under the “Public Health” subcategory, with an h5-index of 258 and an h5-median of 372. For further details on our ranking, please visit the Google Scholar Metrics webpage here.

We would like to thank all the editors, reviewers, authors, and readers of IJERPH for their contributions and support. Please feel free to contact us via ijerph@mdpi.com if you have any questions or suggestions for IJERPH.

Supplementary explanations:

• Scholar Metrics—Scholar Metrics provide an easy way for authors to quickly gauge the visibility and influence of recent articles in scholarly publications.
• h5-index—The h5-index is the h-index for articles published in the last 5 complete years. It is the largest number h such that h articles published in 2020–2024 have at least h citations each.
• h5-median—The h5-median for a publication is the median number of citations for the articles that make up its h5-index.

IJERPH Editorial Office

We are pleased to announce that MDPI will be attending the 12th Indoor Environment and Health Conference (IEHB 2025), which will be held in Dalian, China, from 8 to 10 August 2025. 

This conference is organized by the Indoor Environment and Health Branch of the Chinese Society for Environmental Sciences and is hosted by Dalian University of Technology, Tianjin University, and The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Centered on the theme “Beautiful Environment, Connectivity and Integration, Smart and Healthy Living”, the conference will delve into critical topics such as indoor environments and health, pollutants and their microbial transmission mechanisms and control strategies, healthy and smart cities, green intelligent buildings, carbon peaking and neutrality, energy conservation, and indoor air chemistry and reaction mechanisms. This event aims to foster interdisciplinary collaboration, create a bridge between academia and industry, and serve as a platform to facilitate in-depth discussions, strengthen partnerships, and share success among participants. 

The following MDPI journals will be represented:

• Buildings;
• Air;
• Architecture;
• Clean Technol.;
• Climate;
• Designs;
• Environments;
• IJERPH;
• Pollutants;
• Sustainability;
• Toxics;
• Waste. 

If you plan on attending this conference, feel free to stop by our booth. Our delegates look forward to meeting you in person to answer any questions you may have. For more information about the conference, please click the following link: https://iehb2025.aconf.cn/index.html.

Name: Dr. Ricardo Noriega Espinoza
Affiliations: ¹ Department of Public Health, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA;
² Paso del Norte Health Information Exchange, El Paso, TX 79912, USA
Interests: prediabetes; type 2 diabetes; comorbidity; prevalence; Hispanic 

“Comorbidity Prevalence in Prediabetes and Type 2 Diabetes: A Cross-Sectional Study in a Predominantly Hispanic U.S.–Mexico Border Population”
by Ricardo X. Noriega, Juan J. Nañez, Emily F. Hartmann, John D. Beard, Chantel D. Sloan-Aagard and Evan L. Thacker
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2025, 22(5), 673; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22050673
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/22/5/673 

The following is an interview with Dr. Ricardo Noriega Espinoza: 

1. Congratulations on your recent publication! Could you briefly introduce yourself and your current research focus?
   I'm doctor Ricardo Noriega. I'm originally from Ecuador where I was trained as a physician and I later earned a Master of Public Health with an emphasis in epidemiology in the US from Brigham Young University. Right now, I'm working as an adjunct professor at this university, BYU, and I also work as an epidemiologist and research consultant at PHIX, a health information exchange non-profit organization based in El Paso. Most of my work involves analyzing health data to identify trends and translating clinical information into actionable public health insights. Lately, I've been especially focused on understanding comorbidities in people with prediabetes and type 2 diabetes. That's the main point of my research, and how early detection combined with localized data can help to drive more effective prevention. So, this current research looks at over 100,000 adult medical records in El Paso, which is a predominantly Hispanic bordered community. We found that people with prediabetes had significantly fewer comorbidities compared to those with type 2 diabetes. That’s really reinforced how important early intervention is, especially in underserved populations where diabetes risk is high.
2. Your work focuses on chronic diseases in diverse populations. What’s one surprising insight about community health behaviors that changed how you approach prevention strategies?
   I think one thing that really surprised me was just how low awareness of prediabetes is even among people who regularly visit their healthcare provider. So, for example, the CDC estimates that over 97,000,000 US adults have prediabetes, but more than 80% of them don't know it. In our own study we saw the same patterns, like many patients have a diagnosis of prediabetes in their medical records, but they didn't seem to be engaged in any prevention effort. There’s a gap between having a diagnosis and actually doing something about it. It really shifted how I think about health behavior regarding prediabetes. I think it's not just about motivation. It is also about how risk is communicated. I think that all people involved in providing healthcare should ask, are we making the message culturally relevant? Is it clear, practical or truly connected with the patient in a way that feels personal or meaningful? Because of that, I have started focusing more on a systemic-level solution. An example is improving how medical records follow up on prediabetes and, for example, partnership with local organizations to deliver lifestyle programs that really resonate with the people we are trying to help. And while our results that people with diabetes have more comorbidity than those with prediabetes may not be surprising, there actually hasn't been much larger-scale research quantifying that difference, especially using real world data from Hispanic communities. So, in that sense, our study helped to fill a gap. It provides us a way to track population health over time, compare between communities, and evaluate whether prevention strategies are really working where they are needed most. 
3. Chronic diseases (like diabetes, heart disease) affect millions. How can spatial or environmental data reveal hidden patterns in these diseases that traditional methods might miss?
   That’s a great question. Even though we did not publish any results about these using these methods, we have been working on this. We consider that spatial and environmental data can really open eyes to patterns that we might have otherwise missed, especially when we are just looking at broad averages. For example, in El Paso we have observed that areas with limited green spaces, poor air quality, and higher heat exposure tend to have higher rates of cardiovascular and respiratory conditions, so these hot spots are invisible when the data are aggregated by city. But when we map clinic visits or health outcomes against environmental metrics, this becomes clear. As part of our effort to study diabetes at PHIX, we mapped the prevalence of diabetes by ZIP code and we found that areas closer to the US–Mexico border consistently show higher prevalence. This geographic gradient highlights how social and structural factors like access to care, poverty, housing, and transportation interact with the health outcomes. To better understand these disparities right now we are refining our analysis using the census track and block level. That adds a level of detail that we believe will give us an even clearer picture of local disparities and help guide more targeted intervention in and also resource allocation strategies in El Paso. We have also developed dashboards that layer health outcomes with environmental data such as heat exposure and air quality. These two factors have been especially helpful for our public health partners, enabling them to identify high-risk neighborhoods and take focused actions. Some of them are identifying cooling centers, for example, expanding shaded green areas, or coordinating local outreach efforts. This kind of place-based analysis helps us to shift from reacting to health problems to preventing them via the community level where the impact is most direct. 
4. When combining environmental data (e.g., air quality, green spaces) with health outcomes, what’s a common oversight people make—and how do you address it?
   I think that probably a common oversight is treating environmental exposure as static, which means averaging data over large areas or long time periods without accounting for individual variability or cumulative exposure. We cannot assume that everyone in a given city experiences the environment in the same way, right? People don't live in averages; they live in specific microenvironments that can vary drastically by the hour, the block, or even where they work versus where they live. So, to address this, we have advocated for using fine-grained, time-linked data and when possible incorporated mobility patterns. For example, aligning daily air quality data with emergency department visits helps us to detect acute environmental triggers. Rather than identify disease patterns, the idea is to understand exposure in a way that reflects life experience. The strategies will be designed not just in a data-driven way, but also in a way that is relevant and practical for the communities we serve. Working closely with environmental health experts and utilizing data such as syndromic surveillance systems and GIS could enable El Paso and other communities to respond with greater precision and impact.
5. What appealed to you about the journal that made you want to submit your paper? How was your experience submitting to IJERPH?
   Well, we were drawn to this journal because of the interdisciplinary approach and global reach.
   One of my co-authors has published with the journal before and he spoke highly of the experience. So, when we began looking for the right place to submit our work, he suggested it as a strong fit and after reviewing the journal’s scope, we agreed with that. The study was well aligned with the “Infectious Diseases, Chronic Diseases, and Disease Prevention” Section, particularly because it addresses the core priorities that are understanding the burden of chronic diseases and also identifying the opportunities for early intervention. Although our main focus was on chronic diseases, we also included data on infection and respiratory conditions, including COVID-19, and its prevalence differences between individuals with prediabetes and those with type 2 diabetes, which made the study especially relevant to the scope of this Section.
   And as for the submission and peer review process, we believe that it was efficient and highly constructive. The reviewers provided thoughtful feedback that helped us to improve our arguments and clarify the results. Something that I also really appreciate is the journal’s open access model which ensures that the findings are available for clinicians, researchers and community leaders. So, thank you so much for that.

Conference: 17th China Nutrition Science Congress
Date: 21–23 September 2025
Location: Beijing, China

MDPI will be attending the 17th China Nutrition Science Congress as an exhibitor. The event will take place in Beijing, China, from 21 to 23 September 2025.

The theme of the conference is “Nutritional Innovation—Promoting High Quality Development of National Health”. The conference will invite renowned experts from both home and abroad to give keynote speeches and special reports. It will also organize various academic activities such as paper exchanges, academic presentations, and seminars, with rich and diverse content. Scientists and technicians in the fields of nutrition, health, food, and agriculture, as well as representatives from the industry, are welcome to actively participate and exchange ideas.

The scientific program offers keynote speeches, Symposia, and Forums related to the following fields of nutrition:

• Nutrition innovation and high-quality development—This includes food, sustainable food development and nutrition actions; future nutrition directions and technologies, artificial intelligence and nutrition services, etc.;
• Basic nutrition research—Covering new methods and technologies; nutrition and immunity; nutrition and intestinal microecology; diet and inflammatory diseases; precision nutrition, etc.;
• Food and nutrition—Covering areas such as new food components and analytical technologies; phytochemicals; dietary culture and behavior; food and nutrition big data, etc.;
• Dietary therapy—In the fields of health management, chronic disease prevention and treatment, etc.;
• Lifelong nutrition for the population—nutrition during pregnancy; nutrition during lactation; nutrition in early life; nutrition for children and adolescents; nutrition for the elderly; sports nutrition; vegetarian nutrition, etc.;
• Clinical nutrition—Specialized food products, medical diets, etc.;
• Public nutrition and health—Covering areas such as nutrition policies and regulations, standards; community nutrition; nutritional epidemiology; nutrition and health management, etc.

The following MDPI journals will be represented:

• Nutrients;
• IJERPH;
• Obesities;
• Antioxidants;
• Hygiene;
• Nutraceuticals;
• Healthcare.

If you are attending this conference, please feel free to start an online conversation with us. Our delegates look forward to meeting you in person at booth #78 and answering any questions you may have. For more information about the conference, please visit the following website: http://www.cnsc2025.cn/.