Foxemborg3651

The relation between body mass index (BMI, kg/m2) and mortality among survivors of myocardial infarction (MI) remains controversial. We examined the relationship of BMI before and after MI, and change in weight, with all-cause mortality among participants of the Nurses' Health Study (1980-2016) and Health Professionals Follow up Study (1988-2016) cohorts. During up to 36 years of follow-up, we documented 4856 incident nonfatal MI cases, among whom 2407 died. For the pre-MI and post-MI BMI, overweight was not associated with lower mortality. Obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) was associated with higher risk of mortality. Compared to participants with post-MI BMI of 22.5-24.9, HRs were 1.16, 95% CI 1.01, 1.34 for BMI 30-34.9 and 1.52, 95% CI 1.27, 1.83 for BMI ≥ 35; Ptrend 4 BMI units was associated with increased mortality, HR=1.53, 95% CI 1.28, 1.83. This increase was only among participants who lost weight without improving physical activity or diet. Our findings showed no survival benefit of excess adiposity in relation to risk of mortality. Weight loss from before to after MI without lifestyle improvement may reflect reverse causation and disease severity.Targeted 'omics' research for seaweeds, utilizing various computational and informatics frameworks, has the potential to rapidly develop our understanding of biological processes at the molecular level and contribute to solutions for the most pressing environmental and social issues of our time. Here, a systematic review into the current status of seaweed omics research was undertaken to evaluate the biological diversity of seaweed species investigated (red, green and brown phyla), the levels to which the work was undertaken (from full genome to transcripts, proteins or metabolites) and the field of research to which it has contributed. We report that from 1994 to 2021 the majority of seaweed omics research has been performed on the red seaweeds (45% of total studies), with more than half of these studies based upon two genera Pyropia and Gracilaria. A smaller number of studies examined brown seaweed (key genera Saccharina and Sargassum) and green seaweed (primarily Ulva). check details Overall, seaweed omics research is most highly associated with the field of evolution (46% of total studies), followed by the fields of ecology, natural products and their biosynthesis, omics methodology and seaweed-microbe interactions. Synthesis and specific outcomes derived from omics studies in the red seaweeds are provided. Together, these studies have provided a broad-scale interrogation of seaweeds, facilitating our ability to answer fundamental queries and develop applied outcomes. Crucial to the next steps will be establishing analytical tools and databases that can be more broadly utilized by practitioners and researchers across the globe because of their shared interest in the key seaweed genera.

The aim of the present study was to investigate changes in the psychological state of medical personnel in the Department of Radiotherapy during the COVID-19 epidemic.

Psychological state was evaluated using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS), and Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS). All three questionnaires were first completed by medical personnel on 17-18 February 2020 and were repeated every 3 months thereafter until 17-18 August. The number and intentions of patients receiving radiotherapy (RT) in our department were also collected.

Twenty medical personnel participated in the present study. The global PSQI score recorded in August was significantly lower than that recorded in February (P = 0.045). Among the seven components of the PSQI, sleep quality (P = 0.048) and daytime dysfunction (P = 0.006) in August were significantly improved compared with February, whereas SDS and SAS did not significantly differ among the three different time points. The proportion of patients who received palliative radiotherapy was significantly higher on 18 May than on 17 February (P = 0.005).

Medical personnel in the Department of Radiotherapy experienced a significantly elevated incidence of sleeping problems during the early COVID-19 outbreak period. Multiple combinations of protective measures to avoid infection could improve sleep quality and ensure the safe delivery of RT to cancer patients.

Medical personnel in the Department of Radiotherapy experienced a significantly elevated incidence of sleeping problems during the early COVID-19 outbreak period. Multiple combinations of protective measures to avoid infection could improve sleep quality and ensure the safe delivery of RT to cancer patients.

The pathology report serves as a crucial communication tool among a number of stakeholders. It can sometimes be challenging to understand. A communication barrier exists among pathologists, other clinicians, and patients when interpreting the pathology report, leaving both clinicians and patients less empowered when making treatment decisions. Miscommunication can lead to delays in treatment or other costly medical interventions.

In this review, we highlight miscommunication in pathology reporting and provide potential solutions to improve communication.

Up to one-third of clinicians do not always understand pathology reports. Several causes of report misinterpretation include the use of pathology-specific jargon, different versions of staging or grading systems, and expressions indicative of uncertainty in the pathologist's report. Active communication has proven to be crucial between the clinician and the pathologist to clarify different aspects of the pathology report. Direct communication between pathologists and patients is evolving, with promising success in proof-of-principle studies. Special attention needs to be paid to avoiding inaccuracy while trying to simplify the pathology report.

There is a need for active and adequate communication among pathologists, other clinicians, and patients. Clarity and consistency in reporting, quantifying the level of confidence in diagnosis, and avoiding misnomers are key steps toward improving communications.

There is a need for active and adequate communication among pathologists, other clinicians, and patients. Clarity and consistency in reporting, quantifying the level of confidence in diagnosis, and avoiding misnomers are key steps toward improving communications.