Aim To evaluate the relationship of diet to incident diabetes among non-Black and Black participants in the Adventist Health Study-2. Methods and Results Participants were 15,200 men and 26,187 women (17.3% Blacks) across the U.S. and Canada who were free of diabetes and who provided demographic, anthropometric, lifestyle and dietary data. Participants were grouped as vegan, lacto ovo vegetarian, pesco vegetarian, semi-vegetarian or non-vegetarian (reference group). A follow-up questionnaire after two years elicited information on the development of diabetes. Cases of diabetes developed in 0.54% of vegans, 1.08% of lacto ovo vegetarians, 1.29% of pesco vegetarians, 0.92% of semi-vegetarians and 2.12% of non-vegetarians. Blacks had an increased risk compared to non-Blacks (odds ratio [OR] 1.364; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.093–1.702). In multiple logistic regression analysis controlling for age, gender, education, income, television watching, physical activity, sleep, alcohol use, smoking and BMI, vegans (OR 0.381; 95% CI 0.236–0.617), lacto ovo vegetarians (OR 0.618; 95% CI 0.503–0.760) and semi-vegetarians (OR 0.486, 95% CI 0.312–0.755) had a lower risk of diabetes than non-vegetarians. In non-Blacks vegan, lacto ovo and semi-vegetarian diets were protective against diabetes (OR 0.429, 95% CI 0.249–0.740; OR 0.684, 95% CI 0.542–0.862; OR 0.501, 95% CI 0.303–0.827); among Blacks vegan and lacto ovo vegetarian diets were protective (OR 0.304, 95% CI 0.110–0.842; OR 0.472, 95% CI 0.270–0.825). These associations were strengthened when BMI was removed from the analyses. Conclusion Vegetarian diets (vegan, lacto ovo, semi-) were associated with a substantial and independent reduction in diabetes incidence. In Blacks the dimension of the protection associated with vegetarian diets was as great as the excess risk associated with Black ethnicity.
The surgical repair of distal biceps tendon ruptures has an overall low rate of serious complications, regardless of approach or technique. However, the double-incision technique has a higher rate of posterior interosseous nerve palsy, heterotopic bone formation, and reoperation rate. Surgeon's years of practice, fellowship training, and case volume do not affect the rate of major complications.
Background Randomized trials demonstrated efficacy of Ad26.COV2.S, a single-dose COVID-19 vaccine. Data assessing effectiveness in clinical practice and its stability over time since vaccination and against Delta variants are needed. Methods Using U.S. insurance claims data through July 2021, we identified individuals newly vaccinated with Ad26.COV2.S and up to 10 unvaccinated individuals matched exactly by age, sex, date, location, comorbidity index plus 17 COVID-19 risk factors via propensity score (PS) matching. We estimated Vaccine Effectiveness (VE) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for observed COVID-19 and COVID-19-related hospitalization, nationwide and stratified by age, immunocompromised status, calendar time, and states with high incidence of the Delta variant. We corrected VE estimates for under-recording of vaccinations in insurance data. Results Among 390,517 vaccinated and 1,524,153 matched unvaccinated individuals, VE was 79% (95% CI, 77% to 80%) for COVID-19 and 81% (79% to 84%) for COVID-19-related hospitalizations. VE was stable over calendar time. Among states with high Delta variant incidence, VE during June/July 2021 was 78% (73% to 82%) for infections and 85% (73% to 91%) for hospitalizations. VE for COVID-19 was higher in individuals <50 years (83%; 81% to 85%) and lower in immunocompromised patients (64%; 57% to 70%). All estimates were corrected for under-recording; uncorrected VE was 69% (67% to 71%) and 73% (69% to 76%), for COVID-19 and COVID-19-related hospitalization, respectively. Conclusions These non-randomized data across U.S. clinical practices show high and stable vaccine effectiveness of Ad26.COV2.S over time before the Delta variant emerged to when the Delta variant was dominant.
Among a racially and ethnically diverse cohort from a single geographical area and similar environment, FSGS was the most common glomerulonephropathy, but there was variability of other glomerulonephropathies based on race and ethnicity.
PurposeTo evaluate the prevalence and risk factors for pediatric myopia in a contemporary American cohort.MethodsA cross-sectional study of pediatric patients enrolled in the Kaiser Permanente Southern California health plan was done. Eligible patients were 5- to 19-years old between January 1, 2008, through December 31, 2013, and received an ophthalmologic or optometric refraction. Electronic medical records were reviewed for demographic data, refraction results, and exercise data. Prevalence and relative risks of myopia (defined as ≤−1.0 diopter) were characterized. Age, sex, race/ethnicity, median neighborhood income, and minutes of exercise per day were examined as risk factors.ResultsThere were 60,789 patients who met the inclusion criteria, of which 41.9% had myopia. Myopia was more common in older children (14.8% in 5- to 7-year olds, 59.0% in 17- to 19-year olds). Asian/Pacific Islander patients (OR 1.64, CI 1.58–1.70) had an increased rate of myopia compared to White patients as did African Americans to a lesser extent (OR 1.08, CI 1.03–1.13). Median neighborhood household income of $25,000–40,000 was associated with lower rates of myopia (OR 0.90, CI 0.83–0.97) compared to median neighborhood household incomes less than $25,000. Having at least 60 min of daily exercise was associated with lower prevalence of myopia (OR 0.87, CI 0.85–0.89).DiscussionMyopia was common in this large and diverse Southern Californian pediatric cohort. The prevalence of myopia increases with age. Asian children are at highest risk for myopia. Exercise is associated with a lower rate of myopia and represents an important potentially modifiable risk factor that may be a target for future public health efforts.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.