| 1. |
- Bouillon, Kim, et al.
(författare)
-
Measures of frailty in population-based studies: An overview
- 2013
-
Ingår i: BMC Geriatrics. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1471-2318. ; 13:64
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Although research productivity in the field of frailty has risen exponentially in recent years, there remains a lack of consensus regarding the measurement of this syndrome. This overview offers three services: first, we provide a comprehensive catalogue of current frailty measures; second, we evaluate their reliability and validity; third, we report on their popularity of use.Methods: In order to identify relevant publications, we searched MEDLINE (from its inception in 1948 to May 2011); scrutinized the reference sections of the retrieved articles; and consulted our own files. An indicator of the frequency of use of each frailty instrument was based on the number of times it had been utilized by investigators other than the originators.Results: Of the initially retrieved 2,166 papers, 27 original articles described separate frailty scales. The number (range: 1 to 38) and type of items (range of domains: physical functioning, disability, disease, sensory impairment, cognition, nutrition, mood, and social support) included in the frailty instruments varied widely. Reliability and validity had been examined in only 26% (7/27) of the instruments. The predictive validity of these scales for mortality varied: for instance, hazard ratios/odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for mortality risk for frail relative to non-frail people ranged from 1.21 (0.78; 1.87) to 6.03 (3.00; 12.08) for the Phenotype of Frailty and 1.57 (1.41; 1.74) to 10.53 (7.06; 15.70) for the Frailty Index. Among the 150 papers which we found to have used at least one of the 27 frailty instruments, 69% (n = 104) reported on the Phenotype of Frailty, 12% (n = 18) on the Frailty Index, and 19% (n = 28) on one of the remaining 25 instruments.Conclusions: Although there are numerous frailty scales currently in use, reliability and validity have rarely been examined. The most evaluated and frequently used measure is the Phenotype of Frailty.
|
|
| 2. |
- Heikkilä, Katriina, et al.
(författare)
-
Work stress and risk of cancer: meta-analysis of 5700 incident cancer events in 116 000 European men and women
- 2013
-
Ingår i: The BMJ. - : BMJ. - 1756-1833. ; 345:f165
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective To investigate whether work related stress, measured and defined as job strain, is associated with the overall risk of cancer and the risk of colorectal, lung, breast, or prostate cancers.Design Meta-analysis of pooled prospective individual participant data from 12 European cohort studies including 116 056 men and women aged 17-70 who were free from cancer at study baseline and were followed-up for a median of 12 years. Work stress was measured and defined as job strain, which was self reported at baseline. Incident cancers (all n=5765, colorectal cancer n=522, lung cancer n=374, breast cancer n=1010, prostate cancer n=865) were ascertained from cancer, hospital admission, and death registers. Data were analysed in each study with Cox regression and the study specific estimates pooled in meta-analyses. Models were adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic position, body mass index (BMI), smoking, and alcohol intakeResults A harmonised measure of work stress, high job strain, was not associated with overall risk of cancer (hazard ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 1.04) in the multivariable adjusted analyses. Similarly, no association was observed between job strain and the risk of colorectal (1.16, 0.90 to 1.48), lung (1.17, 0.88 to 1.54), breast (0.97, 0.82 to 1.14), or prostate (0.86, 0.68 to 1.09) cancers. There was no clear evidence for an association between the categories of job strain and the risk of cancer.Conclusions These findings suggest that work related stress, measured and defined as job strain, at baseline is unlikely to be an important risk factor for colorectal, lung, breast, or prostate cancers.
|
|
| 3. |
- Lønborg, C., et al.
(författare)
-
A global database of dissolved organic matter (DOM) concentration measurements in coastal waters (CoastDOM v1)
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Earth System Science Data. - : Copernicus Publications. - 1866-3508 .- 1866-3516. ; 16:2, s. 1107-1119
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Measurements of dissolved organic carbon (DOC), nitrogen (DON), and phosphorus (DOP) concentrations are used to characterize the dissolved organic matter (DOM) pool and are important components ofbiogeochemical cycling in the coastal ocean. Here, we present the first edition of a global database (CoastDOMv1; available at https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.964012, Lønborg et al., 2023) compiling previously published and unpublished measurements of DOC, DON, and DOP in coastal waters. These data are complementedby hydrographic data such as temperature and salinity and, to the extent possible, other biogeochemical variables(e.g. chlorophyll a, inorganic nutrients) and the inorganic carbon system (e.g. dissolved inorganic carbon andtotal alkalinity). Overall, CoastDOM v1 includes observations of concentrations from all continents. However,most data were collected in the Northern Hemisphere, with a clear gap in DOM measurements from the SouthernHemisphere. The data included were collected from 1978 to 2022 and consist of 62 338 data points for DOC,20 356 for DON, and 13 533 for DOP. The number of measurements decreases progressively in the sequenceDOC > DON > DOP, reflecting both differences in the maturity of the analytical methods and the greater focuson carbon cycling by the aquatic science community. The global database shows that the average DOC concentration in coastal waters (average ± standard deviation (SD): 182±314 µmolC L−1; median: 103 µmolC L−1) is13-fold higher than the average coastal DON concentration (13.6 ± 30.4 µmol N L−1; median: 8.0 µmol N L−1),which is itself 39-fold higher than the average coastal DOP concentration (0.34 ± 1.11 µmol P L−1; median:0.18 µmol P L−1). This dataset will be useful for identifying global spatial and temporal patterns in DOM and willhelp facilitate the reuse of DOC, DON, and DOP data in studies aimed at better characterizing local biogeochemical processes; closing nutrient budgets; estimating carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorous pools; and establishing abaseline for modelling future changes in coastal waters.
|
|
