Bone mineral density in relation to medical and lifestyle risk factors for osteoporosis in premenopausal, menopausal and postmenopausal women in general practice

Background: Interest in the prevention of osteoporosis is increasing and thus there is a need for an acceptable osteoporosis prevention programme in general practice. AIM. A study was undertaken to identify a cohort of middle-aged women attending a general practice who would be eligible for a longitudinal study looking at bone mineral density, osteoporosis and the effectiveness of hormone replacement therapy. This study aimed to describe the relationship between medical and lifestyle risk factors for osteoporosis and the initial bone density measurements in this group of women. METHOD. A health visitor administered a questionnaire to women aged between 48 and 52 years registered with a Belfast general practice. The main outcome measures were menopausal status, presence of medical and lifestyle risk factors and bone mineral density measurements. RESULTS. A total of 358 women our of 472 (76%) took part in the study which was conducted in 1991 and 1992. A highly significant difference was found between the mean bone mineral density of premenopausal, menopausal and postmenopausal women within the narrow study age range, postmenopausal women having the lowest bone mineral density. A significant relationship was found between body mass index and bone mineral density, a greater bone mineral density being found among women with a higher body mass index. Risk factors such as smoking and sedentary lifestyle were common (reported by approximately one third of respondents) but a poor relationship was found between these two and all the other risk factors and bone mineral density in this age group. CONCLUSION. Risk of osteoporosis cannot be identified by the presence of risk factors in women aged between 48 and 52 years. In terms of a current prevention strategy for general practice it would be better to take a population-based approach except for those women known to be at high risk of osteoporosis: women with early menopause or those who have had an oophorectomy.

Hierarchy as a barrier to advancement for women in academic medicine

Background: Research on barriers to professional advancement for women in academic medicine has not adequately considered the role of environmental factors and how the structure of organizations affects professional advancement and work experiences. This article examines the impact of the hierarchy, including both the organization's hierarchical structure and professionals' perceptions of this structure, in medical school organization on faculty members' experience and advancement in academic medicine. Methods: As part of an inductive qualitative study of faculty in five disparate U.S. medical schools, we interviewed 96 medical faculty at different career stages and in diverse specialties, using in-depth semistructured interviews, about their perceptions about and experiences in academic medicine. Data were coded and analysis was conducted in the grounded theory tradition. Results: Our respondents saw the hierarchy of chairs, based on the indeterminate tenure of department chairs, as a central characteristic of the structure of academic medicine. Many faculty saw this hierarchy as affecting inclusion, reducing transparency in decision making, and impeding advancement. Indeterminate chair terms lessen turnover and may create a bottleneck for advancement. Both men and women faculty perceived this hierarchy, but women saw it as more consequential. Conclusions: The hierarchical structure of academic medicine has a significant impact on faculty work experiences, including advancement, especially for women. We suggest that medical schools consider alternative models of leadership and managerial styles, including fixed terms for chairs with a greater emphasis on inclusion. This is a structural reform that could increase opportunities for advancement especially for women in academic medicine. © 2010 Copyright Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.

Blueberries decrease cardiovascular risk factors in obese men and women with metabolic syndrome

Among all fruits, berries have shown substantial cardio-protective benefits due to their high polyphenol content. However, investigation of their efficacy in improving features of metabolic syndrome and related cardiovascular risk factors in obesity is limited. We examined the effects of blueberry supplementation on features of metabolic syndrome, lipid peroxidation, and inflammation in obese men and women. Forty-eight participants with metabolic syndrome [4 males and 44 females; BMI: 37.8 +/- 2.3 kg/m(2); age: 50.0 +/- 3.0 y (mean +/- SE)] consumed freeze-dried blueberry beverage (50 g freeze-dried blueberries, approximately 350 g fresh blueberries) or equivalent amounts of fluids (controls, 960 mL water) daily for 8 wk in a randomized controlled trial. Anthropometric and blood pressure measurements, assessment of dietary intakes, and fasting blood draws were conducted at screening and at wk 4 and 8 of the study. The decreases in systolic and diastolic blood pressures were greater in the blueberry-supplemented group (- 6 and - 4%, respectively) than in controls (- 1.5 and - 1.2%) (P lt 0.05), whereas the serum glucose concentration and lipid profiles were not affected. The decreases in plasma oxidized LDL and serum malondialdehyde and hydroxynonenal concentrations were greater in the blueberry group (- 28 and - 17%, respectively) than in the control group (- 9 and - 9%) (P lt 0.01). Our study shows blueberries may improve selected features of metabolic syndrome and related cardiovascular risk factors at dietary achievable doses.

Serum lipoproteins in the diabetes control and complications trial/epidemiology of diabetes intervention and complications cohort:associations with gender and glycemia

To relate the nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR)-determined lipoprotein profile, conventional lipid and apolipoprotein measures, and in vitro oxidizibility of LDL with gender and glycemia in type 1 diabetes.

Women in Politics

this chapter provides a comprehensive discussion of the descriptive and substantive representation of women in Irish politics

Prevalence of human papillomavirus in women attending cervical screening in the UK and Ireland:New data from northern Ireland and a systematic review and meta-analysis

There is substantial international variation in human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence; this study details the first report from Northern Ireland and additionally provides a systematic review and meta-analysis pooling the prevalence of high-risk (HR-HPV) subtypes among women with normal cytology in the UK and Ireland. Between February and December 2009, routine liquid based cytology (LBC) samples were collected for HPV detection (Roche Cobas® 4800 [PCR]) among unselected women attending for cervical cytology testing. Four electronic databases, including MEDLINE, were then searched from their inception till April 2011. A random effects meta-analysis was used to calculate a pooled HR-HPV prevalence and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI). 5,712 women, mean age 39 years (±SD 11.9 years; range 20-64 years), were included in the analysis, of which 5,068 (88.7%), 417 (7.3%) and 72 (1.3%) had normal, low, and high-grade cytological findings, respectively. Crude HR-HPV prevalence was 13.2% (95% CI, 12.7-13.7) among women with normal cytology and increased with cytological grade. In meta-analysis the pooled HR-HPV prevalence among those with normal cytology was 0.12 (95% CIs, 0.10-0.14; 21 studies) with the highest prevalence in younger women. HPV 16 and HPV 18 specific estimates were 0.03 (95% CI, 0.02-0.05) and 0.01 (95% CI, 0.01-0.02), respectively. The findings of this Northern Ireland study and meta-analysis verify the prevalent nature of HPV infection among younger women. Reporting of the type-specific prevalence of HPV infection is relevant for evaluating the impact of future HPV immunization initiatives, particularly against HR-HPV types other than HPV 16 and 18. J. Med. Virol. 85:295-308, 2013. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Copyright © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.