Oxidative stress has been implicated in the etiology of many chronic diseases, including cardiovascular disease. However, limited information exists on the factors that may influence oxidative status in the general population. In a random sample of the population of two counties in western New York, levels of several markers of oxidative status (i.e., thiobarbituric acid-reactive substances, erythrocyte glutathione, and glutathione peroxidase) were determined. A total of 894 men and 903 women aged 35-79 years were included in the study (1996-1999). In addition, a number of sociodemographic and lifestyle characteristics and cardiovascular disease risk factors were measured. Age, markers of glucose metabolism (e.g., plasma glucose level) and insulin resistance (e.g., serum triglycerides, high density lipoprotein cholesterol, body mass index), and postmenopausal status in women were associated with increased oxidative stress and reduced antioxidant potentials. Oxidative status and antioxidant potentials appear to be significantly associated with a number of major cardiovascular disease risk factors; most of them are linked to abnormalities in glucose and insulin metabolism.

This study tested the relative predictive power of self-efficacy expectations of physical capabilities (functional self-efficacy [FSE]), expectations of pain, and expectations of reinjury on physical function in chronic back patients. Before behavioral assessment of function, 85 patients rated their abilities to perform essential job tasks (FSE) and the likelihood that their performances would be accompanied by pain and reinjury. Partial correlations revealed that FSE was significantly related to function when reinjury and pain were partialed out. Neither reinjury nor pain expectancies correlated significantly with function when FSE was partialed out. Further support for an FSE approach came from regression analyses that found pain intensity, gender, and FSE--not expected pain or reinjury--related consistently with physical performance. Thus, performance-specific cognitions may have greater explanatory power over disability than pain-specific ones.

No abstract

Background Obtaining accurate information about GI symptoms is critical to achieving the goals of clinical research and practice. The accuracy of patient data is especially important for functional GI disorders (e.g., IBS) whose symptoms lack a biomarker and index illness severity and treatment response. Retrospective patient reported data are vulnerable to forgetting and various cognitive biases whose impact has not been systematically studied in patients with GI disorders. Aim To document the accuracy of patient reported GI symptoms over a reporting period (1 week) most representative of the time frame used in research and clinical care (1). Methods Subjects were 273 Rome III-diagnosed IBS patients (M age = 39 yrs., 89% F) who completed end of day GI symptom ratings for 7 days using an electronic diary. On Day 8, Ss recalled the frequency and/or intensity of IBS symptoms over the past 7 days. Reports were then compared against a validation criterion based on aggregated end of day ratings. Key Results At the group level, subjects recalled most accurately abdominal pain and urgency intensity at their worst, urgency days, and stool frequency. When data were analyzed at the individual level, a subgroup of subjects had difficulty recalling accurately symptoms that showed convergence between recall and real time reports at the group level. Conclusions and Inferences Although many patients’ recollection for specific GI symptoms (e.g., worst pain, stool frequency) is reasonably accurate, a non-trivial number of other symptoms (e.g. typical pain) are vulnerable to distortion from recall biases that can reduce sensitivity of detecting treatment effects in clinical and research settings.