Background and objectives There is a large number of older of this demographic fact. Although many studies have investigated the association between living arrangements and health, little is known about potential underlying mechanisms regarding how living alone may predict older Canadians’ health. In this study, we address this research gap intending to contribute to offering policy suggestions for older Canadians who live alone. Research design and methods We applied Cockerham’s health lifestyle theory to explore to what degree living alone predicts worse health lifestyles and, further, to what degree these lifestyles can explain the association between living alone and older Canadians’ health. We used the 2017–2018 Canadian Community Social Survey (Annual Component) which has a response rate of 58.8%. We focused on respondents aged 60 and above, and the analytical sample size is 39,636. Results Older Canadians living alone are more likely to have food insecurity problems and higher possibilities of smoking cigarettes compared to those living with spouses/partners with or without children. Compared to those living with spouses/partners only, the odds of solo-living older Canadians drinking regularly is significantly lower. There also exists a significant difference between older Canadians living alone and their counterparts living with spouses/partners that the former reported lower self-rated health compared to the latter. Moreover, food insecurity and the three health lifestyle variables are significantly associated with respondents’ self-rated health; food insecurity, cigarette smoking, and alcohol drinking can partially explain the difference in self-rated health due to living arrangements. Discussion and implications According to our findings, health officials are recommended to pay more attention to food insecurity and heavy smoking problems facing older Canadians who live by themselves. Local communities and other stakeholders are suggested to provide older adults living alone with more opportunities for social engagement and involvement since regular drinking may have played such a role in enhancing social life quality of the aged.

The present study examines the intellectual structure of research on coronavirus, as revealed from an author co‐citation analysis using citation data retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection and mapped to the PubMed database. Four major dimensions are identified: I) outbreaks, II) viral structure and function, III) vaccine and therapeutic development, and IV) coronaviruses found in a range of animals. The “outbreaks” dimension is by far the most prominent, dominated by reports on the three recent major outbreaks: COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome, and Middle East respiratory syndrome. The focus of research on major outbreaks is on public health and clinical research, with focus on disease characterization, diagnosis, transmission, and clinical course. Notably, certain clinically important areas, such as mental health during outbreaks and viral surveillance, among others, did not stand out as identifiable specialties or topics in the coronavirus research landscape. Results from this study should contribute to the understanding of the coronavirus research landscape and to the identification of strengths and weaknesses of current research on COVID-19.

For many analytes, the average analytical variation of tandem GEMs approximates the biologic variation, indicating impaired clinical usefulness of tandem sequential measurements. A significant component of this variation is due to increased variation of the GEMs between 2pm and 2am.

ObjectivesRemote ischaemic conditioning (RIC) has been tested as a possible strategy for mitigating reperfusion injury in ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). However, surrogate outcomes have shown inconsistent effects with lack of clinical correlation.MethodsWe performed a registry-based randomised study of patients with STEMI allocated to RIC (4 cycles of blood pressure cuff inflation to 200 mm Hg for 5 min of ischaemia followed by 5 min of reperfusion) or standard of care (SOC) during PPCI. We examined the associations of RIC on core laboratory measurements of myocardial perfusion, infarct size (IS), left ventricular (LV) performance and clinical outcomes.ResultsA total of 252 patients were enrolled. The median age was 61 (IQR: 55–70) years and 72.8% were male. Sum ST segment deviation resolution ≥50% was similar between RIC and SOC (65.2% vs 55.7%, p=0.269). In those with 3-day cardiovascular MRI (n=88), no difference in median (25th, 75th percentiles) IS (14.9% (4.5%, 23.1%) vs 16.1% (3.3%, 22.0%), p=0.980), LV dimensions (LV end-diastolic volume index: 78.7 (71.1, 91.2) mL/m2 vs 79.9 (71.2, 88.8) mL/m2, p=0.630; LV end-systolic volume index: 48.8 (35.7, 51.4) mL/m2 vs 37.9 (31.8, 47.5) mL/m2, p=0.551) or ejection fraction (50.0% (41.0%–55.0%) vs 50.0% (43.0%–56.0%), p=0.554) was demonstrated. Similar results were observed with 90-day cardiovascular MRI. At 1 year, the clinical composite of death, congestive heart failure, cardiogenic shock and recurrent myocardial infarction was similar in RIC and SOC (21.7% vs 13.3%, p=0.110).ConclusionsIn a contemporary registry-based randomised study of patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI, adjunctive therapy with RIC did not improve myocardial perfusion, reduce IS or alter LV performance. Consequently, there was no difference in clinical outcomes within 1 year.Trial registration numberNCT03930589.