BackgroundLittle is known about the impacts of sleep duration and daytime napping on the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). MethodsIn this study, 20,318 participants (7,597 men, 12,721 women) aged 40-79 years without a history of T2DM, stroke, coronary heart disease, or cancer at baseline (1988)(1989)(1990), completed the baseline survey and the 5-year follow-up questionnaires, which included average sleep duration, napping habits, and self-reports of physician-diagnosed diabetes. The multivariable odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a logistic regression model. ResultsDuring the 5-year follow-up, 531 new cases of T2DM (266 men and 265 women) were documented.Sleep duration ≥ 10 h was associated with higher risk of T2DM compared to sleep duration of 7 h (OR 1.99: 95%CI, 1.28-3.08). The excess risk was observed for both sexes and primarily found among the non-overweight; the multivariable ORs of sleeping ≥ 10 h compared to 7 h were 2. 05 (1.26-3.35) for the non-overweight (BMI < 25 kg/m 2 ) and 1.38 (0.49-3.83) for the overweight (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m 2 ). The respective ORs of nappers vs non-nappers were 1.30 (1.03-1.63) and 0.92 (0.65-1.29). Among the non-overweight, nappers who slept ≥ 10 h had the highest risk of T2DM (OR 2.84: 95%CI, 1.57-5.14), non-nappers who slept ≥ 10 h (2.27: 1.27-4.06), and nappers who slept < 10 h (

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has dramatically changed education systems as most governments around the world closed schools to prevent outbreaks on campus. Medical education was not immune from these policies, and medical students were deprived of opportunities, particularly in clinical training. To determine how countries worldwide have responded to the pandemic, we conducted a literature review of the policies and guidelines of four countries: Japan, the United States (USA), the United Kingdom (UK) and Australia, as well as case reports of faculty and medical students up to September, 2020. Although the methods of implementation were unique to each country, the concept of “returning medical students to live education as quickly and safely as possible” was common. However, the extent to which students and faculty members became engaged in the treatment process of COVID-19 varied. While some countries endorsed students to work as members of medical staff to treat COVID-19, other countries took measures to ensure the safety of both medical students and patients. We await further reports worldwide in order to better understand the strategies employed by different nations in preparation for future possible infection outbreaks.