Cross-sectional associations between multiple lifestyle behaviors and health-related quality of life in the 10,000 steps cohort

Background: The independent and combined influence of smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity, diet, sitting time, and sleep duration and quality on health status is not routinely examined. This study investigates the relationships between these lifestyle behaviors, independently and in combination, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Methods: Adult members of the 10,000 Steps project (n = 159,699) were invited to participate in an online survey in November-December 2011. Participant socio-demographics, lifestyle behaviors, and HRQOL (poor self-rated health; frequent unhealthy days) were assessed by self-report. The combined influence of poor lifestyle behaviors were examined, independently and also as part of two lifestyle behavior indices, one excluding sleep quality (Index 1) and one including sleep quality (Index 2). Adjusted Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine relationships between lifestyle behaviors and HRQOL. Results: A total of 10,478 participants provided complete data for the current study. For Index 1, the Prevalence Ratio (p value) of poor self-rated health was 1.54 (p = 0.001), 2.07 (p≤0.001), 3.00 (p≤0.001), 3.61 (p≤0.001) and 3.89 (p≤0.001) for people reporting two, three, four, five and six poor lifestyle behaviors, compared to people with 0-1 poor lifestyle behaviors. For Index 2, the Prevalence Ratio (p value) of poor self-rated health was 2.26 (p = 0.007), 3.29 (p≤0.001), 4.68 (p≤0.001), 6.48 (p≤0.001), 7.91 (p≤0.001) and 8.55 (p≤0.001) for people reporting two, three, four, five, six and seven poor lifestyle behaviors, compared to people with 0-1 poor lifestyle behaviors. Associations between the combined lifestyle behavior index and frequent unhealthy days were statistically significant and similar to those observed for poor self-rated health. Conclusions: Engaging in a greater number of poor lifestyle behaviors was associated with a higher prevalence of poor HRQOL. This association was exacerbated when sleep quality was included in the index. © 2014 Duncan et al

The New Economic Case for Migration Restrictions: An Assessment

For decades, migration economics has stressed the effects of migration restrictions on income distribution in the host country. Recently the literature has taken a new direction by estimating the costs of migration restrictions to global economic efficiency. In contrast, a new strand of research posits that migration restrictions could be not only desirably redistributive, but in fact globally efficient. This is the new economic case for migration restrictions. The case rests on the possibility that without tight restrictions on migration, migrants from poor countries could transmit low productivity ("A" or Total Factor Productivity) to rich countries – offsetting efficiency gains from the spatial reallocation of labor from low to high-productivity places. We provide a novel assessment, proposing a simple model of dynamically efficient migration under productivity transmission and calibrating it with new macro and micro data. In this model, the case for efficiency-enhancing migration barriers rests on three parameters: transmission, the degree to which origin-country total factor productivity is embodied in migrants; assimilation, the degree to which migrants' productivity determinants become like natives' over time in the host country; and congestion, the degree to which transmission and assimilation change at higher migrant stocks. On current evidence about the magnitudes of these parameters, dynamically efficient policy would not imply open borders but would imply relaxations on current restrictions. That is, the new efficiency case for some migration restrictions is empirically a case against the stringency of current restrictions

Reasons for facebook usage: Data from 46 countries

Seventy-nine percent of internet users use Facebook, and on average they access Facebook eight times a day (Greenwood et al., 2016). To put these numbers into perspective, according to Clement (2019), around 30% of the world\u2019s population uses this Online Social Network (OSN) site. Despite the constantly growing body of academic research on Facebook (Chou et al., 2009; Back et al., 2010; Kaplan and Haenlein, 2010; McAndrew and Jeong, 2012; Wilson et al., 2012; Krasnova et al., 2017), there remains limited research regarding the motivation behind Facebook use across different cultures. Our main goal was to collect data from a large cross-cultural sample of Facebook users to examine the roles of sex, age, and, most importantly, cultural differences underlying Facebook use

Sex differences in mate preferences across 45 countries: A large-scale replication

Considerable research has examined human mate preferences across cultures, finding universal sex differences in preferences for attractiveness and resources as well as sources of systematic cultural variation. Two competing perspectives—an evolutionary psychological perspective and a biosocial role perspective—offer alternative explanations for these findings. However, the original data on which each perspective relies are decades old, and the literature is fraught with conflicting methods, analyses, results, and conclusions. Using a new 45-country sample (N = 14,399), we attempted to replicate classic studies and test both the evolutionary and biosocial role perspectives. Support for universal sex differences in preferences remains robust: Men, more than women, prefer attractive, young mates, and women, more than men, prefer older mates with financial prospects. Cross-culturally, both sexes have mates closer to their own ages as gender equality increases. Beyond age of partner, neither pathogen prevalence nor gender equality robustly predicted sex differences or preferences across countries

A within-subjects trial to test the equivalence of online and paper outcome measures: The Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire

Background: augmenting validated paper versions of existing outcome measures with an equivalent online version may offer substantial research advantages (cost, rapidity and reliability). However, equivalence of online and paper questionnaires cannot be assumed, nor can acceptability to respondents. The aim was to test whether online and written versions of the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), a standard measure of functional disability in back pain, are equivalent at both group and individual levels to establish whether they can be used interchangeably.Methods: this is a within-participants equivalence study. 167 participants with back pain fully completed both the paper and online versions of the RMDQ in random order. Participants were recruited from a chiropractic clinic and patient support groups in Southern England. Limits of equivalence were pre-defined as 0.5 RMDQ points, the Bland-Altman range was calculated, and participants' comments were examined using content analysis.Results: the mean score difference was 0.03 (SD = 1.43), with the 95% Confidence Interval falling entirely within our limits of equivalence (-0.19 to 0.25). The Bland-Altman range was -2.77 to 2.83 RMDQ points. Participants identified unique advantages and disadvantages associated with each version of the RMDQ.Conclusions: the group and individual level data suggest that online and paper versions of the RMDQ are equivalent and can be used interchangeably. The Bland-Altman range appears to reflect the known measurement properties of the RMDQ. Furthermore, participants' comments confirmed the potential value to be had from offering them the choice of completing the RMDQ online or on pape

Use of the Diabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 Risk Score (DPTRS) for Improving the Accuracy of the Risk Classification of Type 1 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE: We studied the utility of the Diabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 Risk Score (DPTRS) for improving the accuracy of type 1 diabetes (T1D) risk classification in TrialNet Natural History Study (TNNHS) participants. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The cumulative incidence of T1D was compared between normoglycemic individuals with DPTRS values >7.00 and dysglycemic individuals in the TNNHS (n = 991). It was also compared between individuals with DPTRS values <7.00 or >7.00 among those with dysglycemia and those with multiple autoantibodies in the TNNHS. DPTRS values >7.00 were compared with dysglycemia for characterizing risk in Diabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 (DPT-1) (n = 670) and TNNHS participants. The reliability of DPTRS values >7.00 was compared with dysglycemia in the TNNHS. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of T1D for normoglycemic TNNHS participants with DPTRS values >7.00 was comparable to those with dysglycemia. Among those with dysglycemia, the cumulative incidence was much higher (P < 0.001) for those with DPTRS values >7.00 than for those with values <7.00 (3-year risks: 0.16 for <7.00 and 0.46 for >7.00). Dysglycemic individuals in DPT-1 were at much higher risk for T1D than those with dysglycemia in the TNNHS (P < 0.001); there was no significant difference in risk between the studies among those with DPTRS values >7.00. The proportion in the TNNHS reverting from dysglycemia to normoglycemia at the next visit was higher than the proportion reverting from DPTRS values >7.00 to values <7.00 (36 vs. 23%). CONCLUSIONS: DPTRS thresholds can improve T1D risk classification accuracy by identifying high-risk normoglycemic and low-risk dysglycemic individuals. The 7.00 DPTRS threshold characterizes risk more consistently between populations and has greater reliability than dysglycemia