Physical inactivity, cardiometabolic disease, and risk of dementia: an individual-participant meta-analysis

OBJECTIVETo examine whether physical inactivity is a risk factor for dementia, with attention to the role of cardiometabolic disease in this association and reverse causation bias that arises from changes in physical activity in the preclinical (prodromal) phase of dementia.DESIGNMeta-analysis of 19 prospective observational cohort studies.DATA SOURCESThe Individual-Participant-Data Meta-analysis in Working Populations Consortium, the Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research, and the UK Data Service, including a total of 19 of a potential 9741 studies.REVIEW METHODThe search strategy was designed to retrieve individual-participant data from prospective cohort studies. Exposure was physical inactivity; primary outcomes were incident all-cause dementia and Alzheimer's disease; and the secondary outcome was incident cardiometabolic disease (that is, diabetes, coronary heart disease, and stroke). Summary estimates were obtained using random effects meta-analysis.RESULTSStudy population included 404 840 people (mean age 45.5 years, 57.7% women) who were initially free of dementia, had a measurement of physical inactivity at study entry, and were linked to electronic health records. In 6.0 million person-years at risk, we recorded 2044 incident cases of all-cause dementia. In studies with data on dementia subtype, the number of incident cases of Alzheimer's disease was 1602 in 5.2 million person-years. When measured = 10 years before dementia onset, no difference in dementia risk between physically active and inactive participants was observed (hazard ratios 1.01 (0.89 to 1.14) and 0.96 (0.85 to 1.08) for the two outcomes). Physical inactivity was consistently associated with increased risk of incident diabetes (hazard ratio 1.42, 1.25 to 1.61), coronary heart disease (1.24, 1.13 to 1.36), and stroke (1.16, 1.05 to 1.27). Among people in whom cardiometabolic disease preceded dementia, physical inactivity was non-significantly associated with dementia (hazard ratio for physical activity assessed > 10 before dementia onset 1.30, 0.79 to 2.14).CONCLUSIONSIn analyses that addressed bias due to reverse causation, physical inactivity was not associated with all-cause dementia or Alzheimer's disease, although an indication of excess dementia risk was observed in a subgroup of physically inactive individuals who developed cardiometabolic disease

Surface functionalization of III-V Nanowires

The physical and chemical properties of semiconductor nanowires are significantly influenced by their surface structure and morphology. This can be understood in that surfaces make out a much larger part of the total structure as compared to macroscale objects. An immediate consequence is that the lack of surface control can result in poor performance and reproducibility of any nanowire device. It is clear that bad performance is problematic, but it must be stressed that without performance reproducibility across millions of nanowires they can never become a useful real technology. This is indeed why many promising nanostructures and materials lost interest of both the scientific and commercial communities. However, surface control also can be used to strongly enhance nanowire performance and even introduce new functionality. As a result, surface functionalization is a key issue for nanowire science and technology. In this chapter, we describe in detail how standard surface science techniques such as Scanning Tunneling Microscopy (STM) and X-ray Photoemission Spectroscopy (XPS) can be modified for effective studies of 1D nanowires despite that they have been originally invented only for large and flat 2D surfaces. We go on to give a number of examples on how these techniques have revealed the precise structure–function relationship in particular of III–V semiconductor nanowires and their surfaces. We further discuss, how this can be used to control the structure and chemistry of the wires down to the atomic scale enabling new functionality for (opto)electronics, sensors, and many other device types. While we focus on III–V nanowires, the examples and techniques put forward should be applicable to many other material systems and types of nanostructures