Applied Filters
- Epidemiology
Journal Title
Topics
Publication Date
Author
- Afifi, Tracie O2
- Chandraraj, Arthana2
- Fortier, Janique2
- Gonzalez, Andrea2
- Kimber, Melissa2
- MacMillan, Harriet L2
- Roos, Leslie2
- Salmon, Samantha2
- Sareen, Jitender2
- Stewart-Tufescu, Ashley2
- Straus, Sharon E2
- Taillieu, Tamara2
- Thakur, Krishna K2
- Tonmyr, Lil2
- Vanderstichel, Raphaël2
- Adamovicz, Laura1
- Akbarzadeh, Mahdi1
- Allan, Brian F1
- Allender, Matthew C1
- Bai, Guirong1
- Baral, Stefan1
- Beckett, Robyn1
- Berall, Anna1
- Berhane, Yohannes1
- Berry, Isha1
Access Type
21 - 24of24
Save this search
Please login to be able to save your searches and receive alerts for new content matching your search criteria.
Filters
| Search Name | Searched On |
|---|---|
| Subject Areas: Ecology and Evolution (146) | 28 Mar 2025 |
| Subject Areas: Epidemiology (24) | 28 Mar 2025 |
You do not have any saved searches
- OPEN ACCESS
- Tracie O. Afifi,
- Janique Fortier,
- Samantha Salmon,
- Tamara Taillieu,
- Ana Osorio,
- Leslie Roos,
- Ashley Stewart-Tufescu,
- Lil Tonmyr,
- Andrea Gonzalez,
- Melissa Kimber,
- Jitender Sareen, and
- Harriet L. MacMillan
Adolescents and young adults have been particularly vulnerable to disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The objectives were to identify youth's self-reported pandemic-related stressors and examine how these stressors were related to six negative health outcomes: self-perceived, fair-to-poor physical, and mental health, depression, anxiety, and at-risk alcohol and cannabis use. Data were from the Well-Being and Experiences Study (The WE Study) from Manitoba, Canada (17–22 years old; n = 587; collected from November 2021 to January 2022). The COVID-19 stressors reported most frequently since pandemic onset included: (1) not being able to spend time with friends (78.5%); (2) feeling lonely or isolated (69.9%); and (3) remote learning for school, college, or university (68.4%). In reference to the “past month”, frequently reported stressors were (1) remote learning (42.6%); (2) feeling lonely or isolated (41.2%); and (3) uncertainty about the future (41.1%). Overall, 26.1% of the sample perceived their physical health as fair-to-poor and 59.1% perceive their mental health as fair-to-poor. A number of stressors were related to fair-to-poor mental health, depression, and anxiety; fewer were related to fair-to-poor physical health and at-risk alcohol and cannabis use. These findings can inform future pandemics and recovery efforts to improve pandemic-related health risks among youth. - OPEN ACCESS
- Janique Fortier,
- Samantha Salmon,
- Tamara Taillieu,
- Ashley Stewart-Tufescu,
- Harriet L. MacMillan,
- Lil Tonmyr,
- Andrea Gonzalez,
- Melissa Kimber,
- Leslie Roos,
- Jitender Sareen, and
- Tracie O. Afifi
The aim of this study was to understand associations between pandemic stressors and parents’ self-rated physical and mental health; symptoms of mental health problems, and at-risk substance use problems. Data were collected from February 2022 to March 2022 as part of Wave 2 of the Well-being and Experiences Study in Manitoba, Canada (n = 749). Stressors frequently identified since the onset of the pandemic included inability to spend time with family and friends, worry about getting coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), and travel restrictions. In the past month, the most frequently identified stressors were worry about getting COVID-19, travel restrictions, public health restrictions, and worry about the future. The stressors with the greatest number of associations with worse health outcomes included: job loss or financial burden; feeling lonely or isolated; disrupted or poor sleep; uncertainty about the future; accessing health care for any reason; increased conflict in relationships; cancellation of surgeries, caregiving for children; and inability to spend time with family. Understanding the COVID-19 stressors that were associated with health and substance problems can inform clinical approaches to respond to pandemic-related problems, as well as public health preparedness to mitigate declines in parents’ health and well-being in the context of future pandemics. - OPEN ACCESS
- Angela McLaughlin,
- Jolene Giacinti,
- Ishraq Rahman,
- Jordan Wight,
- Kathryn Hargan,
- Andrew S. Lang,
- Mark L. Mallory,
- Gregory J. Robertson,
- Kyle Elliot,
- Davor Ojkic,
- Stéphane Lair,
- Megan Jones,
- Yohannes Berhane,
- Grant Gilchrist,
- Laurie Wilson,
- Sabina I. Wilhelm,
- Michael G.C. Brown, and
- Jennifer F. Provencher
Migratory seabirds move across ocean basins and are one of the primary reservoirs of low pathogenic avian influenza virus (LPAIV). This includes the millions of thick-billed murres (Uria lomvia) and common murres (Uria aalge) that are distributed across northern hemisphere oceans. In response to increasingly frequent detections of highly pathogenic avian influenza virus (HPAIV) in Europe in 2020–2021, avian influenza virus (AIV) monitoring in wildlife has increased. We compiled data from murres tested for AIV in Canada between 2007 and 2022 to quantify spatiotemporal variation in the prevalence of LPAIV and HPAIV in these birds. No HPAIV was detected in murres prior to 2022, but HPAIV was present in 46% of both live/harvested and found dead murres in the northwestern Atlantic in 2022 with prevalence peaking at 63% among live birds in the summer. In the eastern Canadian Arctic, HPAIV prevalence in 2022 was <1% while LPAIV prevalence was 21%, which was significantly higher than previous sampling years. Power analyses suggest approximately 100 samples from breeding murres should be collected annually per colony or region to detect moderate changes in HPAIV prevalence. These analyses inform robust monitoring of viruses in wildlife, with implications for conservation, harvest management, and public health. - OPEN ACCESS
- Danial Habibi,
- Amir Hossein Koochekian,
- Hamid Reza Marateb,
- Homayoon masoudi,
- Hanifeh Mirtavoos-Mahyari,
- Muhammadhosein Moradi,
- Mahdi Akbarzadeh,
- Marjan Mansourian,
- Miguel Ángel Mañanas, and
- Roya Kelishadi
The objective of the present systematic review was to incorporate previous studies investigating the association of birth order with the risk of systolic and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). We employed random-effects and Bayesian meta-analyses, complemented by subgroup and sensitivity analyses, including funnel plots, Begg's rank correlation test, Egger's linear regression test, Galbraith plots, and leave-one-out meta-analysis. Of the 13 articles analyzed, 92% (12 articles) were published from 2010 onwards. The aggregate sample comprised 466 853 firstborns and 646 786 later-born individuals. Geographically, the studies were primarily conducted in Europe (54%), followed by Asia (23%), and America (23%). The pooled mean difference for systolic blood pressure (SBP) under a random-effects model was 0.28 mm Hg (95% CI: −7.03 to 7.59), and for DBP was 0.33 mm Hg (95% CI: −5.38 to 6.04), neither of which reached statistical significance (SBP: Z = 0.08, P = 0.939; DBP: Z = 0.11, P = 0.910). Sensitivity analyses supported these findings. Bayesian meta-analysis presented a 95% credible interval for SBP and DBP ranging from −7.25 to 7.84 and −5.60 to 6.27, respectively. The investigation found no substantial evidence of a significant difference in SBP and DBP between firstborns and later-born individuals, challenging the hypothesis that birth order significantly impacts blood pressure levels. ID registration number: 567971.