Spousal loss and cognitive function in later life: a 25-year follow-up in the AGES-Reykjavik study.

The aim of this study was to investigate the associations between loss of a life partner and the development of dementia and decline in cognitive function in later life. We used an Icelandic cohort of 4,370 participants in the Age, Gene/Environment Susceptibility-Reykjavik Study who were living as married in 1978 (born in 1907-1935) and were either still married (unexposed cohort) or widowed (exposed cohort) at follow-up (in 2002-2006). We ascertained history of marital status and spouse's death by record linkage to the Registry of the Total Population, Statistics Iceland. The outcome measures were as follows: 1) dementia and mild cognitive impairment; and 2) memory, speed of processing, and executive function. During the observation period, 3,007 individuals remained married and 1,363 lost a spouse through death. We did not find any significant associations between loss of a spouse and our outcome variables, except that widowed women had poorer executive function (mean = -0.08) during the first 2 years after their husbands' deaths compared with still-married women (mean = 0.09). Our findings do not support the notion that the risk of dementia is increased following the loss of a spouse, yet women demonstrate a seemingly temporary decline in executive function following the death of a partner.

Employment participation and work experience of male cancer survivors: a NOCWO study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether employment status and work experiences, assessed in terms of job resources (organizational culture and superiors' and co-workers' support), commitment to organization, work motives, and experiences of discrimination, differ between survivors of prostate or testicular cancer or lymphoma and cancer-free reference subjects. METHODS: Questionnaires were sent to 1349 male cancer survivors and 2666 referents in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, and Norway. Valid responses were 59% and 45%, respectively. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated with logistic regression models. RESULTS: Compared to the referents, survivors of lymphoma and prostate cancer were less likely to be employed (OR=0.53; CI: 0.30-0.95 and OR=0.50; CI: 0.35-0.73, respectively), but decreased employment was not evident among testicular cancer survivors. Testicular cancer survivors experienced less discrimination at work than did the referents, for example, testicular cancer survivors were less likely to report that their colleagues doubted their ability to carry out their work tasks (OR=0.38; CI: 0.17-0.83). Lymphoma survivors were less likely than the referents to praise their workplace as an enjoyable place to work (OR=0.48; CI: 0.26-0.88). The prostate cancer survivors were more likely than the referents to find the organizational climate competitive, distrustful, and suspicious. CONCLUSIONS: Employment participation and work experiences of male cancer survivors varied substantially according to type of cancer. Occupational therapists and other health care personnel should keep this in mind when assisting cancer survivors in identifying their strengths and limitations at work.

Cancer risk by education in Iceland; a census-based cohort study.

UNLABELLED: Earlier studies have shown that cancer risk is related to educational level in many countries. The relationship between education and cancer risk has not been studied in the small, but ethnically homogenous, Icelandic population postulated to be outstanding as regards social equity. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a follow-up study of a cohort of 60,194 males and 58,505 females aged 20-64 at census 1981 in Iceland. Information on education from the census was classified into three educational groups and linked with the population-based Icelandic Cancer Registry. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated for the period 1982 to 2004. RESULTS: We found a significant association between educational level and cancer risk. Among males with academic education, the SIR was elevated for prostate cancer (SIR=1.17, 95% CI 1.05-1.30) and melanoma (SIR=1.41, 95% CI 1.00-1.93) and lowered for cancers of the lung (SIR=0.72, 95% CI 0.59-0.87) and stomach (SIR=0.67, 95% CI 0.48-0.90). Women with academic education had an increased risk of breast cancer (SIR=1.19, 95% CI 1.07-1.33) and a decreased risk of lung cancer (SIR=0.49, 95% CI 0.36-0.65). Increasing educational level was associated with a lowered risk of cervical cancer (p trend=0.017). DISCUSSION: The association between education and cancer incidence seen in this study resembles observations from other countries and probably reflects concordance between social status and certain risk factors for cancer. Our study confirms health-related socioeconomic differences in Iceland and must be taken into account when programmes for health promotion are planned.