Just as hippocampal lesions are principally responsible for "temporal lobe" amnesia, lesions affecting the anterior thalamic nuclei seem principally responsible for a similar loss of memory, "diencephalic" amnesia. Compared with the former, the causes of diencephalic amnesia have remained elusive. A potential clue comes from how the two sites are interconnected, as within the hippocampal formation, only the subiculum has direct, reciprocal connections with the anterior thalamic nuclei. We found that both permanent and reversible anterior thalamic nuclei lesions in male rats cause a cessation of subicular spatial signaling, reduce spatial memory performance to chance, but leave hippocampal CA1 place cells largely unaffected. We suggest that a core element of diencephalic amnesia stems from the information loss in hippocampal output regions following anterior thalamic pathology.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT At present, we know little about interactions between temporal lobe and diencephalic memory systems. Here, we focused on the subiculum, as the sole hippocampal formation region directly interconnected with the anterior thalamic nuclei. We combined reversible and permanent lesions of the anterior thalamic nuclei, electrophysiological recordings of the subiculum, and behavioral analyses. Our results were striking and clear following permanent thalamic lesions, the diverse spatial signals normally found in the subiculum (including place cells, grid cells, and head-direction cells) all disappeared. Anterior thalamic lesions had no discernible impact on hippocampal CA1 place fields. Thus, spatial firing activity within the subiculum requires anterior thalamic function, as does successful spatial memory performance. Our findings provide a key missing part of the much bigger puzzle concerning why anterior thalamic damage is so catastrophic for spatial memory in rodents and episodic memory in humans. Ten randomized controlled trials over the last 2 decades support treating low-risk pediatric distal radius fractures with removable immobilization and without physician follow-up. We aimed to determine the proportion of these fractures being treated without physician follow-up and to determine whether different hospital and physician types are treating these injuries differently. We conducted a retrospective population-based cohort study using ICES data. We included children aged 2-14 years (2-12 yr for girls and 2-14 yr for boys) with distal radius fractures having had no reduction or operation within a 6-week period, and who received treatment in Ontario emergency departments from 2003 to 2015. Proportions of patients receiving orthopedic, primary care and no follow-up were determined. Multivariable log-binomial regression was used to quantify associations between hospital and physician type and management. We analyzed 70 801 fractures. A total of 20.8% ( = 14 742) fractures were treated without phywithout follow-up, the majority of these fractures in Ontario were not managed according to the latest research evidence. Canadian guidelines are required to improve care of these fractures and to reduce the substantial overutilization of physician resources we observed. It has been suggested that the COVID-19 pandemic has worsened socioeconomic disparities in access to primary care. Given these concerns, we investigated whether the pandemic affected visits to family physicians differently across sociodemographic groups. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using electronic medical records from family physician practices within the University of Toronto Practice-Based Research Network. We evaluated primary care visits for a fixed cohort of patients who were active within the database as of Jan. 1, 2019, to estimate the number of patients who visited their family physician (visitor rate) and the number of distinct visits (visit volume) between Jan. 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020. We compared trends in visitor rate and visit volume during the pandemic (Mar. 14 to June 30, 2020) with the same period in the previous year (Mar. 14 to June 30, 2019) across sociodemographic factors, including age, sex, neighbourhood income, material deprivation and ethnic concentration. We inces with low socioeconomic status did not appear to be disproportionately affected. In this primary care setting, the pandemic appears not to have worsened socioeconomic disparities in access to care. Home blood pressure monitoring is increasingly used for pregnant individuals; however, there are no guidelines on such monitoring in this population. We assessed current practices in the prescription and use of home blood pressure monitoring in pregnancy. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). https://www.selleckchem.com/products/gsk8612.html We conducted a structured search through the MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974) and CENTRAL (from 2018) databases up to Oct. 19, 2020. We included trials comparing office and home blood pressure monitoring in pregnant people. Outcomes included patient education, home blood pressure device, monitoring schedule, adherence, diagnostic thresholds for home blood pressure, and comparison between home and office measurements of blood pressure. We included in our review 21 articles on 19 individual studies (1 RCT, 18 observational) that assessed home and office blood pressure in pregnant individuals ( = 2843). We observed variation in practice patterns in terms of how home monitoring was prescribed. Eight (42%) of the studies used validated home blood pressure devices. Across all studies, measurements were taken 3 to 36 times per week. Third-trimester home blood pressure corresponding to office blood pressure of 140/90 mm Hg after application of a conversion factor ranged from 118 to 143 mm Hg (systolic) and from 76 to 92 mm Hg (diastolic), depending on the patient population and methodology. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure values measured at home were lower than office values by 4 (95% confidence interval [CI] -6 to -3) mm Hg and 3 (95% CI -4 to -2) mm Hg, respectively. Many issues related to home blood pressure monitoring in pregnancy are currently unresolved, including technique, monitoring schedule and target values. Future studies should prioritize the use of validated home measuring devices and standardized measurement schedules and should establish treatment targets. CRD42020147352. CRD42020147352.