11 research outputs found
Emerging Technologies Adoption on Administrative Services at Dangote Cement Plc, Ibese, Ogun State, Nigeria
No full textThe importance of administrative services in the smooth running of organization’s activitiesand goals achievement cannot be underestimated and serve as the backbone that supportsall other functions. However, the rapid advancement in technology necessitatesorganizations to integrate emerging technologies in their administrative services. This studytherefore examines the impact of impact emerging technology adoption on administrativeservices at Dangote Cement Plc, Ibeshe. Survey design was adopted and the populationcomprised all administrative staff of the organisation. A research question and twohypotheses were formulated and a 4-point Likert type questionnaire was developed andadministered on 50 randomly selected administrative staff of Dangote Cement Plc, Ibeshe.Descriptive statistics were used to analysis the research question while the hypotheses weretested with regression analysis at 0.05 level of significance. The results showed thatemerging technology adoption facilitates administrative service’s effectiveness (r = 0.745, p-value = 0.000<0.05) and also contributes to administrative service efficiency (r = 0.735, p-value = 0.000<0.05) in the organisation. The study concluded that the adoption ofemerging technologies significantly influences both the effectiveness and efficiency ofadministrative services in the organisation, thus positioning the organisation to better meetits strategic administrative goals and respond to competitive pressures. It was recommendedamong others, that the management should intensify its technology adoption andcontinuously update staff skills in this direction
Author Correction: Mapping local patterns of childhood overweight and wasting in low- and middle-income countries between 2000 and 2017 (Nature Medicine, (2020), 26, 5, (750-759), 10.1038/s41591-020-0807-6)
No full textAn amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.</p
Author Correction: Mapping local patterns of childhood overweight and wasting in low- and middle-income countries between 2000 and 2017 (Nature Medicine, (2020), 26, 5, (750-759), 10.1038/s41591-020-0807-6)
No full textAn amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper
Author Correction: Mapping local patterns of childhood overweight and wasting in low- and middle-income countries between 2000 and 2017
No full textAuthor Correction: Mapping local patterns of childhood overweight and wasting in low- and middle-income countries between 2000 and 2017 (Nature Medicine, (2020), 26, 5, (750-759), 10.1038/s41591-020-0807-6)
No full textAn amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper
a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021
No full textFunding Information: Research reported in this publication was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1152504); Queensland Department of Health, Australia; UK Department of Health and Social Care; the Norwegian Institute of Public Health; St Jude Children's Research Hospital; and the New Zealand Ministry of Health. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the funders. Data for this research was provided by MEASURE Evaluation, funded by the US Agency for International Development (USAID). Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of USAID, the US Government, or MEASURE Evaluation. This study uses a dataset provided by European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) based on data provided by WHO and Ministries of Health from the affected countries. The views and opinions of the authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the ECDC. The accuracy of the authors' statistical analysis and the findings they report are not the responsibility of ECDC. ECDC is not responsible for conclusions or opinions drawn from the data provided. ECDC is not responsible for the correctness of the data and for data management, data merging, and data collation after provision of the data. ECDC shall not be held liable for improper or incorrect use of the data. Health Behaviour in School-Aged Children (HBSC) is an international study carried out in collaboration with WHO/EURO. The international coordinator of the 1997\u201398, 2001\u201302, 2005\u201306, and 2009\u201310 surveys was Candace Currie and the Data Bank Manager for the 1997\u201398 survey was Bente Wold, whereas for the following survey Oddrun Samda was the databank manager. A list of principal investigators in each country can be found at http://www.hbsc.org. Parts of this material are based on data and information provided by the Canadian institute for Health Information. However, the analyses, conclusions, opinions and statements expressed herein are those of the author and not those of the Canadian Institute for Health information. The data reported here have been supplied by the US Renal Data System (USRDS). The interpretation and reporting of these data are the responsibility of the authors and in no way should be seen as an official policy or interpretation of the US Government. The data used in this paper come from the 2009\u201310 Ghana Socioeconomic Panel Study Survey which is a nationally representative survey of over 5,000 households in Ghana. The survey is a joint effort undertaken by the Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research (ISSER) at the University of Ghana, and the Economic Growth Centre (EGC) at Yale University. It was funded by the Economic Growth Center. At the same time, ISSER and the EGC are not responsible for the estimations reported by the analyst(s). The harmonised dataset was downloaded from the Global Dietary Database (GDD) website ( https://www.globaldietarydatabase.org/). The Canadian Community Health Survey - Nutrition (CCHS-Nutrition), 2015 is available online ( https://www.globaldietarydatabase.org/management/microdata-surveys/650). The harmonisation of the original dataset was performed by GDD. The data was adapted from Statistics Canada, Canadian Community Health Survey: Public Use Microdata File, 2015/2016 (Statistics Canada. CCHS-Nutrition, 2015); this does not constitute an endorsement by Statistics Canada of this product. The data is used under the terms of the Statistics Canada Open Licence (Statistics Canada. Statistics Canada Open Licence. https://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/reference/licence). The Health and Retirement Study (HRS) is sponsored by the National Institute on Aging (grant number NIA U01AG009740) and is conducted by the University of Michigan. The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics granted the researchers access to relevant data in accordance with license no. SLN2014-3-170, after subjecting data to processing aiming to preserve the confidentiality of individual data in accordance with the General Statistics Law - 2000. The researchers are solely responsible for the conclusions and inferences drawn upon available data. The results and conclusions are mine and not those of Eurostat, the European Commission, or any of the national statistical authorities whose data have been used. This manuscript is based on data collected and shared by the International Vaccine Institute (IVI) from an original study it conducted with support from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. This paper uses data from SHARE Waves 1, 2, 3 (SHARELIFE), 4, 5 and 6 (dois: 10.6103/SHARE.w1.611,10.6103/SHARE.w2.611, 10.6103/SHARE.w3.611, 10.6103/SHARE.w4.611, 10.6103/SHARE.w5.611, 10.6103/SHARE.w6.611), see B\u00F6rsch-Supan et al. (2013) for methodological details. The SHARE data collection has been primarily funded by the European Commission through FP5 (QLK6-CT-2001-00360), FP6 (SHARE-I3: RII-CT-2006-062193, COMPARE: CIT5-CT-2005-028857, SHARELIFE: CIT4-CT-2006- 028812) and FP7 (SHARE-PREP: N\u00B0211909, SHARE-LEAP: N\u00B0227822, SHARE M4: N\u00B0261982). Additional funding from the German Ministry of Education and Research, the Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science, the US National Institute on Aging (U01_AG09740-13S2, P01_AG005842, P01_AG08291, P30_AG12815, R21_AG025169, Y1-AG-4553-01, IAG_BSR06-11, OGHA_04-064, HHSN271201300071C) and from various national funding sources is gratefully acknowledged (see www.share-project.org). This paper uses data from the Algeria - Setif and Mostaganem 2003 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health, Population and Hospital Reform (Algeria) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Algeria 2016-2017 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Algeria) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the American Samoa 2004 STEPS survey, implemented by Department of Health (American Samoa) and Monash University (Australia) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Armenia 2016 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Botswana) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Azerbaijan 2017 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Azerbaijan) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Bangladesh 2018 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (Bangladesh) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Barbados 2007 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Barbados) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Belarus 2016-2017 STEPS survey, implemented by Republican Scientific and Practical Center of Medical Technologies, Informatization, Management and Economics of Public Health (Belarus) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Benin - Littoral 2007 STEPS survey, the Benin 2008 STEPS survey, and the Benin 2015 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Benin) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Bhutan - Thimphu 2007 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Bhutan) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Bhutan 2014 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Bhutan) with the support of the World Health Organization. This paper uses data from the Botswana 2014 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Armenia), National Institute of Health with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Brunei 2015-2016 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Brunei) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Cambodia 2010 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Cambodia) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Cameroon 2003 STEPS survey, implemented by Health of Populations in Transition (HoPiT) Research Group (Cameroon) and Ministry of Public Health (Cameroon) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Cape Verde 2007 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health, National Statistics Office with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Central African Republic - Bangui 2010 STEPS survey and Central African Republic - Bangui and Ombella M'Poko 2016 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health and Population (Central African Republic) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Comoros 2011 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Comoros) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Congo - Brazzaville 2004 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health, Population and Hospital Reform (Algeria) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Cook Islands 2003\u20132004 survey and Cook Islands 2013\u20132015 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Cook Islands) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Eritrea 2010 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Eritrea) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Fiji 2002 STEPS survey, implemented by Fiji School of Medicine, Menzies Center for Population Health Research, University of Tasmania (Australia), Ministry of Health (Fiji) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Fiji 2011 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Fiji) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Georgia 2016 STEPS survey, implemented by National Center for Disease Control and Public Health (Georgia) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Ghana - Greater Accra Region 2006 STEPS survey, implemented by Ghana Health Service with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Guniea 2009 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Public Health and Hygiene (Guinea) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Guyana 2016 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Guyana) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Iraq 2015 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Iraq) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Kenya 2015 STEPS survey, implemented by Kenya National Bureau of Statistics, Ministry of Health (Kenya) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Kiribati 2004\u20132006 STEPS survey and the Kiribati 2016 survey, implemented by Ministry of Health and Medical Services (Kiribati) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Kuwait 2006 STEPS survey and the Kuwait 2014 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Kuwait) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Kyrgyzstan 2013 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Kyrgyzstan) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Laos 2013 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Laos) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Lebanon 2016-2017 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Public Health (Lebanon) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Lesotho 2012 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (Lesotho) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Liberia 2011 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (Liberia) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Libya 2009 STEPS survey, implemented by Secretariat of Health and Environment (Libya) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Malawi 2009 STEPS survey and Malawi 2017 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Malawi) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Mali 2007 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Mali) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Marshall Islands 2002 STEPS survey and the Marshall Islands 2017-2018 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Marshall Islands) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Mauritania- Nouakchott 2006 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Mauritania) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Micronesia - Chuuk 2006 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Palestine) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Micronesia - Chuuk 2016 STEPS survey, implemented by Chuuk Department of Health Services (Micronesia), Department of Health and Social Affairs (Micronesia) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Micronesia - Pohnpei 2002 STEPS survey, implemented by Centre for Physical Activity and Health, University of Sydney (Australia), Department of Health and Social Affairs (Micronesia), Fiji School of Medicine, Micronesia Human Resources Development Center, Pohnpei State Department of Health Services with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Micronesia - Pohnpei 2008 STEPS survey, implemented by FSM Department of Health and Social Affairs, Pohnpei State Department of Health Services with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Micronesia - Yap 2009 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health and Social Affairs (Micronesia) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Micronesia- Kosrae 2009 STEPS survey, implemented by FSM Department of Health and Social Affairs with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Moldova 2013 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Moldova) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Mongolia 2005 STEPS survey, the Mongolia 2009 STEPS survey, and the Mongolia 2013 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Mongolia) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Morocco 2017 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Morocco) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Mozambique 2005 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Mozambique) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Myanmar 2014 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Myanmar) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Nauru 2004 STEPS survey and the Nauru 2015\u20132016 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Nauru) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Niger 2007 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Niger) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Palau 2011-2013 STEPS survey and the Palau 2016 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Palau) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Palestine 2010-2011 STEPS survey, implemented by Chuuk Department of Health Services (Micronesia), Department of Health and Social Affairs (Micronesia) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Qatar 2012 STEPS survey, implemented by Supreme Council of Health (Qatar) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Rwanda 2012-2013 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Rwanda) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Samoa 2002 STEPS survey and the Samoa 2013 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Samoa) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Sao Tome and Principe 2008 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Sao Tome and Principe) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Seychelles 2004 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Seychelles) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Solomon Islands 2005\u20132006 STEPS survey and the Solomon Islands 2015 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health and Medical Services (Solomon Islands) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Sri Lanka 2014\u20132015 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Sri Lanka) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Sudan 2016 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Sudan) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Swaziland 2007 STEPS survey and the Swaziland 2014 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Swaziland) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Tajikistan 2016 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Tajikistan) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Tanzania - Zanzibar 2011 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Zanzibar) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Tanzania 2012 STEPS survey, implemented by National Institute for Medical Research (Tanzania) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Timor-Leste 2014 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Timor-Leste) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Togo 2010\u20132011 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Togo) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Tokelau 2005 STEPS survey, implemented by Tokelau Department of Health, Fiji School of Medicine with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Tonga 2004 STEPS survey and the Tonga 2011\u20132012 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Tonga) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Tuvalu 2015 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Tuvalu), with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Uganda 2014 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Uganda) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Uruguay 2006 STEPS survey and the Uruguay 2013-2014 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Uruguay) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Vanuatu 2011 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Vanuatu) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Viet Nam 2009 STEPS survey and the Viet Nam 2015 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Viet Nam) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Virgin Islands, British 2009 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health and Social Development (British Virgin Islands) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Zambia - Lusaka 2008 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Zambia) with the support of WHO. This paper uses data from the Zambia 2017 STEPS survey, implemented by Ministry of Health (Zambia) with the support of WHO. This research used data from the Chile National Health Survey 2003, 2009\u201310, and 2016\u201317. The authors are grateful to the Ministry of Health, survey copyright owner, for allowing them to have the database. All results of the study are those of the author and in no way committed to the Ministry. This research used information from the Health Surveys for epidemiological surveillance of the Undersecretary of Public Health. The authors thank the Ministry of Health of Chile, having allowed them to have access to the database. All the results obtained from the study or research are the responsibility of the authors and in no way compromise that institution. This research uses data from Add Health, a program project designed by J Richard Udry, Peter S Bearman, and Kathleen Mullan Harris, and funded by a grant P01-HD31921 from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, with cooperative funding from 17 other agencies. Special acknowledgment is due to Ronald R Rindfuss and Barbara Entwisle for assistance in the original design. Persons interested in obtaining data files from Add Health should contact Add Health, Carolina Population Center, 123 W. Franklin Street, Chapel Hill, NC 27516-2524, USA ( [email protected]). No direct support was received from grant P01-HD31921 for this analysis. This study has been realised using the data collected by the Swiss Household Panel (SHP), which is based at the Swiss Centre of Expertise in the Social Sciences FORS. The project is financed by the Swiss National Science Foundation. We thank the Russia Longitudinal Monitoring Survey, RLMS-HSE, conducted by the National Research University Higher School of Economics and ZAO Demoscope together with Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and the Institute of Sociology RAS for making these data available. Editorial note: The Lancet Group takes a neutral position with respect to territorial claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Publisher Copyright: © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 licenseBackground: Detailed, comprehensive, and timely reporting on population health by underlying causes of disability and premature death is crucial to understanding and responding to complex patterns of disease and injury burden over time and across age groups, sexes, and locations. The availability of disease burden estimates can promote evidence-based interventions that enable public health researchers, policy makers, and other professionals to implement strategies that can mitigate diseases. It can also facilitate more rigorous monitoring of progress towards national and international health targets, such as the Sustainable Development Goals. For three decades, the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) has filled that need. A global network of collaborators contributed to the production of GBD 2021 by providing, reviewing, and analysing all available data. GBD estimates are updated routinely with additional data and refined analytical methods. GBD 2021 presents, for the first time, estimates of health loss due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: The GBD 2021 disease and injury burden analysis estimated years lived with disability (YLDs), years of life lost (YLLs), disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 371 diseases and injuries using 100 983 data sources. Data were extracted from vital registration systems, verbal autopsies, censuses, household surveys, disease-specific registries, health service contact data, and other sources. YLDs were calculated by multiplying cause-age-sex-location-year-specific prevalence of sequelae by their respective disability weights, for each disease and injury. YLLs were calculated by multiplying cause-age-se
a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021
No full textPublisher Copyright: © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 licenseBackground: Regular, detailed reporting on population health by underlying cause of death is fundamental for public health decision making. Cause-specific estimates of mortality and the subsequent effects on life expectancy worldwide are valuable metrics to gauge progress in reducing mortality rates. These estimates are particularly important following large-scale mortality spikes, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. When systematically analysed, mortality rates and life expectancy allow comparisons of the consequences of causes of death globally and over time, providing a nuanced understanding of the effect of these causes on global populations. Methods: The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2021 cause-of-death analysis estimated mortality and years of life lost (YLLs) from 288 causes of death by age-sex-location-year in 204 countries and territories and 811 subnational locations for each year from 1990 until 2021. The analysis used 56 604 data sources, including data from vital registration and verbal autopsy as well as surveys, censuses, surveillance systems, and cancer registries, among others. As with previous GBD rounds, cause-specific death rates for most causes were estimated using the Cause of Death Ensemble model—a modelling tool developed for GBD to assess the out-of-sample predictive validity of different statistical models and covariate permutations and combine those results to produce cause-specific mortality estimates—with alternative strategies adapted to model causes with insufficient data, substantial changes in reporting over the study period, or unusual epidemiology. YLLs were computed as the product of the number of deaths for each cause-age-sex-location-year and the standard life expectancy at each age. As part of the modelling process, uncertainty intervals (UIs) were generated using the 2·5th and 97·5th percentiles from a 1000-draw distribution for each metric. We decomposed life expectancy by cause of death, location, and year to show cause-specific effects on life expectancy from 1990 to 2021. We also used the coefficient of variation and the fraction of population affected by 90% of deaths to highlight concentrations of mortality. Findings are reported in counts and age-standardised rates. Methodological improvements for cause-of-death estimates in GBD 2021 include the expansion of under-5-years age group to include four new age groups, enhanced methods to account for stochastic variation of sparse data, and the inclusion of COVID-19 and other pandemic-related mortality—which includes excess mortality associated with the pandemic, excluding COVID-19, lower respiratory infections, measles, malaria, and pertussis. For this analysis, 199 new country-years of vital registration cause-of-death data, 5 country-years of surveillance data, 21 country-years of verbal autopsy data, and 94 country-years of other data types were added to those used in previous GBD rounds. Findings: The leading causes of age-standardised deaths globally were the same in 2019 as they were in 1990; in descending order, these were, ischaemic heart disease, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and lower respiratory infections. In 2021, however, COVID-19 replaced stroke as the second-leading age-standardised cause of death, with 94·0 deaths (95% UI 89·2–100·0) per 100 000 population. The COVID-19 pandemic shifted the rankings of the leading five causes, lowering stroke to the third-leading and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to the fourth-leading position. In 2021, the highest age-standardised death rates from COVID-19 occurred in sub-Saharan Africa (271·0 deaths [250·1–290·7] per 100 000 population) and Latin America and the Caribbean (195·4 deaths [182·1–211·4] per 100 000 population). The lowest age-standardised death rates from COVID-19 were in the high-income super-region (48·1 deaths [47·4–48·8] per 100 000 population) and southeast Asia, east Asia, and Oceania (23·2 deaths [16·3–37·2] per 100 000 population). Globally, life expectancy steadily improved between 1990 and 2019 for 18 of the 22 investigated causes. Decomposition of global and regional life expectancy showed the positive effect that reductions in deaths from enteric infections, lower respiratory infections, stroke, and neonatal deaths, among others have contributed to improved survival over the study period. However, a net reduction of 1·6 years occurred in global life expectancy between 2019 and 2021, primarily due to increased death rates from COVID-19 and other pandemic-related mortality. Life expectancy was highly variable between super-regions over the study period, with southeast Asia, east Asia, and Oceania gaining 8·3 years (6·7–9·9) overall, while having the smallest reduction in life expectancy due to COVID-19 (0·4 years). The largest reduction in life expectancy due to COVID-19 occurred in Latin America and the Caribbean (3·6 years). Additionally, 53 of the 288 causes of death were highly concentrated in locations with less than 50% of the global population as of 2021, and these causes of death became progressively more concentrated since 1990, when only 44 causes showed this pattern. The concentration phenomenon is discussed heuristically with respect to enteric and lower respiratory infections, malaria, HIV/AIDS, neonatal disorders, tuberculosis, and measles. Interpretation: Long-standing gains in life expectancy and reductions in many of the leading causes of death have been disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, the adverse effects of which were spread unevenly among populations. Despite the pandemic, there has been continued progress in combatting several notable causes of death, leading to improved global life expectancy over the study period. Each of the seven GBD super-regions showed an overall improvement from 1990 and 2021, obscuring the negative effect in the years of the pandemic. Additionally, our findings regarding regional variation in causes of death driving increases in life expectancy hold clear policy utility. Analyses of shifting mortality trends reveal that several causes, once widespread globally, are now increasingly concentrated geographically. These changes in mortality concentration, alongside further investigation of changing risks, interventions, and relevant policy, present an important opportunity to deepen our understanding of mortality-reduction strategies. Examining patterns in mortality concentration might reveal areas where successful public health interventions have been implemented. Translating these successes to locations where certain causes of death remain entrenched can inform policies that work to improve life expectancy for people everywhere. Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.publishersversionpublishe
Estimates of global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and mortality of HIV, 1980-2015 : the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015.
No full textBACKGROUND: Timely assessment of the burden of HIV/AIDS is essential for policy setting and programme evaluation. In this report from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015 (GBD 2015), we provide national estimates of levels and trends of HIV/AIDS incidence, prevalence, coverage of antiretroviral therapy (ART), and mortality for 195 countries and territories from 1980 to 2015. METHODS: For countries without high-quality vital registration data, we estimated prevalence and incidence with data from antenatal care clinics and population-based seroprevalence surveys, and with assumptions by age and sex on initial CD4 distribution at infection, CD4 progression rates (probability of progression from higher to lower CD4 cell-count category), on and off antiretroviral therapy (ART) mortality, and mortality from all other causes. Our estimation strategy links the GBD 2015 assessment of all-cause mortality and estimation of incidence and prevalence so that for each draw from the uncertainty distribution all assumptions used in each step are internally consistent. We estimated incidence, prevalence, and death with GBD versions of the Estimation and Projection Package (EPP) and Spectrum software originally developed by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). We used an open-source version of EPP and recoded Spectrum for speed, and used updated assumptions from systematic reviews of the literature and GBD demographic data. For countries with high-quality vital registration data, we developed the cohort incidence bias adjustment model to estimate HIV incidence and prevalence largely from the number of deaths caused by HIV recorded in cause-of-death statistics. We corrected these statistics for garbage coding and HIV misclassification. FINDINGS: Global HIV incidence reached its peak in 1997, at 3·3 million new infections (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 3·1-3·4 million). Annual incidence has stayed relatively constant at about 2·6 million per year (range 2·5-2·8 million) since 2005, after a period of fast decline between 1997 and 2005. The number of people living with HIV/AIDS has been steadily increasing and reached 38·8 million (95% UI 37·6-40·4 million) in 2015. At the same time, HIV/AIDS mortality has been declining at a steady pace, from a peak of 1·8 million deaths (95% UI 1·7-1·9 million) in 2005, to 1·2 million deaths (1·1-1·3 million) in 2015. We recorded substantial heterogeneity in the levels and trends of HIV/AIDS across countries. Although many countries have experienced decreases in HIV/AIDS mortality and in annual new infections, other countries have had slowdowns or increases in rates of change in annual new infections. INTERPRETATION: Scale-up of ART and prevention of mother-to-child transmission has been one of the great successes of global health in the past two decades. However, in the past decade, progress in reducing new infections has been slow, development assistance for health devoted to HIV has stagnated, and resources for health in low-income countries have grown slowly. Achievement of the new ambitious goals for HIV enshrined in Sustainable Development Goal 3 and the 90-90-90 UNAIDS targets will be challenging, and will need continued efforts from governments and international agencies in the next 15 years to end AIDS by 2030.Funding: We thank the countless individuals who have contributed to the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study 2015 in various capacities. We specifically thank Jeffrey Eaton and John Stover. HW and CJLM received funding for this study from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; the National Institute of Mental Health, National Institutes of Health (NIH; R01MH110163); and the National Institute on Aging, NIH (P30AG047845). LJAR acknowledges the support of Qatar National Research Fund (NPRP 04-924-3-251) who provided the main funding for generating the data provided to the GBD-Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation effort. BPAQ acknowledges institutional support from PRONABEC (National Program of Scholarship and Educational Loan), provided by the Peruvian government. DB is supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (grant number OPP1068048). JDN was supported in his contribution to this work by a Fellowship from Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia, Portugal (SFRH/BPD/92934/2013). KD is supported by a Wellcome Trust Fellowship in Public Health and Tropical Medicine (grant number 099876). TF received financial support from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF; project number P300P3-154634). AG acknowledges funding from Sistema Nacional de Investigadores de Panama-SNI. PJ is supported by Wellcome Trust-DBT India Alliance Clinical and Public Health Intermediate Fellowship. MK receives research support from the Academy of Finland, the Swedish Research Council, Alzheimerfonden, Alzheimer's Research & Prevention Foundation, Center for Innovative Medicine (CIMED) at Karolinska Institutet South Campus, AXA Research Fund, Wallenberg Clinical Scholars Award from the Knut och Alice Wallenbergs Foundation, and the Sheika Salama Bint Hamdan Al Nahyan Foundation. AK's work was supported by the Miguel Servet contract financed by the CP13/00150 and PI15/00862 projects, integrated into the National R&D&I and funded by the ISCIII (General Branch Evaluation and Promotion of Health Research), and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF-FEDER). SML is funded by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinician Scientist Fellowship (grant number NIHR/CS/010/014). HJL reports grants from the NIHR, EU Innovative Medicines Initiative, Centre for Strategic & International Studies, and WHO. WM is Program analyst, Population and Development, in the Peru Country Office of the United Nations Population Fund, which does not necessarily endorse this study. For UOM, funding from the German National Cohort Consortium (O1ER1511D) is gratefully acknowledged. KR reports grants from NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, NIHR Career Development Fellowship, and Oxford Martin School during the conduct of the study. GR acknowledges that work related to this paper has been done on the behalf of the GBD Genitourinary Disease Expert Group supported by the International Society of Nephrology (ISN). ISS reports grants from FAPESP (Brazilian public agency). RSS receives institutional support from Universidad de Ciencias Aplicadas y Ambientales, UDCA, Bogota Colombia. SS receives postdoctoral funding from the Fonds de la recherche en sante du Quebec (FRSQ), including its renewal. RTS was supported in part by grant number PROMETEOII/2015/021 from Generalitat Valenciana and the national grant PI14/00894 from ISCIII-FEDER. PY acknowledges support from Strategic Public Policy Research (HKU7003-SPPR-12).</p
Global, regional, and national disability‐adjusted life years (DALYs) for 315 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 195 countries and territories, 1990‐2015 : a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors (GBD) 2015 Study
No full textBackground
Healthy life expectancy (HALE) and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) provide summary measures of health across geographies and time that can inform assessments of epidemiological patterns and health system performance, help to prioritise investments in research and development, and monitor progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We aimed to provide updated HALE and DALYs for geographies worldwide and evaluate how disease burden changes with development.
Methods
We used results from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2015 (GBD 2015) for all-cause mortality, cause-specific mortality, and non-fatal disease burden to derive HALE and DALYs by sex for 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2015. We calculated DALYs by summing years of life lost (YLLs) and years of life lived with disability (YLDs) for each geography, age group, sex, and year. We estimated HALE using the Sullivan method, which draws from age-specific death rates and YLDs per capita. We then assessed how observed levels of DALYs and HALE differed from expected trends calculated with the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a composite indicator constructed from measures of income per capita, average years of schooling, and total fertility rate.
Findings
Total global DALYs remained largely unchanged from 1990 to 2015, with decreases in communicable, neonatal, maternal, and nutritional (Group 1) disease DALYs offset by increased DALYs due to non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Much of this epidemiological transition was caused by changes in population growth and ageing, but it was accelerated by widespread improvements in SDI that also correlated strongly with the increasing importance of NCDs. Both total DALYs and age-standardised DALY rates due to most Group 1 causes significantly decreased by 2015, and although total burden climbed for the majority of NCDs, age-standardised DALY rates due to NCDs declined. Nonetheless, age-standardised DALY rates due to several high-burden NCDs (including osteoarthritis, drug use disorders, depression, diabetes, congenital birth defects, and skin, oral, and sense organ diseases) either increased or remained unchanged, leading to increases in their relative ranking in many geographies. From 2005 to 2015, HALE at birth increased by an average of 2·9 years (95% uncertainty interval 2·9–3·0) for men and 3·5 years (3·4–3·7) for women, while HALE at age 65 years improved by 0·85 years (0·78–0·92) and 1·2 years (1·1–1·3), respectively. Rising SDI was associated with consistently higher HALE and a somewhat smaller proportion of life spent with functional health loss; however, rising SDI was related to increases in total disability. Many countries and territories in central America and eastern sub-Saharan Africa had increasingly lower rates of disease burden than expected given their SDI. At the same time, a subset of geographies recorded a growing gap between observed and expected levels of DALYs, a trend driven mainly by rising burden due to war, interpersonal violence, and various NCDs
Global, regional, national, and selected subnational levels of stillbirths, neonatal, infant, and under‐5 mortality during 1980‐2015 : a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015
No full textBackground
Established in 2000, Millennium Development Goal 4 (MDG4) catalysed extraordinary political, financial, and social commitments to reduce under-5 mortality by two-thirds between 1990 and 2015. At the country level, the pace of progress in improving child survival has varied markedly, highlighting a crucial need to further examine potential drivers of accelerated or slowed decreases in child mortality. The Global Burden of Disease 2015 Study (GBD 2015) provides an analytical framework to comprehensively assess these trends for under-5 mortality, age-specific and cause-specific mortality among children under 5 years, and stillbirths by geography over time.
Methods
Drawing from analytical approaches developed and refined in previous iterations of the GBD study, we generated updated estimates of child mortality by age group (neonatal, post-neonatal, ages 1–4 years, and under 5) for 195 countries and territories and selected subnational geographies, from 1980–2015. We also estimated numbers and rates of stillbirths for these geographies and years. Gaussian process regression with data source adjustments for sampling and non-sampling bias was applied to synthesise input data for under-5 mortality for each geography. Age-specific mortality estimates were generated through a two-stage age–sex splitting process, and stillbirth estimates were produced with a mixed-effects model, which accounted for variable stillbirth definitions and data source-specific biases. For GBD 2015, we did a series of novel analyses to systematically quantify the drivers of trends in child mortality across geographies. First, we assessed observed and expected levels and annualised rates of decrease for under-5 mortality and stillbirths as they related to the Soci-demographic Index (SDI). Second, we examined the ratio of recorded and expected levels of child mortality, on the basis of SDI, across geographies, as well as differences in recorded and expected annualised rates of change for under-5 mortality. Third, we analysed levels and cause compositions of under-5 mortality, across time and geographies, as they related to rising SDI. Finally, we decomposed the changes in under-5 mortality to changes in SDI at the global level, as well as changes in leading causes of under-5 deaths for countries and territories. We documented each step of the GBD 2015 child mortality estimation process, as well as data sources, in accordance with the Guidelines for Accurate and Transparent Health Estimates Reporting (GATHER).
Findings
Globally, 5·8 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 5·7–6·0) children younger than 5 years died in 2015, representing a 52·0% (95% UI 50·7–53·3) decrease in the number of under-5 deaths since 1990. Neonatal deaths and stillbirths fell at a slower pace since 1990, decreasing by 42·4% (41·3–43·6) to 2·6 million (2·6–2·7) neonatal deaths and 47·0% (35·1–57·0) to 2·1 million (1·8-2·5) stillbirths in 2015. Between 1990 and 2015, global under-5 mortality decreased at an annualised rate of decrease of 3·0% (2·6–3·3), falling short of the 4·4% annualised rate of decrease required to achieve MDG4. During this time, 58 countries met or exceeded the pace of progress required to meet MDG4. Between 2000, the year MDG4 was formally enacted, and 2015, 28 additional countries that did not achieve the 4·4% rate of decrease from 1990 met the MDG4 pace of decrease. However, absolute levels of under-5 mortality remained high in many countries, with 11 countries still recording rates exceeding 100 per 1000 livebirths in 2015. Marked decreases in under-5 deaths due to a number of communicable diseases, including lower respiratory infections, diarrhoeal diseases, measles, and malaria, accounted for much of the progress in lowering overall under-5 mortality in low-income countries. Compared with gains achieved for infectious diseases and nutritional deficiencies, the persisting toll of neonatal conditions and congenital anomalies on child survival became evident, especially in low-income and low-middle-income countries. We found sizeable heterogeneities in comparing observed and expected rates of under-5 mortality, as well as differences in observed and expected rates of change for under-5 mortality. At the global level, we recorded a divergence in observed and expected levels of under-5 mortality starting in 2000, with the observed trend falling much faster than what was expected based on SDI through 2015. Between 2000 and 2015, the world recorded 10·3 million fewer under-5 deaths than expected on the basis of improving SDI alone
