| 1. |
- Gorasso, Vanessa, et al.
(författare)
-
Burden of disease attributable to risk factors in European countries: a scoping literature review
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Archives of Public Health. - 0778-7367 .- 2049-3258. ; 81:1
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: Within the framework of the burden of disease (BoD) approach, disease and injury burden estimates attributable to risk factors are a useful guide for policy formulation and priority setting in disease prevention. Considering the important differences in methods, and their impact on burden estimates, we conducted a scoping literature review to: (1) map the BoD assessments including risk factors performed across Europe; and (2) identify the methodological choices in comparative risk assessment (CRA) and risk assessment methods. Methods: We searched multiple literature databases, including grey literature websites and targeted public health agencies websites. Results: A total of 113 studies were included in the synthesis and further divided into independent BoD assessments (54 studies) and studies linked to the Global Burden of Disease (59 papers). Our results showed that the methods used to perform CRA varied substantially across independent European BoD studies. While there were some methodological choices that were more common than others, we did not observe patterns in terms of country, year or risk factor. Each methodological choice can affect the comparability of estimates between and within countries and/or risk factors, since they might significantly influence the quantification of the attributable burden. From our analysis we observed that the use of CRA was less common for some types of risk factors and outcomes. These included environmental and occupational risk factors, which are more likely to use bottom-up approaches for health outcomes where disease envelopes may not be available. Conclusions: Our review also highlighted misreporting, the lack of uncertainty analysis and the under-investigation of causal relationships in BoD studies. Development and use of guidelines for performing and reporting BoD studies will help understand differences, avoid misinterpretations thus improving comparability among estimates.
|
|
| 2. |
- Maurer, Marcus, et al.
(författare)
-
Urticaria : Collegium Internationale Allergologicum (CIA) Update 2020
- 2020
-
Ingår i: International Archives of Allergy and Immunology. - : S. Karger AG. - 1018-2438 .- 1423-0097. ; 181:5, s. 321-333
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- This update on chronic urticaria (CU) focuses on the prevalence and pathogenesis of chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU), the expanding spectrum of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for assessing CU disease activity, impact, and control, as well as future treatment options for CU. This update is needed, as several recently reported findings have led to significant advances in these areas. Some of these key discoveries were first presented at past meetings of the Collegium Internationale Allergologicum (CIA). New evidence shows that the prevalence of CSU is geographically heterogeneous, high in all age groups, and increasing. Several recent reports have helped to better characterize two endotypes of CSU: type I autoimmune (or autoallergic) CSU, driven by IgE to autoallergens, and type IIb autoimmune CSU, which is due to mast cell (MC)-targeted autoantibodies. The aim of treatment in CU is complete disease control with absence of signs and symptoms as well as normalization of quality of life (QoL). This is best monitored by the use of an expanding set of PROMs, to which the Angioedema Control Test, the Cholinergic Urticaria Quality of Life Questionnaire, and the Cholinergic Urticaria Activity Score have recently been added. Current treatment approaches for CU under development include drugs that inhibit the effects of signals that drive MC activation and accumulation, drugs that inhibit intracellular pathways of MC activation and degranulation, and drugs that silence MCs by binding to inhibitory receptors. The understanding, knowledge, and management of CU are rapidly increasing. The aim of this review is to provide physicians who treat CU patients with an update on where we stand and where we will go. Many questions and unmet needs remain to be addressed, such as the development of routine diagnostic tests for type I and type IIb autoimmune CSU, the global dissemination and consistent use of PROMs to assess disease activity, impact, and control, and the development of more effective and well-tolerated long-term treatments for all forms of CU.
|
|
