| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- James, SL, et al.
(författare)
-
Estimating global injuries morbidity and mortality: methods and data used in the Global Burden of Disease 2017 study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention. - : BMJ. - 1475-5785. ; 26:SUPP_1Supp 1, s. 125-153
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- While there is a long history of measuring death and disability from injuries, modern research methods must account for the wide spectrum of disability that can occur in an injury, and must provide estimates with sufficient demographic, geographical and temporal detail to be useful for policy makers. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 study used methods to provide highly detailed estimates of global injury burden that meet these criteria.MethodsIn this study, we report and discuss the methods used in GBD 2017 for injury morbidity and mortality burden estimation. In summary, these methods included estimating cause-specific mortality for every cause of injury, and then estimating incidence for every cause of injury. Non-fatal disability for each cause is then calculated based on the probabilities of suffering from different types of bodily injury experienced.ResultsGBD 2017 produced morbidity and mortality estimates for 38 causes of injury. Estimates were produced in terms of incidence, prevalence, years lived with disability, cause-specific mortality, years of life lost and disability-adjusted life-years for a 28-year period for 22 age groups, 195 countries and both sexes.ConclusionsGBD 2017 demonstrated a complex and sophisticated series of analytical steps using the largest known database of morbidity and mortality data on injuries. GBD 2017 results should be used to help inform injury prevention policy making and resource allocation. We also identify important avenues for improving injury burden estimation in the future.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- James, SL, et al.
(författare)
-
Global injury morbidity and mortality from 1990 to 2017: results from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention. - : BMJ. - 1475-5785. ; 26:SUPP_1Supp 1, s. 96-114
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Past research in population health trends has shown that injuries form a substantial burden of population health loss. Regular updates to injury burden assessments are critical. We report Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 Study estimates on morbidity and mortality for all injuries.MethodsWe reviewed results for injuries from the GBD 2017 study. GBD 2017 measured injury-specific mortality and years of life lost (YLLs) using the Cause of Death Ensemble model. To measure non-fatal injuries, GBD 2017 modelled injury-specific incidence and converted this to prevalence and years lived with disability (YLDs). YLLs and YLDs were summed to calculate disability-adjusted life years (DALYs).FindingsIn 1990, there were 4 260 493 (4 085 700 to 4 396 138) injury deaths, which increased to 4 484 722 (4 332 010 to 4 585 554) deaths in 2017, while age-standardised mortality decreased from 1079 (1073 to 1086) to 738 (730 to 745) per 100 000. In 1990, there were 354 064 302 (95% uncertainty interval: 338 174 876 to 371 610 802) new cases of injury globally, which increased to 520 710 288 (493 430 247 to 547 988 635) new cases in 2017. During this time, age-standardised incidence decreased non-significantly from 6824 (6534 to 7147) to 6763 (6412 to 7118) per 100 000. Between 1990 and 2017, age-standardised DALYs decreased from 4947 (4655 to 5233) per 100 000 to 3267 (3058 to 3505).InterpretationInjuries are an important cause of health loss globally, though mortality has declined between 1990 and 2017. Future research in injury burden should focus on prevention in high-burden populations, improving data collection and ensuring access to medical care.
|
|
| 9. |
- Nichols, E, et al.
(författare)
-
Use of multidimensional item response theory methods for dementia prevalence prediction: an example using the Health and Retirement Survey and the Aging, Demographics, and Memory Study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: BMC medical informatics and decision making. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1472-6947. ; 21:1, s. 241-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundData sparsity is a major limitation to estimating national and global dementia burden. Surveys with full diagnostic evaluations of dementia prevalence are prohibitively resource-intensive in many settings. However, validation samples from nationally representative surveys allow for the development of algorithms for the prediction of dementia prevalence nationally.MethodsUsing cognitive testing data and data on functional limitations from Wave A (2001–2003) of the ADAMS study (n = 744) and the 2000 wave of the HRS study (n = 6358) we estimated a two-dimensional item response theory model to calculate cognition and function scores for all individuals over 70. Based on diagnostic information from the formal clinical adjudication in ADAMS, we fit a logistic regression model for the classification of dementia status using cognition and function scores and applied this algorithm to the full HRS sample to calculate dementia prevalence by age and sex.ResultsOur algorithm had a cross-validated predictive accuracy of 88% (86–90), and an area under the curve of 0.97 (0.97–0.98) in ADAMS. Prevalence was higher in females than males and increased over age, with a prevalence of 4% (3–4) in individuals 70–79, 11% (9–12) in individuals 80–89 years old, and 28% (22–35) in those 90 and older.ConclusionsOur model had similar or better accuracy as compared to previously reviewed algorithms for the prediction of dementia prevalence in HRS, while utilizing more flexible methods. These methods could be more easily generalized and utilized to estimate dementia prevalence in other national surveys.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
