1. |
|
|
2. |
- Glasbey, JC, et al.
(author)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
3. |
- Tabiri, S, et al.
(author)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
4. |
- Bravo, L, et al.
(author)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
5. |
|
|
6. |
- Alvarez, E. M., et al.
(author)
-
The global burden of adolescent and young adult cancer in 2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019
- 2022
-
In: Lancet Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1470-2045. ; 23:1, s. 27-52
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background In estimating the global burden of cancer, adolescents and young adults with cancer are often overlooked, despite being a distinct subgroup with unique epidemiology, clinical care needs, and societal impact. Comprehensive estimates of the global cancer burden in adolescents and young adults (aged 15-39 years) are lacking. To address this gap, we analysed results from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019, with a focus on the outcome of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), to inform global cancer control measures in adolescents and young adults. Methods Using the GBD 2019 methodology, international mortality data were collected from vital registration systems, verbal autopsies, and population-based cancer registry inputs modelled with mortality-to-incidence ratios (MIRs). Incidence was computed with mortality estimates and corresponding MIRs. Prevalence estimates were calculated using modelled survival and multiplied by disability weights to obtain years lived with disability (YLDs). Years of life lost (YLLs) were calculated as age-specific cancer deaths multiplied by the standard life expectancy at the age of death. The main outcome was DALYs (the sum of YLLs and YLDs). Estimates were presented globally and by Socio-demographic Index (SDI) quintiles (countries ranked and divided into five equal SDI groups), and all estimates were presented with corresponding 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). For this analysis, we used the age range of 15-39 years to define adolescents and young adults. Findings There were 1.19 million (95% UI 1.11-1.28) incident cancer cases and 396 000 (370 000-425 000) deaths due to cancer among people aged 15-39 years worldwide in 2019. The highest age-standardised incidence rates occurred in high SDI (59.6 [54.5-65.7] per 100 000 person-years) and high-middle SDI countries (53.2 [48.8-57.9] per 100 000 person-years), while the highest age-standardised mortality rates were in low-middle SDI (14.2 [12.9-15.6] per 100 000 person-years) and middle SDI (13.6 [12.6-14.8] per 100 000 person-years) countries. In 2019, adolescent and young adult cancers contributed 23.5 million (21.9-25.2) DALYs to the global burden of disease, of which 2.7% (1.9-3.6) came from YLDs and 97.3% (96.4-98.1) from YLLs. Cancer was the fourth leading cause of death and tenth leading cause of DALYs in adolescents and young adults globally. Interpretation Adolescent and young adult cancers contributed substantially to the overall adolescent and young adult disease burden globally in 2019. These results provide new insights into the distribution and magnitude of the adolescent and young adult cancer burden around the world. With notable differences observed across SDI settings, these estimates can inform global and country-level cancer control efforts. Copyright (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
|
|
7. |
- Kocarnik, J. M., et al.
(author)
-
Cancer Incidence, Mortality, Years of Life Lost, Years Lived With Disability, and Disability-Adjusted Life Years for 29 Cancer Groups From 2010 to 2019 A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019
- 2022
-
In: Jama Oncology. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2374-2437 .- 2374-2445. ; 8:3, s. 420-488
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- IMPORTANCE The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019 (GBD 2019) provided systematic estimates of incidence, morbidity, and mortality to inform local and international efforts toward reducing cancer burden. OBJECTIVE To estimate cancer burden and trends globally for 204 countries and territories and by Sociodemographic Index (SDI) quintiles from 2010 to 2019. EVIDENCE REVIEW The GBD 2019 estimation methods were used to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in 2019 and over the past decade. Estimates are also provided by quintiles of the SDI, a composite measure of educational attainment, income per capita, and total fertility rate for those younger than 25 years. Estimates include 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). FINDINGS In 2019, there were an estimated 23.6 million (95% UI, 22.2-24.9 million) new cancer cases (17.2 million when excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and 10.0 million (95% UI, 9.36-10.6 million) cancer deaths globally, with an estimated 250 million (235-264 million) DALYs due to cancer. Since 2010, these represented a 26.3%(95% UI, 20.3%-32.3%) increase in new cases, a 20.9%(95% UI, 14.2%-27.6%) increase in deaths, and a 16.0% (95% UI, 9.3%-22.8%) increase in DALYs. Among 22 groups of diseases and injuries in the GBD 2019 study, cancer was second only to cardiovascular diseases for the number of deaths, years of life lost, and DALYs globally in 2019. Cancer burden differed across SDI quintiles. The proportion of years lived with disability that contributed to DALYs increased with SDI, ranging from 1.4%(1.1%-1.8%) in the low SDI quintile to 5.7%(4.2%-7.1%) in the high SDI quintile. While the high SDI quintile had the highest number of new cases in 2019, the middle SDI quintile had the highest number of cancer deaths and YDALYs. From 2010 to 2019, the largest percentage increase in the numbers of cases and deaths occurred in the low and low-middle SDI quintiles. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The results of this systematic analysis suggest that the global burden of cancer is substantial and growing, with burden differing by SDI. These results provide comprehensive and comparable estimates that can potentially inform efforts toward equitable cancer control around the world.
|
|
8. |
|
|
9. |
|
|
10. |
|
|
11. |
|
|
12. |
|
|
13. |
|
|
14. |
|
|
15. |
- James, SL, et al.
(author)
-
Global injury morbidity and mortality from 1990 to 2017: results from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017
- 2020
-
In: Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention. - : BMJ. - 1475-5785. ; 26:SUPP_1Supp 1, s. 96-114
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)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.
|
|
16. |
|
|
17. |
- Abbafati, Cristiana, et al.
(author)
-
- 2020
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)
|
|
18. |
- James, SL, et al.
(author)
-
Estimating global injuries morbidity and mortality: methods and data used in the Global Burden of Disease 2017 study
- 2020
-
In: Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention. - : BMJ. - 1475-5785. ; 26:SUPP_1Supp 1, s. 125-153
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)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.
|
|
19. |
- Harley, M, et al.
(author)
-
Was Rodney Ledward a statistical outlier? Retrospective analysis using hospital data to identify gynaecologists performance
- 2005
-
In: British Medical Journal, 2005, 330, 929.
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: To investigate whether routinely collected data from hospital episode statistics could be used to identify the gynaecologist Rodney Ledward, who was suspended in 1966 and was the subject of the Ritchie inquiry into quality and practice within the NHS. Design A mixed scanning approach was used to identify seven variables from hospital episode statistics that were likely to be associated with potentially poor performance. A blinded multivariate analysis was undertaken to determine the distance (known as the Mahalanobis distance) in the seven indicator multidimensional space that each consultant was from the average consultant in each year. The change in Mahalanobis distance over time was also investigated by using a mixed effects model. Setting: NHS hospital trusts in two English regions, in the five years from 1991-2 to 1995-6. Population: Gynaecology consultants (n = 143) and their hospital episode statistics data. Main outcome measure Whether Ledward was a statistical outlier at the 95% level. Results: The proportion of consultants who were outliers in any one year (at the 95% significance level) ranged from 9% to 20%. Ledward appeared as an outlier in three of the five years. Our mixed effects (multi-year) model identified nine high outlier consultants, including Ledward. Conclusion: It was possible to identify Ledward as an outlier by using hospital episode statistics data. Although our method found other outlier consultants, we strongly caution that these outliers should not be overinterpreted as indicative of "poor" performance. Instead, a scientific search for a credible explanation should be undertaken, but this was outside the remit of our study. The set of indicators used means that cancer specialists, for example, are likely to have high values for several indicators, and the approach needs to be refined to deal with case mix variation. Even after allowing for that, the interpretation of outlier status is still as yet unclear. Further prospective evaluation of our method is warranted, but our overall approach may be potentially useful in other settings, especially where performance entails several indicator variables.
|
|
20. |
|
|
21. |
- Almasri, Abdullah, et al.
(author)
-
A study of residential radon in Sweden using multilevel analysis
- 2008
-
In: Health Physics Journal, to appear 2008.
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- A Swedish radon data set, consisting of more than 8000 measurements of residential radon levels in about 50% of the Swedish municipalities were analysed using a multilevel approach.The results were compared with those of a single-level analysis. We found that there was a significant variability between municipalities. The point estimates of the population mean radon levels were similar (geometric mean 60 Bq/m3 and arithmetic mean 106 Bq/m3).The analysis shows the advantages of multilevel modeling compared with a single-level OLS model.A single-level model results in too optimistic standard errors, about 25% of those of the multilevelmodel which can lead to erroneous conclusions.In a multilevel model including house type as a fixed effect (single-family house, row house, or apartment in multi-family house), the estimates of the fixed effect of house type were similar for the single-level and the multi-level models
|
|
22. |
- Almasri, N. A., et al.
(author)
-
Development of a Cerebral Palsy Follow-up Registry in Jordan (CPUP-Jordan)
- 2018
-
In: Child: Care Health and Development. - : Wiley. - 0305-1862. ; 44:1, s. 131-139
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims: This study aims to describe the development of a Cerebral Palsy Follow-up Registry in Jordan (CPUP-Jordan) and to provide a baseline child and parent demographic information, birth history of the child participants, and distribution of the participants based on topographical distribution of cerebral palsy (CP) and functional classification systems. Methods: The CPUP-Jordan was developed using a similar framework of a follow-up surveillance programme for persons with CP in Sweden (CPUP). Standard assessment forms were utilized to collect data related to child and family demographics, child birth history, and functional classifications and physiotherapy and occupational therapy assessments and interventions. Research assistants were trained to conduct the assessments. A secured web-based system was developed to store data and disseminate knowledge maintained in the registry. Children with CP were included in the registry if they have confirmed diagnosis of CP. The ascertainment age of inclusion and the minimum age of survival required are 4 years. Results: One hundred sixty-seven children were registered between 2013 and 2015 (mean age is 3.6 ± 3.0 years). Forty-two percent were born premature, and 48% were less than the normal birthweight. Perinatal causes were reported for 54% of the participants. The most common type of CP based on tone disturbance was spastic type, and the most common topographical distributions of motor dysfunction were quadriplegia followed by diplegia. Fifty-six percent of the participants had severe limitation in ambulation; 48% had restricted manual abilities, and 47% had limited communication abilities even with familiar family members and partners. Conclusions: The development of CPUP-Jordan registry for children with CP proved to be both feasible and informative. The registry baseline descriptive data were similar to those reported in previous research in Jordan supporting validity of the data. The implementation of CPUP-Jordan at national level is expected to have a positive impact on children with CP, clinicians, policymakers, and researchers.
|
|