SwePub
Sök i SwePub databas

  Extended search

Träfflista för sökning "WFRF:(Johnson Jane B.) srt2:(2015-2019)"

Search: WFRF:(Johnson Jane B.) > (2015-2019)

  • Result 1-9 of 9
Sort/group result
   
EnumerationReferenceCoverFind
1.
  •  
2.
  •  
3.
  • Lozano, Rafael, et al. (author)
  • Measuring progress from 1990 to 2017 and projecting attainment to 2030 of the health-related Sustainable Development Goals for 195 countries and territories: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017
  • 2018
  • In: The Lancet. - : Elsevier. - 1474-547X .- 0140-6736. ; 392:10159, s. 2091-2138
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • Background: Efforts to establish the 2015 baseline and monitor early implementation of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) highlight both great potential for and threats to improving health by 2030. To fully deliver on the SDG aim of “leaving no one behind”, it is increasingly important to examine the health-related SDGs beyond national-level estimates. As part of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2017 (GBD 2017), we measured progress on 41 of 52 health-related SDG indicators and estimated the health-related SDG index for 195 countries and territories for the period 1990–2017, projected indicators to 2030, and analysed global attainment. Methods: We measured progress on 41 health-related SDG indicators from 1990 to 2017, an increase of four indicators since GBD 2016 (new indicators were health worker density, sexual violence by non-intimate partners, population census status, and prevalence of physical and sexual violence [reported separately]). We also improved the measurement of several previously reported indicators. We constructed national-level estimates and, for a subset of health-related SDGs, examined indicator-level differences by sex and Socio-demographic Index (SDI) quintile. We also did subnational assessments of performance for selected countries. To construct the health-related SDG index, we transformed the value for each indicator on a scale of 0–100, with 0 as the 2·5th percentile and 100 as the 97·5th percentile of 1000 draws calculated from 1990 to 2030, and took the geometric mean of the scaled indicators by target. To generate projections through 2030, we used a forecasting framework that drew estimates from the broader GBD study and used weighted averages of indicator-specific and country-specific annualised rates of change from 1990 to 2017 to inform future estimates. We assessed attainment of indicators with defined targets in two ways: first, using mean values projected for 2030, and then using the probability of attainment in 2030 calculated from 1000 draws. We also did a global attainment analysis of the feasibility of attaining SDG targets on the basis of past trends. Using 2015 global averages of indicators with defined SDG targets, we calculated the global annualised rates of change required from 2015 to 2030 to meet these targets, and then identified in what percentiles the required global annualised rates of change fell in the distribution of country-level rates of change from 1990 to 2015. We took the mean of these global percentile values across indicators and applied the past rate of change at this mean global percentile to all health-related SDG indicators, irrespective of target definition, to estimate the equivalent 2030 global average value and percentage change from 2015 to 2030 for each indicator. Findings: The global median health-related SDG index in 2017 was 59·4 (IQR 35·4–67·3), ranging from a low of 11·6 (95% uncertainty interval 9·6–14·0) to a high of 84·9 (83·1–86·7). SDG index values in countries assessed at the subnational level varied substantially, particularly in China and India, although scores in Japan and the UK were more homogeneous. Indicators also varied by SDI quintile and sex, with males having worse outcomes than females for non-communicable disease (NCD) mortality, alcohol use, and smoking, among others. Most countries were projected to have a higher health-related SDG index in 2030 than in 2017, while country-level probabilities of attainment by 2030 varied widely by indicator. Under-5 mortality, neonatal mortality, maternal mortality ratio, and malaria indicators had the most countries with at least 95% probability of target attainment. Other indicators, including NCD mortality and suicide mortality, had no countries projected to meet corresponding SDG targets on the basis of projected mean values for 2030 but showed some probability of attainment by 2030. For some indicators, including child malnutrition, several infectious diseases, and most violence measures, the annualised rates of change required to meet SDG targets far exceeded the pace of progress achieved by any country in the recent past. We found that applying the mean global annualised rate of change to indicators without defined targets would equate to about 19% and 22% reductions in global smoking and alcohol consumption, respectively; a 47% decline in adolescent birth rates; and a more than 85% increase in health worker density per 1000 population by 2030. Interpretation: The GBD study offers a unique, robust platform for monitoring the health-related SDGs across demographic and geographic dimensions. Our findings underscore the importance of increased collection and analysis of disaggregated data and highlight where more deliberate design or targeting of interventions could accelerate progress in attaining the SDGs. Current projections show that many health-related SDG indicators, NCDs, NCD-related risks, and violence-related indicators will require a concerted shift away from what might have driven past gains—curative interventions in the case of NCDs—towards multisectoral, prevention-oriented policy action and investments to achieve SDG aims. Notably, several targets, if they are to be met by 2030, demand a pace of progress that no country has achieved in the recent past. The future is fundamentally uncertain, and no model can fully predict what breakthroughs or events might alter the course of the SDGs. What is clear is that our actions—or inaction—today will ultimately dictate how close the world, collectively, can get to leaving no one behind by 2030.
  •  
4.
  • 2019
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)
  •  
5.
  • Hudson, Lawrence N, et al. (author)
  • The database of the PREDICTS (Projecting Responses of Ecological Diversity In Changing Terrestrial Systems) project
  • 2017
  • In: Ecology and Evolution. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 2045-7758. ; 7:1, s. 145-188
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • The PREDICTS project-Projecting Responses of Ecological Diversity In Changing Terrestrial Systems (www.predicts.org.uk)-has collated from published studies a large, reasonably representative database of comparable samples of biodiversity from multiple sites that differ in the nature or intensity of human impacts relating to land use. We have used this evidence base to develop global and regional statistical models of how local biodiversity responds to these measures. We describe and make freely available this 2016 release of the database, containing more than 3.2 million records sampled at over 26,000 locations and representing over 47,000 species. We outline how the database can help in answering a range of questions in ecology and conservation biology. To our knowledge, this is the largest and most geographically and taxonomically representative database of spatial comparisons of biodiversity that has been collated to date; it will be useful to researchers and international efforts wishing to model and understand the global status of biodiversity.
  •  
6.
  •  
7.
  • Mavaddat, Nasim, et al. (author)
  • Prediction of Breast Cancer Risk Based on Profiling With Common Genetic Variants
  • 2015
  • In: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1460-2105 .- 0027-8874. ; 107:5, s. 036-036
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • Background: Data for multiple common susceptibility alleles for breast cancer may be combined to identify women at different levels of breast cancer risk. Such stratification could guide preventive and screening strategies. However, empirical evidence for genetic risk stratification is lacking. Methods: We investigated the value of using 77 breast cancer-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for risk stratification, in a study of 33 673 breast cancer cases and 33 381 control women of European origin. We tested all possible pair-wise multiplicative interactions and constructed a 77-SNP polygenic risk score (PRS) for breast cancer overall and by estrogen receptor (ER) status. Absolute risks of breast cancer by PRS were derived from relative risk estimates and UK incidence and mortality rates. Results: There was no strong evidence for departure from a multiplicative model for any SNP pair. Women in the highest 1% of the PRS had a three-fold increased risk of developing breast cancer compared with women in the middle quintile (odds ratio [OR] = 3.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.95 to 3.83). The ORs for ER-positive and ER-negative disease were 3.73 (95% CI = 3.24 to 4.30) and 2.80 (95% CI = 2.26 to 3.46), respectively. Lifetime risk of breast cancer for women in the lowest and highest quintiles of the PRS were 5.2% and 16.6% for a woman without family history, and 8.6% and 24.4% for a woman with a first-degree family history of breast cancer. Conclusions: The PRS stratifies breast cancer risk in women both with and without a family history of breast cancer. The observed level of risk discrimination could inform targeted screening and prevention strategies. Further discrimination may be achievable through combining the PRS with lifestyle/environmental factors, although these were not considered in this report.
  •  
8.
  • Shu, Xiang, et al. (author)
  • Associations of obesity and circulating insulin and glucose with breast cancer risk : a Mendelian randomization analysis
  • 2019
  • In: International Journal of Epidemiology. - : OXFORD UNIV PRESS. - 0300-5771 .- 1464-3685. ; 48:3, s. 795-806
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • Background: In addition to the established association between general obesity and breast cancer risk, central obesity and circulating fasting insulin and glucose have been linked to the development of this common malignancy. Findings from previous studies, however, have been inconsistent, and the nature of the associations is unclear. Methods: We conducted Mendelian randomization analyses to evaluate the association of breast cancer risk, using genetic instruments, with fasting insulin, fasting glucose, 2-h glucose, body mass index (BMI) and BMI-adjusted waist-hip-ratio (WHRadj BMI). We first confirmed the association of these instruments with type 2 diabetes risk in a large diabetes genome-wide association study consortium. We then investigated their associations with breast cancer risk using individual-level data obtained from 98 842 cases and 83 464 controls of European descent in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Results: All sets of instruments were associated with risk of type 2 diabetes. Associations with breast cancer risk were found for genetically predicted fasting insulin [odds ratio (OR) = 1.71 per standard deviation (SD) increase, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.26-2.31, p = 5.09 x 10(-4)], 2-h glucose (OR = 1.80 per SD increase, 95% CI = 1.3 0-2.49, p = 4.02 x 10(-4)), BMI (OR = 0.70 per 5-unit increase, 95% CI = 0.65-0.76, p = 5.05 x 10(-19)) and WHRadj BMI (OR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.79-0.91, p = 9.22 x 10(-6)). Stratified analyses showed that genetically predicted fasting insulin was more closely related to risk of estrogen-receptor [ER]-positive cancer, whereas the associations with instruments of 2h glucose, BMI and WHRadj BMI were consistent regardless of age, menopausal status, estrogen receptor status and family history of breast cancer. Conclusions: We confirmed the previously reported inverse association of genetically predicted BMI with breast cancer risk, and showed a positive association of genetically predicted fasting insulin and 2-h glucose and an inverse association of WHRadj BMI with breast cancer risk. Our study suggests that genetically determined obesity and glucose/insulin-related traits have an important role in the aetiology of breast cancer.
  •  
9.
  •  
Skapa referenser, mejla, bekava och länka
  • Result 1-9 of 9
Type of publication
journal article (9)
Type of content
peer-reviewed (9)
Author/Editor
Nevanlinna, Heli (3)
Blomqvist, Carl (3)
Chang-Claude, Jenny (3)
Wang, Qin (3)
Haiman, Christopher ... (3)
Giles, Graham G (3)
show more...
Brenner, Hermann (3)
John, Esther M (3)
Neuhausen, Susan L (3)
Eriksson, Mikael (3)
Arndt, Volker (3)
Michailidou, Kyriaki (3)
Milne, Roger L. (3)
Bolla, Manjeet K. (3)
Dennis, Joe (3)
Dunning, Alison M. (3)
Andrulis, Irene L. (3)
Anton-Culver, Hoda (3)
Benitez, Javier (3)
Bermisheva, Marina (3)
Bojesen, Stig E. (3)
Brauch, Hiltrud (3)
Burwinkel, Barbara (3)
Chenevix-Trench, Geo ... (3)
Cox, Angela (3)
Cross, Simon S. (3)
Czene, Kamila (3)
Dwek, Miriam (3)
Eccles, Diana M. (3)
Fasching, Peter A. (3)
Figueroa, Jonine (3)
Goldberg, Mark S. (3)
Gonzalez-Neira, Anna (3)
Guenel, Pascal (3)
Hall, Per (3)
Hamann, Ute (3)
Hollestelle, Antoine ... (3)
Hopper, John L. (3)
Jakubowska, Anna (3)
Khusnutdinova, Elza (3)
Lambrechts, Diether (3)
Lissowska, Jolanta (3)
Mannermaa, Arto (3)
Margolin, Sara (3)
Meindl, Alfons (3)
Peto, Julian (3)
Radice, Paolo (3)
Sawyer, Elinor J. (3)
Schmutzler, Rita K. (3)
Southey, Melissa C. (3)
show less...
University
Lund University (7)
Karolinska Institutet (6)
Uppsala University (5)
Umeå University (3)
Stockholm University (3)
Chalmers University of Technology (3)
show more...
University of Gothenburg (2)
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (2)
Royal Institute of Technology (1)
Halmstad University (1)
Linköping University (1)
Södertörn University (1)
Linnaeus University (1)
Högskolan Dalarna (1)
show less...
Language
English (9)
Research subject (UKÄ/SCB)
Medical and Health Sciences (7)
Natural sciences (5)
Social Sciences (1)

Year

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Close

Copy and save the link in order to return to this view