BACKGROUND: India's economic development and urbanisation in recent decades has varied considerably between states. Attempts to assess how overweight (including obesity) varies by socioeconomic position at the national level may mask considerable sub-national heterogeneity. We examined the socioeconomic patterning of overweight among adults in India's most and least economically developed states between 1998 and 2016. METHODS: We used state representative data from the National Family Health Surveys from 1998 to 99, 2005-06 and 2015-16. We estimated the prevalence of overweight by socioeconomic position in men (15-54 years) and women (15-49 years) from India's most and least economically developed states using multilevel logistic regressions. RESULTS: We observed an increasing trend of overweight prevalence among low socioeconomic position women. Amongst high socioeconomic position women, overweight prevalence either increased to a smaller extent, remained the same or even declined between 1998 and 2016. This was particularly the case in urban areas of the most developed states, where in the main analysis, the prevalence of overweight increased from 19 to 33% among women from the lowest socioeconomic group between 1998 and 2016 compared to no change among women from the highest socioeconomic group. Between 2005 and 2016, the prevalence of overweight increased to similar extents among high and low socioeconomic status men, irrespective of residence. CONCLUSIONS: The converging prevalence of overweight by socioeconomic position in India's most developed states, particularly amongst urban women, implies that this subpopulation may be the first to exhibit a negative association between socioeconomic position and overweight in India. Programs aiming to reduce the increasing overweight trends may wish to focus on poorer women in India's most developed states, amongst whom the increasing trend in prevalence has been considerable.
BACKGROUND: In India, the prevalence of overweight and obesity has increased rapidly in recent decades. Given the association between overweight and obesity with many non-communicable diseases, forecasts of the future prevalence of overweight and obesity can help inform policy in a country where around one sixth of the world's population resides. METHODS: We used a system of multi-state life tables to forecast overweight and obesity prevalence among Indians aged 20-69 years by age, sex and urban/rural residence to 2040. We estimated the incidence and initial prevalence of overweight using nationally representative data from the National Family Health Surveys 3 and 4, and the Study on global AGEing and adult health, waves 0 and 1. We forecasted future mortality, using the Lee-Carter model fitted life tables reported by the Sample Registration System, and adjusted the mortality rates for Body Mass Index using relative risks from the literature. RESULTS: The prevalence of overweight will more than double among Indian adults aged 20-69 years between 2010 and 2040, while the prevalence of obesity will triple. Specifically, the prevalence of overweight and obesity will reach 30.5% (27.4%-34.4%) and 9.5% (5.4%-13.3%) among men, and 27.4% (24.5%-30.6%) and 13.9% (10.1%-16.9%) among women, respectively, by 2040. The largest increases in the prevalence of overweight and obesity between 2010 and 2040 is expected to be in older ages, and we found a larger relative increase in overweight and obesity in rural areas compared to urban areas. The largest relative increase in overweight and obesity prevalence was forecast to occur at older age groups. CONCLUSION: The overall prevalence of overweight and obesity is expected to increase considerably in India by 2040, with substantial increases particularly among rural residents and older Indians. Detailed predictions of excess weight are crucial in estimating future non-communicable disease burdens and their economic impact. ; This study was supported in part by the Victorian Government's OIS Program, the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC Project no. 1122744), the Murdoch Children's Research Institute, and the Royal Children's Hospital Foundation (grant no. 2017-896). GA was supported by an NHMRC Early Career Fellowship (no. 1090462). MI was supported by the Munz Chair of Cardiovascular Prediction and Prevention. This study acknowledges the use of the following UK JIA cohort collections: The Biologics for Children with Rheumatic Diseases (BCRD) study (funded by Arthritis Research UK Grant 20747). The British Society for Paediatric and Adolescent Rheumatology Etanercept Cohort Study (BSPAR-ETN) (funded by a research grant from the British Society for Rheumatology (BSR). BSR has previously also received restricted income from Pfizer to fund this project). Childhood Arthritis Prospective Study (CAPS) (funded by Versus Arthritis, grant reference number 20542), Childhood Arthritis Response to Medication Study (CHARMS) (funded by Sparks UK, reference 08ICH09, and the Medical Research Council, reference MR/M004600/1), United Kingdom Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis Genetics Consortium (UKJIAGC). Genotyping of the UK JIA case samples were supported by the Versus Arthritis grants reference numbers 20385 and 21754. This research was funded by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre and supported by the Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre (MAHSC). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. We would like to acknowledge the assistance given by IT Services and the use of the Computational Shared Facility at The University of Manchester. Finally, the CHOP data used were funded by an Institute Development Fund to the CAG center from The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and by NIH grant, U01-HG006830, from the NHGRI-sponsored eMERGE Network.
Aims/hypothesis: We aimed to estimate the lifetime risk of diabetes and diabetes-free life expectancy in metropolitan cities in India among the population aged 20 years or more, and their variation by sex, age and BMI.Methods: A Markov simulation model was adopted to estimate age-, sex- and BMI-specific lifetime risk of developing diabetes and diabetes-free life expectancy. The main data inputs used were as follows: age-, sex- and BMI-specific incidence rates of diabetes in urban India taken from the Centre for Cardiometabolic Risk Reduction in South Asia (2010-2018); age-, sex- and urban-specific rates of mortality from period lifetables reported by the Government of India (2014); and prevalence of diabetes from the Indian Council for Medical Research INdia DIABetes study (2008-2015).Results: Lifetime risk (95% CI) of diabetes in 20-year-old men and women was 55.5 (51.6, 59.7)% and 64.6 (60.0, 69.5)%, respectively. Women generally had a higher lifetime risk across the lifespan. Remaining lifetime risk (95% CI) declined with age to 37.7 (30.1, 46.7)% at age 60 years among women and 27.5 (23.1, 32.4)% in men. Lifetime risk (95% CI) was highest among obese Indians: 86.0 (76.6, 91.5)% among 20-year-old women and 86.9 (75.4, 93.8)% among men. We identified considerably higher diabetes-free life expectancy at lower levels of BMI.Conclusions/interpretation: Lifetime risk of diabetes in metropolitan cities in India is alarming across the spectrum of weight and rises dramatically with higher BMI. Prevention of diabetes among metropolitan Indians of all ages is an urgent national priority, particularly given the rapid increase in urban obesogenic environments across the country. Graphical abstract.
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We aimed to estimate the lifetime risk of diabetes and diabetes-free life expectancy in metropolitan cities in India among the population aged 20 years or more, and their variation by sex, age and BMI. METHODS: A Markov simulation model was adopted to estimate age-, sex- and BMI-specific lifetime risk of developing diabetes and diabetes-free life expectancy. The main data inputs used were as follows: age-, sex- and BMI-specific incidence rates of diabetes in urban India taken from the Centre for Cardiometabolic Risk Reduction in South Asia (2010-2018); age-, sex- and urban-specific rates of mortality from period lifetables reported by the Government of India (2014); and prevalence of diabetes from the Indian Council for Medical Research INdia DIABetes study (2008-2015). RESULTS: Lifetime risk (95% CI) of diabetes in 20-year-old men and women was 55.5 (51.6, 59.7)% and 64.6 (60.0, 69.5)%, respectively. Women generally had a higher lifetime risk across the lifespan. Remaining lifetime risk (95% CI) declined with age to 37.7 (30.1, 46.7)% at age 60 years among women and 27.5 (23.1, 32.4)% in men. Lifetime risk (95% CI) was highest among obese Indians: 86.0 (76.6, 91.5)% among 20-year-old women and 86.9 (75.4, 93.8)% among men. We identified considerably higher diabetes-free life expectancy at lower levels of BMI. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Lifetime risk of diabetes in metropolitan cities in India is alarming across the spectrum of weight and rises dramatically with higher BMI. Prevention of diabetes among metropolitan Indians of all ages is an urgent national priority, particularly given the rapid increase in urban obesogenic environments across the country. Graphical abstract.
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We aimed to estimate the lifetime risk of diabetes and diabetes-free life expectancy in metropolitan cities in India among the population aged 20 years or more, and their variation by sex, age and BMI. METHODS: A Markov simulation model was adopted to estimate age-, sex- and BMI-specific lifetime risk of developing diabetes and diabetes-free life expectancy. The main data inputs used were as follows: age-, sex- and BMI-specific incidence rates of diabetes in urban India taken from the Centre for Cardiometabolic Risk Reduction in South Asia (2010–2018); age-, sex- and urban-specific rates of mortality from period lifetables reported by the Government of India (2014); and prevalence of diabetes from the Indian Council for Medical Research INdia DIABetes study (2008–2015). RESULTS: Lifetime risk (95% CI) of diabetes in 20-year-old men and women was 55.5 (51.6, 59.7)% and 64.6 (60.0, 69.5)%, respectively. Women generally had a higher lifetime risk across the lifespan. Remaining lifetime risk (95% CI) declined with age to 37.7 (30.1, 46.7)% at age 60 years among women and 27.5 (23.1, 32.4)% in men. Lifetime risk (95% CI) was highest among obese Indians: 86.0 (76.6, 91.5)% among 20-year-old women and 86.9 (75.4, 93.8)% among men. We identified considerably higher diabetes-free life expectancy at lower levels of BMI. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Lifetime risk of diabetes in metropolitan cities in India is alarming across the spectrum of weight and rises dramatically with higher BMI. Prevention of diabetes among metropolitan Indians of all ages is an urgent national priority, particularly given the rapid increase in urban obesogenic environments across the country. [Figure: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains peer-reviewed but unedited supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00125-020-05330-1.
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We aimed to estimate the lifetime risk of diabetes and diabetes-free life expectancy in metropolitan cities in India among the population aged 20 years or more, and their variation by sex, age and BMI. METHODS: A Markov simulation model was adopted to estimate age-, sex- and BMI-specific lifetime risk of developing diabetes and diabetes-free life expectancy. The main data inputs used were as follows: age-, sex- and BMI-specific incidence rates of diabetes in urban India taken from the Centre for Cardiometabolic Risk Reduction in South Asia (2010-2018); age-, sex- and urban-specific rates of mortality from period lifetables reported by the Government of India (2014); and prevalence of diabetes from the Indian Council for Medical Research INdia DIABetes study (2008-2015). RESULTS: Lifetime risk (95% CI) of diabetes in 20-year-old men and women was 55.5 (51.6, 59.7)% and 64.6 (60.0, 69.5)%, respectively. Women generally had a higher lifetime risk across the lifespan. Remaining lifetime risk (95% CI) declined with age to 37.7 (30.1, 46.7)% at age 60 years among women and 27.5 (23.1, 32.4)% in men. Lifetime risk (95% CI) was highest among obese Indians: 86.0 (76.6, 91.5)% among 20-year-old women and 86.9 (75.4, 93.8)% among men. We identified considerably higher diabetes-free life expectancy at lower levels of BMI. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Lifetime risk of diabetes in metropolitan cities in India is alarming across the spectrum of weight and rises dramatically with higher BMI. Prevention of diabetes among metropolitan Indians of all ages is an urgent national priority, particularly given the rapid increase in urban obesogenic environments across the country. Graphical abstract.
In the present study, we examined the associations of early nutrition with adult lean body mass (LBM) and muscle strength in a birth cohort that was established to assess the long-term impact of a nutrition program. Participants (n = 1,446, 32% female) were born near Hyderabad, India, in 29 villages from 1987 to 1990, during which time only intervention villages (n = 15) had a government program that offered balanced protein-calorie supplementation to pregnant women and children. Participants' LBM and appendicular skeletal muscle mass were measured using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry; grip strength and information on lifestyle indicators, including diet and physical activity level, were also obtained. Ages (mean = 20.3 years) and body mass indexes (weight (kg)/height (m)(2); mean = 19.5) of participants in 2 groups were similar. Current dietary energy intake was higher in the intervention group. Unadjusted LBM and grip strength were similar in 2 groups. After adjustment for potential confounders, the intervention group had lower LBM (β = -0.75; P = 0.03), appendicular skeletal muscle mass, and grip strength than did controls, but these differences were small in magnitude (<0.1 standard deviation). Multivariable regression analyses showed that current socioeconomic position, energy intake, and physical activity level had a positive association with adult LBM and muscle strength. This study could not detect a "programming" effect of early nutrition supplementation on adult LBM and muscle strength.
Background India has made substantial progress in improving child survival over the past few decades, but a comprehensive understanding of child mortality trends at disaggregated geographical levels is not available. We present a detailed analysis of subnational trends of child mortality to inform efforts aimed at meeting the India National Health Policy (NHP) and Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) targets for child mortality. Methods We assessed the under-5 mortality rate (U5MR) and neonatal mortality rate (NMR) from 2000 to 2017 in 5 × 5 km grids across India, and for the districts and states of India, using all accessible data from various sources including surveys with subnational geographical information. The 31 states and groups of union territories were categorised into three groups using their Socio-demographic Index (SDI) level, calculated as part of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study on the basis of per-capita income, mean education, and total fertility rate in women younger than 25 years. Inequality between districts within the states was assessed using the coefficient of variation. We projected U5MR and NMR for the states and districts up to 2025 and 2030 on the basis of the trends from 2000 to 2017 and compared these projections with the NHP 2025 and SDG 2030 targets for U5MR (23 deaths and 25 deaths per 1000 livebirths, respectively) and NMR (16 deaths and 12 deaths per 1000 livebirths, respectively). We assessed the causes of child death and the contribution of risk factors to child deaths at the state level. Findings U5MR in India decreased from 83·1 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 76·7–90·1) in 2000 to 42·4 (36·5–50·0) per 1000 livebirths in 2017, and NMR from 38·0 (34·2–41·6) to 23·5 (20·1–27·8) per 1000 livebirths. U5MR varied 5·7 times between the states of India and 10·5 times between the 723 districts of India in 2017, whereas NMR varied 4·5 times and 8·0 times, respectively. In the low SDI states, 275 (88%) districts had a U5MR of 40 or more per 1000 livebirths and 291 (93%) districts had an NMR of 20 or more per 1000 livebirths in 2017. The annual rate of change from 2010 to 2017 varied among the districts from a 9·02% (95% UI 6·30–11·63) reduction to no significant change for U5MR and from an 8·05% (95% UI 5·34–10·74) reduction to no significant change for NMR. Inequality between districts within the states increased from 2000 to 2017 in 23 of the 31 states for U5MR and in 24 states for NMR, with the largest increases in Odisha and Assam among the low SDI states. If the trends observed up to 2017 were to continue, India would meet the SDG 2030 U5MR target but not the SDG 2030 NMR target or either of the NHP 2025 targets. To reach the SDG 2030 targets individually, 246 (34%) districts for U5MR and 430 (59%) districts for NMR would need a higher rate of improvement than they had up to 2017. For all major causes of under-5 death in India, the death rate decreased between 2000 and 2017, with the highest decline for infectious diseases, intermediate decline for neonatal disorders, and the smallest decline for congenital birth defects, although the magnitude of decline varied widely between the states. Child and maternal malnutrition was the predominant risk factor, to which 68·2% (65·8–70·7) of under-5 deaths and 83·0% (80·6–85·0) of neonatal deaths in India could be attributed in 2017; 10·8% (9·1–12·4) of under-5 deaths could be attributed to unsafe water and sanitation and 8·8% (7·0–10·3) to air pollution. Interpretation India has made gains in child survival, but there are substantial variations between the states in the magnitude and rate of decline in mortality, and even higher variations between the districts of India. Inequality between districts within states has increased for the majority of the states. The district-level trends presented here can provide crucial guidance for targeted efforts needed in India to reduce child mortality to meet the Indian and global child survival targets. District-level mortality trends along with state-level trends in causes of under-5 and neonatal death and the risk factors in this Article provide a comprehensive reference for further planning of child mortality reduction in India.
Background A key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016. Methods Drawing from established methods and updated estimates from GBD 2016, we used 32 causes from which death should not occur in the presence of effective care to approximate personal health-care access and quality by location and over time. To better isolate potential effects of personal health-care access and quality from underlying risk factor patterns, we risk-standardised cause-specific deaths due to non-cancers by location-year, replacing the local joint exposure of environmental and behavioural risks with the global level of exposure. Supported by the expansion of cancer registry data in GBD 2016, we used mortality-to-incidence ratios for cancers instead of risk-standardised death rates to provide a stronger signal of the effects of personal health care and access on cancer survival. We transformed each cause to a scale of 0-100, with 0 as the first percentile (worst) observed between 1990 and 2016, and 100 as the 99th percentile (best); we set these thresholds at the country level, and then applied them to subnational locations. We applied a principal components analysis to construct the HAQ Index using all scaled cause values, providing an overall score of 0-100 of personal health-care access and quality by location over time. We then compared HAQ Index levels and trends by quintiles on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary measure of overall development. As derived from the broader GBD study and other data sources, we examined relationships between national HAQ Index scores and potential correlates of performance, such as total health spending per capita. Findings In 2016, HAQ Index performance spanned from a high of 97.1 (95% UI 95.8-98.1) in Iceland, followed by 96.6 (94.9-97.9) in Norway and 96.1 (94.5-97.3) in the Netherlands, to values as low as 18.6 (13.1-24.4) in the Central African Republic, 19.0 (14.3-23.7) in Somalia, and 23.4 (20.2-26.8) in Guinea-Bissau. The pace of progress achieved between 1990 and 2016 varied, with markedly faster improvements occurring between 2000 and 2016 for many countries in sub-Saharan Africa and southeast Asia, whereas several countries in Latin America and elsewhere saw progress stagnate after experiencing considerable advances in the HAQ Index between 1990 and 2000. Striking subnational disparities emerged in personal health-care access and quality, with China and India having particularly large gaps between locations with the highest and lowest scores in 2016. In China, performance ranged from 91.5 (89.1-936) in Beijing to 48.0 (43.4-53.2) in Tibet (a 43.5-point difference), while India saw a 30.8-point disparity, from 64.8 (59.6-68.8) in Goa to 34.0 (30.3-38.1) in Assam. Japan recorded the smallest range in subnational HAQ performance in 2016 (a 4.8-point difference), whereas differences between subnational locations with the highest and lowest HAQ Index values were more than two times as high for the USA and three times as high for England. State-level gaps in the HAQ Index in Mexico somewhat narrowed from 1990 to 2016 (from a 20.9-point to 17.0-point difference), whereas in Brazil, disparities slightly increased across states during this time (a 17.2-point to 20.4-point difference). Performance on the HAQ Index showed strong linkages to overall development, with high and high-middle SDI countries generally having higher scores and faster gains for non-communicable diseases. Nonetheless, countries across the development spectrum saw substantial gains in some key health service areas from 2000 to 2016, most notably vaccine-preventable diseases. Overall, national performance on the HAQ Index was positively associated with higher levels of total health spending per capita, as well as health systems inputs, but these relationships were quite heterogeneous, particularly among low-to-middle SDI countries. Interpretation GBD 2016 provides a more detailed understanding of past success and current challenges in improving personal health-care access and quality worldwide. Despite substantial gains since 2000, many low-SDI and middle-SDI countries face considerable challenges unless heightened policy action and investments focus on advancing access to and quality of health care across key health services, especially non-communicable diseases. Stagnating or minimal improvements experienced by several low-middle to high-middle SDI countries could reflect the complexities of re-orienting both primary and secondary health-care services beyond the more limited foci of the Millennium Development Goals. Alongside initiatives to strengthen public health programmes, the pursuit of universal health coverage upon improving both access and quality worldwide, and thus requires adopting a more comprehensive view and subsequent provision of quality health care for all populations. ; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Barbora de Courten is supported by a National Heart Foundation Future Leader Fellowship (100864). Ai Koyanagi's work is 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). Alberto Ortiz was supported by Spanish Government (Instituto de Salud Carlos III RETIC REDINREN RD16/0019 FEDER funds). Ashish Awasthi acknowledges funding support from Department of Science and Technology, Government of India through INSPIRE Faculty scheme Boris Bikbov has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 703226. Boris Bikbov acknowledges that work related to this paper has been done on the behalf of the GBD Genitourinary Disease Expert Group. Panniyammakal Jeemon acknowledges support from the clinical and public health intermediate fellowship from the Wellcome Trust and Department of Biotechnology, India Alliance (2015–20). Job F M van Boven was supported by the Department of Clinical Pharmacy & Pharmacology of the University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Netherlands. Olanrewaju Oladimeji is an African Research Fellow hosted by Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC), South Africa and he also has honorary affiliations with Walter Sisulu University (WSU), Eastern Cape, South Africa and School of Public Health, University of Namibia (UNAM), Namibia. He is indeed grateful for support from HSRC, WSU and UNAM. EUI is supported in part by the South African National Research Foundation (NRF UID: 86003). Ulrich Mueller acknowledges funding by the German National Cohort Study grant No 01ER1511/D, Gabrielle B Britton is supported by Secretaría Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación and Sistema Nacional de Investigación de Panamá. Giuseppe Remuzzi acknowledges that the work related to this paper has been done on behalf of the GBD Genitourinary Disease Expert Group. Behzad Heibati would like to acknowledge Air pollution Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS), Tehran, Iran. Syed Aljunid acknowledges the National University of Malaysia for providing the approval to participate in this GBD Project. Azeem Majeed and Imperial College London are grateful for support from the Northwest London National Insititute of Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research & Care. Tambe Ayuk acknowledges the Institute of Medical Research and Medicinal Plant Studies for office space provided. José das Neves was supported in his contribution to this work by a Fellowship from Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, Portugal (SFRH/BPD/92934/2013). João Fernandes gratefully acknowledges funding from FCT–Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (grant number UID/Multi/50016/2013). Jan-Walter De Neve was supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. Kebede Deribe is funded by a Wellcome Trust Intermediate Fellowship in Public Health and Tropical Medicine (201900). Kazem Rahimi was supported by grants from the Oxford Martin School, the NIHR Oxford BRC and the RCUK Global Challenges Research Fund. Laith J Abu-Raddad acknowledges the support of Qatar National Research Fund (NPRP 9-040-3-008) who provided the main funding for generating the data provided to the GBD-IHME effort. Liesl Zuhlke is funded by the national research foundation of South Africa and the Medical Research Council of South Africa. Monica Cortinovis acknowledges that work related to this paper has been done on the behalf of the GBD Genitourinary Disease Expert Group. Chuanhua Yu acknowleges support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number 81773552 and grant number 81273179) Norberto Perico acknowledges that work related to this paper has been done on behalf of the GBD Genitourinary Disease Expert Group. Charles Shey Wiysonge's work is supported by the South African Medical Research Council and the National Research Foundation of South Africa (grant numbers 106035 and 108571). John J McGrath is supported by grant APP1056929 from the John Cade Fellowship from the National Health and Medical Research Council and the Danish National Research Foundation (Niels Bohr Professorship). Quique Bassat is an ICREA (Catalan Institution for Research and Advanced Studies) research professor at ISGlobal. Richard G White is funded by the UK MRC and the UK Department for International Development (DFID) under the MRC/DFID Concordat agreement that is also part of the EDCTP2 programme supported by the European Union (MR/P002404/1), the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (TB Modelling and Analysis Consortium: OPP1084276/OPP1135288, CORTIS: OPP1137034/OPP1151915, Vaccines: OPP1160830), and UNITAID (4214-LSHTM-Sept15; PO 8477-0-600). Rafael Tabarés-Seisdedos was supported in part by grant number PROMETEOII/2015/021 from Generalitat Valenciana and the national grant PI17/00719 from ISCIII-FEDER. Mihajlo Jakovljevic acknowleges contribution from the Serbian Ministry of Education Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia (grant OI 175 014). Shariful Islam is funded by a Senior Fellowship from Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University and received career transition grants from High Blood Pressure Research Council of Australia. Sonia Saxena is funded by various grants from the NIHR. Stefanos Tyrovolas was supported by the Foundation for Education and European Culture, the Sara Borrell postdoctoral program (reference number CD15/00019 from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII–Spain) and the Fondos Europeo de Desarrollo Regional. Stefanos was awarded with a 6 months visiting fellowship funding at IHME from M-AES (reference no. MV16/00035 from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III). S Vittal Katikreddi was funded by a NHS Research Scotland Senior Clinical Fellowship (SCAF/15/02), the MRC (MC_UU_12017/13 & MC_ UU_12017/15) and the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office (SPHSU13 & SPHSU15). Traolach S Brugha has received funding from NHS Digital UK to collect data used in this study. The work of Hamid Badali was financially supported by Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran. The work of Stefan Lorkowski is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (nutriCARD, Grant agreement number 01EA1411A). Mariam Molokhia's research was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. We also thank the countless individuals who have contributed to GBD 2016 in various capacities. ; Peer reviewed
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 United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of USAID, the US Government, or MEASURE Evaluation. The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics granted the researchers access to relevant data in accordance with licence 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. ; Background Assessments of age-specific mortality and life expectancy have been done by the UN Population Division, Department of Economics and Social Affairs (UNPOP), the United States Census Bureau, WHO, and as part of previous iterations of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD). Previous iterations of the GBD used population estimates from UNPOP, which were not derived in a way that was internally consistent with the estimates of the numbers of deaths in the GBD. The present iteration of the GBD, GBD 2017, improves on previous assessments and provides timely estimates of the mortality experience of populations globally. Methods The GBD uses all available data to produce estimates of mortality rates between 1950 and 2017 for 23 age groups, both sexes, and 918 locations, including 195 countries and territories and subnational locations for 16 countries. Data used include vital registration systems, sample registration systems, household surveys (complete birth histories, summary birth histories, sibling histories), censuses (summary birth histories, household deaths), and Demographic Surveillance Sites. In total, this analysis used 8259 data sources. Estimates of the probability of death between birth and the age of 5 years and between ages 15 and 60 years are generated and then input into a model life table system to produce complete life tables for all locations and years. Fatal discontinuities and mortality due to HIV/AIDS are analysed separately and then incorporated into the estimation. We analyse the relationship between age-specific mortality and development status using the Socio-demographic Index, a composite measure based on fertility under the age of 25 years, education, and income. There are four main methodological improvements in GBD 2017 compared with GBD 2016: 622 additional data sources have been incorporated; new estimates of population, generated by the GBD study, are used; statistical methods used in different components of the analysis have been further standardised and improved; and the analysis has been extended backwards in time by two decades to start in 1950. Findings Globally, 18·7% (95% uncertainty interval 18·4–19·0) of deaths were registered in 1950 and that proportion has been steadily increasing since, with 58·8% (58·2–59·3) of all deaths being registered in 2015. At the global level, between 1950 and 2017, life expectancy increased from 48·1 years (46·5–49·6) to 70·5 years (70·1–70·8) for men and from 52·9 years (51·7–54·0) to 75·6 years (75·3–75·9) for women. Despite this overall progress, there remains substantial variation in life expectancy at birth in 2017, which ranges from 49·1 years (46·5–51·7) for men in the Central African Republic to 87·6 years (86·9–88·1) among women in Singapore. The greatest progress across age groups was for children younger than 5 years; under-5 mortality dropped from 216·0 deaths (196·3–238·1) per 1000 livebirths in 1950 to 38·9 deaths (35·6–42·83) per 1000 livebirths in 2017, with huge reductions across countries. Nevertheless, there were still 5·4 million (5·2–5·6) deaths among children younger than 5 years in the world in 2017. Progress has been less pronounced and more variable for adults, especially for adult males, who had stagnant or increasing mortality rates in several countries. The gap between male and female life expectancy between 1950 and 2017, while relatively stable at the global level, shows distinctive patterns across super-regions and has consistently been the largest in central Europe, eastern Europe, and central Asia, and smallest in south Asia. Performance was also variable across countries and time in observed mortality rates compared with those expected on the basis of development. Interpretation This analysis of age-sex-specific mortality shows that there are remarkably complex patterns in population mortality across countries. The findings of this study highlight global successes, such as the large decline in under-5 mortality, which reflects significant local, national, and global commitment and investment over several decades. However, they also bring attention to mortality patterns that are a cause for concern, particularly among adult men and, to a lesser extent, women, whose mortality rates have stagnated in many countries over the time period of this study, and in some cases are increasing. ; Research reported in this publication was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the University of Melbourne, Public Health England, the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health (award P30AG047845), and the National Institute of Mental Health of the National Institutes of Health (award R01MH110163). ; Peer reviewed