Completion of secondary school is increasingly viewed as a desirable life goal for young men and women in urban Kenya. Yet achieving this goal often conflicts with other key transitions to adulthood, such as becoming sexually active, marrying, having children, and finding employment. Drawing upon exceptionally rich life‐history calendar data from young people in Kisumu, Kenya, we explore how the timing and sequencing of key transitions affects the likelihood of secondary school completion. Conversely, we also examine how school enrollment and performance affect the timing of sexual initiation. Our findings indicate that sexual activity and the transition toward family formation are largely incompatible with young women's schooling. For men, however, romantic and sexual partnerships have no impact on schooling unless a partner becomes pregnant. Instead, paid employment appears to be least compatible with continued education.
ObjectiveWe hypothesised that adults living in overcrowded households were more likely to be diagnosed with Serious Mental Illness (SMI) or depression after accounting for individual, household and area-level factors. ApproachWe linked primary care records of adults currently registered with all general practices in the north-east London region on 21/03/2021 to housing data using pseudonymised unique property reference numbers (pUPRNs), giving a sample of 762,718 adults in 329,948 households. Primary outcomes were a primary care diagnosis of SMI or depression. Overcrowding was defined as <32.5m2 per person. We estimated the adjusted odds (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of SMI or depression when living in an overcrowded household, adjusting for individual (age, sex, ethnic group), household (size, composition), and area (Index of Multiple Deprivation) characteristics. We conducted logistic regression models with robust standard errors in RStudio. ResultsSMI and depression were diagnosed in 6,492 (0.9%) and 45,053 (5.9%) adults respectively; 584,515 (76.6%) adults lived in overcrowded households. In univariable analyses, household overcrowding was inversely related to risk of SMI or depression (aOR[CI]: 0.42 [0.39,0.44]; 0.62 [0.61,0.64]). The direction of effect reversed on adjustment for household size, composition, and area-level deprivation: 1.22 [1.12,1.33]; 1.07 [1.04,1.10] for SMI and depression respectively. ConclusionsWe found significant associations between SMI and depression and household overcrowding, using a novel method of record linkage to estimate household overcrowding but are not able to establish causality of observed associations in this cross-sectional study. ImplicationsMore research is needed to understand how housing conditions affect mental health.
Background: To effectively prevent, detect, and treat health conditions that affect people during their lifecourse, health-care professionals and researchers need to know which sections of the population are susceptible to which health conditions and at which ages. Hence, we aimed to map the course of human health by identifying the 50 most common health conditions in each decade of life and estimating the median age at first diagnosis. Methods: We developed phenotyping algorithms and codelists for physical and mental health conditions that involve intensive use of health-care resources. Individuals older than 1 year were included in the study if their primary-care and hospital-admission records met research standards set by the Clinical Practice Research Datalink and they had been registered in a general practice in England contributing up-to-standard data for at least 1 year during the study period. We used linked records of individuals from the CALIBER platform to calculate the sex-standardised cumulative incidence for these conditions by 10-year age groups between April 1, 2010, and March 31, 2015. We also derived the median age at diagnosis and prevalence estimates stratified by age, sex, and ethnicity (black, white, south Asian) over the study period from the primary-care and secondary-care records of patients. Findings: We developed case definitions for 308 disease phenotypes. We used records of 2 784 138 patients for the calculation of cumulative incidence and of 3 872 451 patients for the calculation of period prevalence and median age at diagnosis of these conditions. Conditions that first gained prominence at key stages of life were: atopic conditions and infections that led to hospital admission in children (<10 years); acne and menstrual disorders in the teenage years (10-19 years); mental health conditions, obesity, and migraine in individuals aged 20-29 years; soft-tissue disorders and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in individuals aged 30-39 years; dyslipidaemia, hypertension, and erectile dysfunction in individuals aged 40-59 years; cancer, osteoarthritis, benign prostatic hyperplasia, cataract, diverticular disease, type 2 diabetes, and deafness in individuals aged 60-79 years; and atrial fibrillation, dementia, acute and chronic kidney disease, heart failure, ischaemic heart disease, anaemia, and osteoporosis in individuals aged 80 years or older. Black or south-Asian individuals were diagnosed earlier than white individuals for 258 (84%) of the 308 conditions. Bone fractures and atopic conditions were recorded earlier in male individuals, whereas female individuals were diagnosed at younger ages with nutritional anaemias, tubulointerstitial nephritis, and urinary disorders. Interpretation: We have produced the first chronological map of human health with cumulative-incidence and period-prevalence estimates for multiple morbidities in parallel from birth to advanced age. This can guide clinicians, policy makers, and researchers on how to formulate differential diagnoses, allocate resources, and target research priorities on the basis of the knowledge of who gets which diseases when. We have published our phenotyping algorithms on the CALIBER open-access Portal which will facilitate future research by providing a curated list of reusable case definitions. Funding: Wellcome Trust, National Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council, Arthritis Research UK, British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates, Department of Health and Social Care (England), Health and Social Care Research and Development Division (Welsh Government), Public Health Agency (Northern Ireland), Economic and Social Research Council, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, National Institute for Social Care and Health Research, and The Alan Turing Institute.
AbstractBackgroundHydroxychloroquine has been shown to inhibit severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in vitro, but early clinical studies found no benefit treating patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We set out to evaluate the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine for prevention, as opposed to treatment, of COVID-19 mortality.MethodsWe pre-specified and conducted an observational, population-based cohort study using national primary care data and linked death registrations in the OpenSAFELY platform, representing 40% of the general population in England. We used Cox regression to estimate the association between ongoing routine hydroxychloroquine use prior to the COVID-19 outbreak in England and risk of COVID-19 mortality among people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Model adjustment was informed by a directed acyclic graph.ResultsOf 194,637 patients with RA or SLE, 30,569 (15.7%) received ≥ 2 prescriptions of hydroxychloroquine in the six months prior to 1 March 2020. Between 1 March 2020 and 13 July 2020, there were 547 COVID-19 deaths, 70 among hydroxychloroquine users. Estimated standardised cumulative COVID-19 mortality was 0.23% (95% CI 0.18–0.29) among users and 0.22% (95% CI 0.20–0.25) among non-users; an absolute difference of 0.008% (95% CI –0.051-0.066). After accounting for age, sex, ethnicity, use of other immunuosuppressives, and geographic region, no association with COVID-19 mortality was observed (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.80–1.33). We found no evidence of interactions with age or other immunosuppressives. Quantitative bias analyses indicated observed associations were robust to missing information regarding additional biologic treatments for rheumatological disease. We observed similar associations with the negative control outcome of non-COVID-19 mortality.ConclusionWe found no evidence of a difference in COVID-19 mortality among patients who received hydroxychloroquine for treatment of rheumatological disease prior to the COVID-19 outbreak in England.Research in contextEvidence before this studyPublished trials and observational studies to date have shown no evidence of benefit of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for hospitalised patients who already have COVID-19. A separate question remains: whether routine ongoing use of hydroxychloroquine in people without COVID-19 protects against new infections or severe outcomes. We searched MEDLINE/PubMed for pharmacoepidemiological studies evaluating hydroxychloroquine for prevention of severe COVID-19 outcomes. The keywords "hydroxychloroquine AND (COVID OR coronavirus OR SARS-CoV-2) AND (prophyl* OR prevent*) AND (rate OR hazard OR odds OR risk)" were used and results were filtered to articles from the last year with abstracts available. 109 papers were identified for screening; none investigated pre-exposure prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine for prevention of severe COVID-19 outcomes. Clinical trials of prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine are ongoing; however, the largest trial does not expect to meet recruitment targets due to "…unjustified extrapolation and exaggerated safety concerns together with intense politicisation and negative publicity." In the absence of reported clinical trials, evidence can be generated from real-world data to support the need for randomised clinical trials.Added value of this studyIn this cohort study representing 40% of the population of England, we investigated whether routine use of hydroxychloroquine prior to the COVID-19 outbreak prevented COVID-19 mortality. Using robust pharmacoepidemiological methods, we found no evidence to support a substantial benefit of hydroxychloroquine in preventing COVID-19 mortality. At the same time, we have shown no significant harm, and this generates the equipoise to justify continuing randomised trials. We have demonstrated in this study that it is feasible to address specific hypotheses about medicines in a rapid and transparent manner to inform interim clinical decision making and support the need for large-scale, randomised trial data.Implications of all the available evidenceThis is the first study to investigate the ongoing routine use of hydroxychloroquine and risk of COVID-19 mortality in a general population. While we found no evidence of any protective benefit, due to the observational nature of the study, residual confounding remains a possibility. Completion of trials for prevention of severe outcomes is warranted, but prior to the completion of these, we found no evidence to support the use of hydroxychloroquine for prevention of COVID-19 mortality.
