Comprehensive epidemiological data on prevalence, trends, and determinants of the use of unskilled birth attendants (traditional birth attendants (TBAs) and other unskilled birth attendants) are essential to policy decision-makers and health practitioners, to guide efforts and resource allocation. This study investigated the prevalence, trends, and drivers of the utilization of unskilled birth attendants during democratic governance in Nigeria from 1999 to 2018. The study used the Nigeria Demographic and Health Surveys data for the years 1999 (n = 3552), 2003 (n = 6029), 2008 (n = 28,647), 2013 (n = 31,482), and 2018 (34,193). Multivariate multinomial logistic regression was used to investigate the association between socioeconomic, demographic, health-service, and community-level factors with the utilization of TBAs and other unskilled birth attendants in Nigeria. Between 1999 and 2018, the study showed that the prevalence of TBA-assisted delivery remained unchanged (20.7%; 95% CI: 18.0–23.7% in 1999 and 20.5%; 95% CI: 18.9–22.1% in 2018). The prevalence of other-unskilled-birth-attendant use declined significantly from 45.5% (95% CI: 41.1–49.7%) in 2003 to 36.2% (95% CI: 34.5–38.0%) in 2018. Higher parental education, maternal employment, belonging to rich households, higher maternal age (35–49 years), frequent antenatal care (ANC) (≥4) visits, the proximity of health facilities, and female autonomy in households were associated with lower odds of unskilled birth attendants' utilization. Rural residence, geopolitical region, lower maternal age (15–24 years), and higher birth interval (≥2 years) were associated with higher odds of unskilled-birth-attendant-assisted deliveries. Reducing births assisted by unskilled birth attendants in Nigeria would require prioritized and scaled-up maternal health efforts that target all women, especially those from low socioeconomic backgrounds, those who do not attend antenatal care, and/or those who reside in rural areas.
Importance: The increasing burden due to cancer and other noncommunicable diseases poses a threat to human development, which has resulted in global political commitments reflected in the Sustainable Development Goals as well as the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Action Plan on Non-Communicable Diseases. To determine if these commitments have resulted in improved cancer control, quantitative assessments of the cancer burden are required. Objective: To assess the burden for 29 cancer groups over time to provide a framework for policy discussion, resource allocation, and research focus. Evidence Review: Cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) were evaluated for 195 countries and territories by age and sex using the Global Burden of Disease study estimation methods. Levels and trends were analyzed over time, as well as by the Sociodemographic Index (SDI). Changes in incident cases were categorized by changes due to epidemiological vs demographic transition. Findings: In 2016, there were 17.2 million cancer cases worldwide and 8.9 million deaths. Cancer cases increased by 28% between 2006 and 2016. The smallest increase was seen in high SDI countries. Globally, population aging contributed 17%; population growth, 12%; and changes in age-specific rates, -1% to this change. The most common incident cancer globally for men was prostate cancer (1.4 million cases). The leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs was tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer (1.2 million deaths and 25.4 million DALYs). For women, the most common incident cancer and the leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs was breast cancer (1.7 million incident cases, 535 000 deaths, and 14.9 million DALYs). In 2016, cancer caused 213.2 million DALYs globally for both sexes combined. Between 2006 and 2016, the average annual age-standardized incidence rates for all cancers combined increased in 130 of 195 countries or territories, and the average annual age-standardized death rates decreased within that timeframe in 143 of 195 countries or territories. Conclusions and Relevance: Large disparities exist between countries in cancer incidence, deaths, and associated disability. Scaling up cancer prevention and ensuring universal access to cancer care are required for health equity and to fulfill the global commitments for noncommunicable disease and cancer control.
Importance The increasing burden due to cancer and other noncommunicable diseases poses a threat to human development, which has resulted in global political commitments reflected in the Sustainable Development Goals as well as the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Action Plan on Non-Communicable Diseases. To determine if these commitments have resulted in improved cancer control, quantitative assessments of the cancer burden are required. Objective To assess the burden for 29 cancer groups over time to provide a framework for policy discussion, resource allocation, and research focus. Evidence Review Cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) were evaluated for 195 countries and territories by age and sex using the Global Burden of Disease study estimation methods. Levels and trends were analyzed over time, as well as by the Sociodemographic Index (SDI). Changes in incident cases were categorized by changes due to epidemiological vs demographic transition. Findings In 2016, there were 17.2 million cancer cases worldwide and 8.9 million deaths. Cancer cases increased by 28% between 2006 and 2016. The smallest increase was seen in high SDI countries. Globally, population aging contributed 17%; population growth, 12%; and changes in age-specific rates, −1% to this change. The most common incident cancer globally for men was prostate cancer (1.4 million cases). The leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs was tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer (1.2 million deaths and 25.4 million DALYs). For women, the most common incident cancer and the leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs was breast cancer (1.7 million incident cases, 535 000 deaths, and 14.9 million DALYs). In 2016, cancer caused 213.2 million DALYs globally for both sexes combined. Between 2006 and 2016, the average annual age-standardized incidence rates for all cancers combined increased in 130 of 195 countries or territories, and the average annual age-standardized death rates decreased within that timeframe in 143 of 195 countries or territories. Conclusions and Relevance Large disparities exist between countries in cancer incidence, deaths, and associated disability. Scaling up cancer prevention and ensuring universal access to cancer care are required for health equity and to fulfill the global commitments for noncommunicable disease and cancer control.
BACKGROUND: The number of individuals living with dementia is increasing, negatively affecting families, communities, and health-care systems around the world. A successful response to these challenges requires an accurate understanding of the dementia disease burden. We aimed to present the first detailed analysis of the global prevalence, mortality, and overall burden of dementia as captured by the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors (GBD) Study 2016, and highlight the most important messages for clinicians and neurologists. METHODS: GBD 2016 obtained data on dementia from vital registration systems, published scientific literature and surveys, and data from health-service encounters on deaths, excess mortality, prevalence, and incidence from 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2016, through systematic review and additional data-seeking efforts. To correct for differences in cause of death coding across time and locations, we modelled mortality due to dementia using prevalence data and estimates of excess mortality derived from countries that were most likely to code deaths to dementia relative to prevalence. Data were analysed by standardised methods to estimate deaths, prevalence, years of life lost (YLLs), years of life lived with disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs; computed as the sum of YLLs and YLDs), and the fractions of these metrics that were attributable to four risk factors that met GBD criteria for assessment (high body-mass index [BMI], high fasting plasma glucose, smoking, and a diet high in sugar-sweetened beverages). FINDINGS: In 2016, the global number of individuals who lived with dementia was 43·8 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 37·8-51·0), increased from 20.2 million (17·4-23·5) in 1990. This increase of 117% (95% UI 114-121) contrasted with a minor increase in age-standardised prevalence of 1·7% (1·0-2·4), from 701 cases (95% UI 602-815) per 100 000 population in 1990 to 712 cases (614-828) per 100 000 population in 2016. More women than men had dementia in 2016 (27·0 million, 95% UI 23·3-31·4, vs 16.8 million, 14.4-19.6), and dementia was the fifth leading cause of death globally, accounting for 2·4 million (95% UI 2·1-2·8) deaths. Overall, 28·8 million (95% UI 24·5-34·0) DALYs were attributed to dementia; 6·4 million (95% UI 3·4-10·5) of these could be attributed to the modifiable GBD risk factors of high BMI, high fasting plasma glucose, smoking, and a high intake of sugar-sweetened beverages. INTERPRETATION: The global number of people living with dementia more than doubled from 1990 to 2016, mainly due to increases in population ageing and growth. Although differences in coding for causes of death and the heterogeneity in case-ascertainment methods constitute major challenges to the estimation of the burden of dementia, future analyses should improve on the methods for the correction of these biases. Until breakthroughs are made in prevention or curative treatment, dementia will constitute an increasing challenge to health-care systems worldwide. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. ; AA received financial support from the Department of Science and Technology, Government of India, (New Delhi, India) through the INSPIRE Faculty program. MSBS received Australian Government Research and Training Program funding for post-graduates to study at the Australian National University (Canberra, ACT, Australia). FC acknowledges support from the European Union (FEDER funds POCI/01/0145/FEDER/007728 and POCI/01/0145/FEDER/007265) and National Funds (FCT/MEC, Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia and Ministério da Educação e Ciência) under the Partnership Agreements PT2020 UID/MULTI/04378/2013 and PT2020 UID/QUI/50006/2013. EC is supported by an Australian Research Council Future fellowship (FT3 140100085). AK was 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 (ISCIII-FEDER). MOO is supported by grant U54HG007479 from the National Institutes of Health. TCR is a member of the Alzheimer Scotland Dementia Research Centre (University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK) and is supported by Alzheimer Scotland. RT-S was partly supported by grant number PROMETEOII/2015/021 from Generalitat Valenciana and the national grant PI17/00719 from ISCIII-FEDER. TW acknowledges academic support from University of Rajarata (Mihintale, Sri Lanka). ; Sí
Importance: The increasing burden due to cancer and other noncommunicable diseases poses a threat to human development, which has resulted in global political commitments reflected in the Sustainable Development Goals as well as the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Action Plan on Non-Communicable Diseases. To determine if these commitments have resulted in improved cancer control, quantitative assessments of the cancer burden are required. Objective: To assess the burden for 29 cancer groups over time to provide a framework for policy discussion, resource allocation, and research focus. Evidence Review: Cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) were evaluated for 195 countries and territories by age and sex using the Global Burden of Disease study estimation methods. Levels and trends were analyzed over time, as well as by the Sociodemographic Index (SDI). Changes in incident cases were categorized by changes due to epidemiological vs demographic transition. Findings: In 2016, there were 17.2 million cancer cases worldwide and 8.9 million deaths. Cancer cases increased by 28% between 2006 and 2016. The smallest increase was seen in high SDI countries. Globally, population aging contributed 17%; population growth, 12%; and changes in age-specific rates, -1% to this change. The most common incident cancer globally for men was prostate cancer (1.4 million cases). The leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs was tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer (1.2 million deaths and 25.4 million DALYs). For women, the most common incident cancer and the leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs was breast cancer (1.7 million incident cases, 535 000 deaths, and 14.9 million DALYs). In 2016, cancer caused 213.2 million DALYs globally for both sexes combined. Between 2006 and 2016, the average annual age-standardized incidence rates for all cancers combined increased in 130 of 195 countries or territories, and the average annual age-standardized death rates decreased within that timeframe in 143 of 195 countries or territories. Conclusions and Relevance: Large disparities exist between countries in cancer incidence, deaths, and associated disability. Scaling up cancer prevention and ensuring universal access to cancer care are required for health equity and to fulfill the global commitments for noncommunicable disease and cancer control.
Background: Neurological disorders are increasingly recognised as major causes of death and disability worldwide. The aim of this analysis from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2016 is to provide the most comprehensive and up-to-date estimates of the global, regional, and national burden from neurological disorders. Methods: We estimated prevalence, incidence, deaths, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs; the sum of years of life lost [YLLs] and years lived with disability [YLDs]) by age and sex for 15 neurological disorder categories (tetanus, meningitis, encephalitis, stroke, brain and other CNS cancers, traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injury, Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, motor neuron diseases, idiopathic epilepsy, migraine, tension-type headache, and a residual category for other less common neurological disorders) in 195 countries from 1990 to 2016. DisMod-MR 2.1, a Bayesian meta-regression tool, was the main method of estimation of prevalence and incidence, and the Cause of Death Ensemble model (CODEm) was used for mortality estimation. We quantified the contribution of 84 risks and combinations of risk to the disease estimates for the 15 neurological disorder categories using the GBD comparative risk assessment approach. Findings: Globally, in 2016, neurological disorders were the leading cause of DALYs (276 million [95% UI 247–308]) and second leading cause of deaths (9·0 million [8·8–9·4]). The absolute number of deaths and DALYs from all neurological disorders combined increased (deaths by 39% [34–44] and DALYs by 15% [9–21]) whereas their age-standardised rates decreased (deaths by 28% [26–30] and DALYs by 27% [24–31]) between 1990 and 2016. The only neurological disorders that had a decrease in rates and absolute numbers of deaths and DALYs were tetanus, meningitis, and encephalitis. The four largest contributors of neurological DALYs were stroke (42·2% [38·6–46·1]), migraine (16·3% [11·7–20·8]), Alzheimer's and other dementias (10·4% [9·0–12·1]), and meningitis (7·9% [6·6–10·4]). For the combined neurological disorders, age-standardised DALY rates were significantly higher in males than in females (male-to-female ratio 1·12 [1·05–1·20]), but migraine, multiple sclerosis, and tension-type headache were more common and caused more burden in females, with male-to-female ratios of less than 0·7. The 84 risks quantified in GBD explain less than 10% of neurological disorder DALY burdens, except stroke, for which 88·8% (86·5–90·9) of DALYs are attributable to risk factors, and to a lesser extent Alzheimer's disease and other dementias (22·3% [11·8–35·1] of DALYs are risk attributable) and idiopathic epilepsy (14·1% [10·8–17·5] of DALYs are risk attributable). Interpretation: Globally, the burden of neurological disorders, as measured by the absolute number of DALYs, continues to increase. As populations are growing and ageing, and the prevalence of major disabling neurological disorders steeply increases with age, governments will face increasing demand for treatment, rehabilitation, and support services for neurological disorders. The scarcity of established modifiable risks for most of the neurological burden demonstrates that new knowledge is required to develop effective prevention and treatment strategies. Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) and spinal cord injury (SCI) are increasingly recognised as global health priorities in view of the preventability of most injuries and the complex and expensive medical care they necessitate. We aimed to measure the incidence, prevalence, and years of life lived with disability (YLDs) for TBI and SCI from all causes of injury in every country, to describe how these measures have changed between 1990 and 2016, and to estimate the proportion of TBI and SCI cases caused by different types of injury. METHODS: We used results from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors (GBD) Study 2016 to measure the global, regional, and national burden of TBI and SCI by age and sex. We measured the incidence and prevalence of all causes of injury requiring medical care in inpatient and outpatient records, literature studies, and survey data. By use of clinical record data, we estimated the proportion of each cause of injury that required medical care that would result in TBI or SCI being considered as the nature of injury. We used literature studies to establish standardised mortality ratios and applied differential equations to convert incidence to prevalence of long-term disability. Finally, we applied GBD disability weights to calculate YLDs. We used a Bayesian meta-regression tool for epidemiological modelling, used cause-specific mortality rates for non-fatal estimation, and adjusted our results for disability experienced with comorbid conditions. We also analysed results on the basis of the Socio-demographic Index, a compound measure of income per capita, education, and fertility. FINDINGS: In 2016, there were 27·08 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 24·30-30·30 million) new cases of TBI and 0·93 million (0·78-1·16 million) new cases of SCI, with age-standardised incidence rates of 369 (331-412) per 100 000 population for TBI and 13 (11-16) per 100 000 for SCI. In 2016, the number of prevalent cases of TBI was 55·50 million (53·40-57·62 million) and of SCI was 27·04 million (24·98-30·15 million). From 1990 to 2016, the age-standardised prevalence of TBI increased by 8·4% (95% UI 7·7 to 9·2), whereas that of SCI did not change significantly (-0·2% [-2·1 to 2·7]). Age-standardised incidence rates increased by 3·6% (1·8 to 5·5) for TBI, but did not change significantly for SCI (-3·6% [-7·4 to 4·0]). TBI caused 8·1 million (95% UI 6·0-10·4 million) YLDs and SCI caused 9·5 million (6·7-12·4 million) YLDs in 2016, corresponding to age-standardised rates of 111 (82-141) per 100 000 for TBI and 130 (90-170) per 100 000 for SCI. Falls and road injuries were the leading causes of new cases of TBI and SCI in most regions. INTERPRETATION: TBI and SCI constitute a considerable portion of the global injury burden and are caused primarily by falls and road injuries. The increase in incidence of TBI over time might continue in view of increases in population density, population ageing, and increasing use of motor vehicles, motorcycles, and bicycles. The number of individuals living with SCI is expected to increase in view of population growth, which is concerning because of the specialised care that people with SCI can require. Our study was limited by data sparsity in some regions, and it will be important to invest greater resources in collection of data for TBI and SCI to improve the accuracy of future assessments. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. ; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation ; We acknowledge the funding and support of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. AK was supported by the Miguel Servet contract, which was financed by the CP13/00150 and PI15/00862 projects integrated into the National Research, Development, and Implementation,and funded by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III General Branch Evaluation and Promotion of Health Research and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF-FEDER). AMS is supported by the Egyptian Fulbright Mission Program. AF acknowledges the Federal University of Sergipe (Sergipe, Brazil). AA received financial assistance from the Indian Department of Science and Technology (New Delhi, India) through the INSPIRE faculty programme. AS is supported by Health Data Research UK. DJS is supported by the South African Medical Research Council. AB is supported by the Public Health Agency of Canada. SMSI received a senior research fellowship from the Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University (Waurn Ponds, VIC, Australia), and a career transition grant from the High Blood Pressure Research Council of Australia. FP and CF acknowledge support from the European Union (FEDER funds POCI/01/0145/FEDER/007728 and POCI/01/0145/FEDER/007265) and National Funds (FCT/MEC, Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, and Ministério da Educação e Ciência) under the Partnership Agreements PT2020 UID/MULTI/04378/2013 and PT2020 UID/QUI/50006/2013. TB acknowledges financial support from the Institute of Medical Research and Medicinal Plant Studies, Yaoundé, Cameroon. AM of Imperial College London is grateful for support from the Northwest London National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research andCare and the Imperial NIHR Biomedical Research Centre. KD is funded by a Wellcome Trust Intermediate Fellowship in Public Health and Tropical Medicine (grant number 201900). PSA is supported by an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Early Career Fellowship. RT-S was supported in part by grant number PROMETEOII/2015/021 from Generalitat Valenciana and the national grant PI17/00719 from ISCIII-FEDER. The Serbian part of this contribution (by MJ) has been co-financed with grant OI175014 from the Serbian Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development; publication of results was not contingent upon the Ministry's approval. MMMSM acknowledges support from the Serbian Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development (contract 175087). MM's research was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust (London, UK) and King's College London. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the UK National Health Service, the NIHR, or the UK Department of Health. TWB was supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation through the Alexander von Humboldt professor award, which was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research ; Sí
High-resolution estimates of HIV burden across space and time provide an important tool for tracking and monitoring the progress of prevention and control efforts and assist with improving the precision and efficiency of targeting efforts. We aimed to assess HIV incidence and HIV mortality for all second-level administrative units across sub-Saharan Africa. ; his work was primarily supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (grant OPP1132415). Additionally, O Adetokunboh acknowledges the support of the Department of Science and Innovation, and National Research Foundation of South Africa. M Ausloos, A Pana, and C Herteliu are partially supported by a grant of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation, Executive Agency for Higher Education, Research, Development and Innovation Funding (Romania; project number PN-III-P4-ID-PCCF-2016-0084). T W Bärnighausen was supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation through the Alexander von Humboldt Professor award, funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research. M J Bockarie is supported by the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership. F Carvalho and E Fernandes acknowledge support from Portuguese national funds (Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia and Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Ensino Superior; UIDB/50006/2020, UIDB/04378/2020, and UIDP/04378/2020. K Deribe is supported by the Wellcome Trust (grant 201900/Z/16/Z) as part of his International Intermediate Fellowship. B-F Hwang was partially supported by China Medical University (CMU107-Z-04), Taichung, Taiwan. M Jakovljevic acknowledges support of the Serbia Ministry of Education Science and Technological Development (grant OI 175 014). M N Khan acknowledges the support of Jatiya Kabi Kazi Nazrul Islam University, Bangladesh. Y J Kim was supported by the Research Management Centre, Xiamen University Malaysia, Malaysia, (XMUMRF/2020-C6/ITCM/0004). K Krishnan is supported by University Grants Commission Centre of Advanced Study, (CAS II), awarded to the Department of Anthropology, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India. M Kumar would like to acknowledge National Institutes of Health and Fogarty International Cente (K43TW010716). I Landires is a member of the Sistema Nacional de Investigación, which is supported by the Secretaría Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación, Panama. W Mendoza is a program analyst in population and development at the UN Population Fund Country Office in Peru, which does not necessarily endorse this study. M Phetole received institutional support from the Grants, Innovation and Product Development Unit, South African Medical Research Council. O Odukoya acknowledges support from the Fogarty International Center of the US National Institutes of Health (K43TW010704). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the US National Institutes of Health. O Oladimeji is grateful for the support from Walter Sisulu University, Eastern Cape, South Africa, the University of Botswana, Botswana, and the University of Technology of Durban, Durban, South Africa. J R Padubidri acknowledges support from Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, India. G C Patton is supported by an Australian Government National Health and Medical Research Council research fellowship. P Rathi acknowledges Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal India. A I Ribeiro was supported by National Funds through Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, under the programme of Stimulus of Scientific Employment–Individual Support (CEECIND/02386/2018). A M Samy acknowledges the support of the Egyptian Fulbright Mission Program. F Sha was supported by the Shenzhen Social Science Fund (SZ2020C015) and the Shenzhen Science and Technology Program (KQTD20190929172835662). A Sheikh is supported by Health Data Research UK. N Taveira acknowledges partial funding by Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, Portugal, and Aga Khan Development Network—Portugal Collaborative Research Network in Portuguese-speaking countries in Africa (332821690), and by the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (RIA2016MC-1615). C S Wiysonge is supported by the South African Medical Research Council. Y Zhang was supported by the Science and Technology Research Project of Hubei Provincial Department of Education (Q20201104) and Open Fund Project of Hubei Province Key Laboratory of Occupational Hazard Identification and Control (OHIC2020Y01).Editorial note: the Lancet Group takes a neutral position with respect to territorial claims in published maps and institutional affiliations
High-resolution estimates of HIV burden across space and time provide an important tool for tracking and monitoring the progress of prevention and control efforts and assist with improving the precision and efficiency of targeting efforts. We aimed to assess HIV incidence and HIV mortality for all second-level administrative units across sub-Saharan Africa. ; his work was primarily supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (grant OPP1132415). Additionally, O Adetokunboh acknowledges the support of the Department of Science and Innovation, and National Research Foundation of South Africa. M Ausloos, A Pana, and C Herteliu are partially supported by a grant of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation, Executive Agency for Higher Education, Research, Development and Innovation Funding (Romania; project number PN-III-P4-ID-PCCF-2016-0084). T W Bärnighausen was supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation through the Alexander von Humboldt Professor award, funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research. M J Bockarie is supported by the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership. F Carvalho and E Fernandes acknowledge support from Portuguese national funds (Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia and Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Ensino Superior; UIDB/50006/2020, UIDB/04378/2020, and UIDP/04378/2020. K Deribe is supported by the Wellcome Trust (grant 201900/Z/16/Z) as part of his International Intermediate Fellowship. B-F Hwang was partially supported by China Medical University (CMU107-Z-04), Taichung, Taiwan. M Jakovljevic acknowledges support of the Serbia Ministry of Education Science and Technological Development (grant OI 175 014). M N Khan acknowledges the support of Jatiya Kabi Kazi Nazrul Islam University, Bangladesh. Y J Kim was supported by the Research Management Centre, Xiamen University Malaysia, Malaysia, (XMUMRF/2020-C6/ITCM/0004). K Krishnan is supported by University Grants Commission Centre of Advanced Study, (CAS II), awarded to the Department of Anthropology, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India. M Kumar would like to acknowledge National Institutes of Health and Fogarty International Cente (K43TW010716). I Landires is a member of the Sistema Nacional de Investigación, which is supported by the Secretaría Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación, Panama. W Mendoza is a program analyst in population and development at the UN Population Fund Country Office in Peru, which does not necessarily endorse this study. M Phetole received institutional support from the Grants, Innovation and Product Development Unit, South African Medical Research Council. O Odukoya acknowledges support from the Fogarty International Center of the US National Institutes of Health (K43TW010704). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the US National Institutes of Health. O Oladimeji is grateful for the support from Walter Sisulu University, Eastern Cape, South Africa, the University of Botswana, Botswana, and the University of Technology of Durban, Durban, South Africa. J R Padubidri acknowledges support from Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, India. G C Patton is supported by an Australian Government National Health and Medical Research Council research fellowship. P Rathi acknowledges Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal India. A I Ribeiro was supported by National Funds through Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, under the programme of Stimulus of Scientific Employment–Individual Support (CEECIND/02386/2018). A M Samy acknowledges the support of the Egyptian Fulbright Mission Program. F Sha was supported by the Shenzhen Social Science Fund (SZ2020C015) and the Shenzhen Science and Technology Program (KQTD20190929172835662). A Sheikh is supported by Health Data Research UK. N Taveira acknowledges partial funding by Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, Portugal, and Aga Khan Development Network—Portugal Collaborative Research Network in Portuguese-speaking countries in Africa (332821690), and by the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (RIA2016MC-1615). C S Wiysonge is supported by the South African Medical Research Council. Y Zhang was supported by the Science and Technology Research Project of Hubei Provincial Department of Education (Q20201104) and Open Fund Project of Hubei Province Key Laboratory of Occupational Hazard Identification and Control (OHIC2020Y01).Editorial note: the Lancet Group takes a neutral position with respect to territorial claims in published maps and institutional affiliations
Importance: Cancer and other noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are now widely recognized as a threat to global development. The latest United Nations high-level meeting on NCDs reaffirmed this observation and also highlighted the slow progress in meeting the 2011 Political Declaration on the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases and the third Sustainable Development Goal. Lack of situational analyses, priority setting, and budgeting have been identified as major obstacles in achieving these goals. All of these have in common that they require information on the local cancer epidemiology. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study is uniquely poised to provide these crucial data. Objective: To describe cancer burden for 29 cancer groups in 195 countries from 1990 through 2017 to provide data needed for cancer control planning. Evidence Review: We used the GBD study estimation methods to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). Results are presented at the national level as well as by Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a composite indicator of income, educational attainment, and total fertility rate. We also analyzed the influence of the epidemiological vs the demographic transition on cancer incidence. Findings: In 2017, there were 24.5 million incident cancer cases worldwide (16.8 million without nonmelanoma skin cancer [NMSC]) and 9.6 million cancer deaths. The majority of cancer DALYs came from years of life lost (97%), and only 3% came from years lived with disability. The odds of developing cancer were the lowest in the low SDI quintile (1 in 7) and the highest in the high SDI quintile (1 in 2) for both sexes. In 2017, the most common incident cancers in men were NMSC (4.3 million incident cases); tracheal, bronchus, and lung (TBL) cancer (1.5 million incident cases); and prostate cancer (1.3 million incident cases). The most common causes of cancer deaths and DALYs for men were TBL cancer (1.3 million deaths and 28.4 million DALYs), liver cancer (572000 deaths and 15.2 million DALYs), and stomach cancer (542000 deaths and 12.2 million DALYs). For women in 2017, the most common incident cancers were NMSC (3.3 million incident cases), breast cancer (1.9 million incident cases), and colorectal cancer (819000 incident cases). The leading causes of cancer deaths and DALYs for women were breast cancer (601000 deaths and 17.4 million DALYs), TBL cancer (596000 deaths and 12.6 million DALYs), and colorectal cancer (414000 deaths and 8.3 million DALYs). Conclusions and Relevance: The national epidemiological profiles of cancer burden in the GBD study show large heterogeneities, which are a reflection of different exposures to risk factors, economic settings, lifestyles, and access to care and screening. The GBD study can be used by policy makers and other stakeholders to develop and improve national and local cancer control in order to achieve the global targets and improve equity in cancer care.
BACKGROUND: Timely assessment of the burden of HIV/AIDS is essential for policy setting and programme evaluation. In this report from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015 (GBD 2015), we provide national estimates of levels and trends of HIV/AIDS incidence, prevalence, coverage of antiretroviral therapy (ART), and mortality for 195 countries and territories from 1980 to 2015. METHODS: For countries without high-quality vital registration data, we estimated prevalence and incidence with data from antenatal care clinics and population-based seroprevalence surveys, and with assumptions by age and sex on initial CD4 distribution at infection, CD4 progression rates (probability of progression from higher to lower CD4 cell-count category), on and off antiretroviral therapy (ART) mortality, and mortality from all other causes. Our estimation strategy links the GBD 2015 assessment of all-cause mortality and estimation of incidence and prevalence so that for each draw from the uncertainty distribution all assumptions used in each step are internally consistent. We estimated incidence, prevalence, and death with GBD versions of the Estimation and Projection Package (EPP) and Spectrum software originally developed by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). We used an open-source version of EPP and recoded Spectrum for speed, and used updated assumptions from systematic reviews of the literature and GBD demographic data. For countries with high-quality vital registration data, we developed the cohort incidence bias adjustment model to estimate HIV incidence and prevalence largely from the number of deaths caused by HIV recorded in cause-of-death statistics. We corrected these statistics for garbage coding and HIV misclassification. FINDINGS: Global HIV incidence reached its peak in 1997, at 3·3 million new infections (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 3·1-3·4 million). Annual incidence has stayed relatively constant at about 2·6 million per year (range 2·5-2·8 million) since 2005, after a period of fast decline between 1997 and 2005. The number of people living with HIV/AIDS has been steadily increasing and reached 38·8 million (95% UI 37·6-40·4 million) in 2015. At the same time, HIV/AIDS mortality has been declining at a steady pace, from a peak of 1·8 million deaths (95% UI 1·7-1·9 million) in 2005, to 1·2 million deaths (1·1-1·3 million) in 2015. We recorded substantial heterogeneity in the levels and trends of HIV/AIDS across countries. Although many countries have experienced decreases in HIV/AIDS mortality and in annual new infections, other countries have had slowdowns or increases in rates of change in annual new infections. INTERPRETATION: Scale-up of ART and prevention of mother-to-child transmission has been one of the great successes of global health in the past two decades. However, in the past decade, progress in reducing new infections has been slow, development assistance for health devoted to HIV has stagnated, and resources for health in low-income countries have grown slowly. Achievement of the new ambitious goals for HIV enshrined in Sustainable Development Goal 3 and the 90-90-90 UNAIDS targets will be challenging, and will need continued efforts from governments and international agencies in the next 15 years to end AIDS by 2030. ; Funding: We thank the countless individuals who have contributed to the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study 2015 in various capacities. We specifically thank Jeffrey Eaton and John Stover. HW and CJLM received funding for this study from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; the National Institute of Mental Health, National Institutes of Health (NIH; R01MH110163); and the National Institute on Aging, NIH (P30AG047845). LJAR acknowledges the support of Qatar National Research Fund (NPRP 04-924-3-251) who provided the main funding for generating the data provided to the GBD-Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation effort. BPAQ acknowledges institutional support from PRONABEC (National Program of Scholarship and Educational Loan), provided by the Peruvian government. DB is supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (grant number OPP1068048). JDN was supported in his contribution to this work by a Fellowship from Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia, Portugal (SFRH/BPD/92934/2013). KD is supported by a Wellcome Trust Fellowship in Public Health and Tropical Medicine (grant number 099876). TF received financial support from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF; project number P300P3-154634). AG acknowledges funding from Sistema Nacional de Investigadores de Panama-SNI. PJ is supported by Wellcome Trust-DBT India Alliance Clinical and Public Health Intermediate Fellowship. MK receives research support from the Academy of Finland, the Swedish Research Council, Alzheimerfonden, Alzheimer's Research & Prevention Foundation, Center for Innovative Medicine (CIMED) at Karolinska Institutet South Campus, AXA Research Fund, Wallenberg Clinical Scholars Award from the Knut och Alice Wallenbergs Foundation, and the Sheika Salama Bint Hamdan Al Nahyan Foundation. AK's work was 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). SML is funded by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinician Scientist Fellowship (grant number NIHR/CS/010/014). HJL reports grants from the NIHR, EU Innovative Medicines Initiative, Centre for Strategic & International Studies, and WHO. WM is Program analyst, Population and Development, in the Peru Country Office of the United Nations Population Fund, which does not necessarily endorse this study. For UOM, funding from the German National Cohort Consortium (O1ER1511D) is gratefully acknowledged. KR reports grants from NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, NIHR Career Development Fellowship, and Oxford Martin School during the conduct of the study. GR acknowledges that work related to this paper has been done on the behalf of the GBD Genitourinary Disease Expert Group supported by the International Society of Nephrology (ISN). ISS reports grants from FAPESP (Brazilian public agency). RSS receives institutional support from Universidad de Ciencias Aplicadas y Ambientales, UDCA, Bogota Colombia. SS receives postdoctoral funding from the Fonds de la recherche en sante du Quebec (FRSQ), including its renewal. RTS was supported in part by grant number PROMETEOII/2015/021 from Generalitat Valenciana and the national grant PI14/00894 from ISCIII-FEDER. PY acknowledges support from Strategic Public Policy Research (HKU7003-SPPR-12).
Background: timely assessment of the burden of HIV/AIDS is essential for policy setting and programme evaluation. In this report from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015 (GBD 2015), we provide national estimates of levels and trends of HIV/AIDS incidence, prevalence, coverage of antiretroviral therapy (ART), and mortality for 195 countries and territories from 1980 to 2015. Methods: for countries without high-quality vital registration data, we estimated prevalence and incidence with data from antenatal care clinics and population-based seroprevalence surveys, and with assumptions by age and sex on initial CD4 distribution at infection, CD4 progression rates (probability of progression from higher to lower CD4 cell-count category), on and off antiretroviral therapy (ART) mortality, and mortality from all other causes. Our estimation strategy links the GBD 2015 assessment of all-cause mortality and estimation of incidence and prevalence so that for each draw from the uncertainty distribution all assumptions used in each step are internally consistent. We estimated incidence, prevalence, and death with GBD versions of the Estimation and Projection Package (EPP) and Spectrum software originally developed by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). We used an open-source version of EPP and recoded Spectrum for speed, and used updated assumptions from systematic reviews of the literature and GBD demographic data. For countries with high-quality vital registration data, we developed the cohort incidence bias adjustment model to estimate HIV incidence and prevalence largely from the number of deaths caused by HIV recorded in cause-of-death statistics. We corrected these statistics for garbage coding and HIV misclassification. Findings: global HIV incidence reached its peak in 1997, at 3·3 million new infections (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 3·1–3·4 million). Annual incidence has stayed relatively constant at about 2·6 million per year (range 2·5–2·8 million) since 2005, after a period of fast decline between 1997 and 2005. The number of people living with HIV/AIDS has been steadily increasing and reached 38·8 million (95% UI 37·6–40·4 million) in 2015. At the same time, HIV/AIDS mortality has been declining at a steady pace, from a peak of 1·8 million deaths (95% UI 1·7–1·9 million) in 2005, to 1·2 million deaths (1·1–1·3 million) in 2015. We recorded substantial heterogeneity in the levels and trends of HIV/AIDS across countries. Although many countries have experienced decreases in HIV/AIDS mortality and in annual new infections, other countries have had slowdowns or increases in rates of change in annual new infections. Interpretation: scale-up of ART and prevention of mother-to-child transmission has been one of the great successes of global health in the past two decades. However, in the past decade, progress in reducing new infections has been slow, development assistance for health devoted to HIV has stagnated, and resources for health in low-income countries have grown slowly. Achievement of the new ambitious goals for HIV enshrined in Sustainable Development Goal 3 and the 90-90-90 UNAIDS targets will be challenging, and will need continued efforts from governments and international agencies in the next 15 years to end AIDS by 2030. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and National Institute of Mental Health and National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health
Background Timely assessment of the burden of HIV/AIDS is essential for policy setting and programme evaluation. In this report from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015 (GBD 2015), we provide national estimates of levels and trends of HIV/AIDS incidence, prevalence, coverage of antiretroviral therapy (ART), and mortality for 195 countries and territories from 1980 to 2015. Methods For countries without high-quality vital registration data, we estimated prevalence and incidence with data from antenatal care clinics and population-based seroprevalence surveys, and with assumptions by age and sex on initial CD4 distribution at infection, CD4 progression rates (probability of progression from higher to lower CD4 cell-count category), on and off antiretroviral therapy (ART) mortality, and mortality from all other causes. Our estimation strategy links the GBD 2015 assessment of all-cause mortality and estimation of incidence and prevalence so that for each draw from the uncertainty distribution all assumptions used in each step are internally consistent. We estimated incidence, prevalence, and death with GBD versions of the Estimation and Projection Package (EPP) and Spectrum software originally developed by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). We used an open-source version of EPP and recoded Spectrum for speed, and used updated assumptions from systematic reviews of the literature and GBD demographic data. For countries with high-quality vital registration data, we developed the cohort incidence bias adjustment model to estimate HIV incidence and prevalence largely from the number of deaths caused by HIV recorded in cause-of-death statistics. We corrected these statistics for garbage coding and HIV misclassification. Findings Global HIV incidence reached its peak in 1997, at 3.3 million new infections (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 3.1-3.4 million). Annual incidence has stayed relatively constant at about 2.6 million per year (range 2.5-2.8 million) since 2005, after a period of fast decline between 1997 and 2005. The number of people living with HIV/AIDS has been steadily increasing and reached 38.8 million (95% UI 37.6-40.4 million) in 2015. At the same time, HIV/AIDS mortality has been declining at a steady pace, from a peak of 1.8 million deaths (95% UI 1.7-1.9 million) in 2005, to 1.2 million deaths (1.1-1.3 million) in 2015. We recorded substantial heterogeneity in the levels and trends of HIV/AIDS across countries. Although many countries have experienced decreases in HIV/AIDS mortality and in annual new infections, other countries have had slowdowns or increases in rates of change in annual new infections. Interpretation Scale-up of ART and prevention of mother-to-child transmission has been one of the great successes of global health in the past two decades. However, in the past decade, progress in reducing new infections has been slow, development assistance for health devoted to HIV has stagnated, and resources for health in low-income countries have grown slowly. Achievement of the new ambitious goals for HIV enshrined in Sustainable Development Goal 3 and the 90-90-90 UNAIDS targets will be challenging, and will need continued efforts from governments and international agencies in the next 15 years to end AIDS by 2030. Copyright (C) The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY license
Background: Achieving universal health coverage (UHC) involves all people receiving the health services they need, of high quality, without experiencing financial hardship. Making progress towards UHC is a policy priority for both countries and global institutions, as highlighted by the agenda of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and WHO's Thirteenth General Programme of Work (GPW13). Measuring effective coverage at the health-system level is important for understanding whether health services are aligned with countries' health profiles and are of sufficient quality to produce health gains for populations of all ages. Methods: Based on the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019, we assessed UHC effective coverage for 204 countries and territories from 1990 to 2019. Drawing from a measurement framework developed through WHO's GPW13 consultation, we mapped 23 effective coverage indicators to a matrix representing health service types (eg, promotion, prevention, and treatment) and five population-age groups spanning from reproductive and newborn to older adults (>= 65 years). Effective coverage indicators were based on intervention coverage or outcome-based measures such as mortality-to-incidence ratios to approximate access to quality care; outcome-based measures were transformed to values on a scale of 0-100 based on the 2.5th and 97.5th percentile of location-year values. We constructed the UHC effective coverage index by weighting each effective coverage indicator relative to its associated potential health gains, as measured by disability-adjusted life-years for each location-year and population-age group. For three tests of validity (content, known-groups, and convergent), UHC effective coverage index performance was generally better than that of other UHC service coverage indices from WHO (ie, the current metric for SDG indicator 3.8.1 on UHC service coverage), the World Bank, and GBD 2017. We quantified frontiers of UHC effective coverage performance on the basis of pooled health spending per capita, representing UHC effective coverage index levels achieved in 2019 relative to country-level government health spending, prepaid private expenditures, and development assistance for health. To assess current trajectories towards the GPW13 UHC billion target-1 billion more people benefiting from UHC by 2023-we estimated additional population equivalents with UHC effective coverage from 2018 to 2023. Findings: Globally, performance on the UHC effective coverage index improved from 45.8 (95% uncertainty interval 44.2-47.5) in 1990 to 60.3 (58.7-61.9) in 2019, yet country-level UHC effective coverage in 2019 still spanned from 95 or higher in Japan and Iceland to lower than 25 in Somalia and the Central African Republic. Since 2010, sub-Saharan Africa showed accelerated gains on the UHC effective coverage index (at an average increase of 2.6% [1.9-3.3] per year up to 2019); by contrast, most other GBD super-regions had slowed rates of progress in 2010-2019 relative to 1990-2010. Many countries showed lagging performance on effective coverage indicators for non-communicable diseases relative to those for communicable diseases and maternal and child health, despite non-communicable diseases accounting for a greater proportion of potential health gains in 2019, suggesting that many health systems are not keeping pace with the rising non-communicable disease burden and associated population health needs. In 2019, the UHC effective coverage index was associated with pooled health spending per capita (r=0.79), although countries across the development spectrum had much lower UHC effective coverage than is potentially achievable relative to their health spending. Under maximum efficiency of translating health spending into UHC effective coverage performance, countries would need to reach $1398 pooled health spending per capita (US$ adjusted for purchasing power parity) in order to achieve 80 on the UHC effective coverage index. From 2018 to 2023, an estimated 388.9 million (358.6-421.3) more population equivalents would have UHC effective coverage, falling well short of the GPW13 target of 1 billion more people benefiting from UHC during this time. Current projections point to an estimated 3.1 billion (3.0-3.2) population equivalents still lacking UHC effective coverage in 2023, with nearly a third (968.1 million [903.5-1040.3]) residing in south Asia. Interpretation: The present study demonstrates the utility of measuring effective coverage and its role in supporting improved health outcomes for all people-the ultimate goal of UHC and its achievement. Global ambitions to accelerate progress on UHC service coverage are increasingly unlikely unless concerted action on non-communicable diseases occurs and countries can better translate health spending into improved performance. Focusing on effective coverage and accounting for the world's evolving health needs lays the groundwork for better understanding how close-or how far-all populations are in benefiting from UHC.
Background Neurological disorders are increasingly recognised as major causes of death and disability worldwide. The aim of this analysis from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2016 is to provide the most comprehensive and up-to-date estimates of the global, regional, and national burden from neurological disorders. Methods We estimated prevalence, incidence, deaths, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs; the sum of years of life lost [YLLs] and years lived with disability [YLDs]) by age and sex for 15 neurological disorder categories (tetanus, meningitis, encephalitis, stroke, brain and other CNS cancers, traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injury, Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, motor neuron diseases, idiopathic epilepsy, migraine, tension-type headache, and a residual category for other less common neurological disorders) in 195 countries from 1990 to 2016. DisMod-MR 2.1, a Bayesian meta-regression tool, was the main method of estimation of prevalence and incidence, and the Cause of Death Ensemble model (CODEm) was used for mortality estimation. We quantified the contribution of 84 risks and combinations of risk to the disease estimates for the 15 neurological disorder categories using the GBD comparative risk assessment approach. Findings Globally, in 2016, neurological disorders were the leading cause of DALYs (276 million [95% UI 247-308]) and second leading cause of deaths (9.0 million [8.8-9.4]). The absolute number of deaths and DALYs from all neurological disorders combined increased (deaths by 39% [34-44] and DALYs by 15% [9-21]) whereas their age-standardised rates decreased (deaths by 28% [26-30] and DALYs by 27% [24-31]) between 1990 and 2016. The only neurological disorders that had a decrease in rates and absolute numbers of deaths and DALYs were tetanus, meningitis, and encephalitis. The four largest contributors of neurological DALYs were stroke (42.2% [38.6-46.1]), migraine (16.3% [11.7-20.8]), Alzheimer's and other dementias (10.4% [9.0-124]), and meningitis (7.9% [6.6-10.4]). For the combined neurological disorders, age-standardised DALY rates were significantly higher in males than in females (male-to-female ratio 1.12 [1.05-1.20]), but migraine, multiple sclerosis, and tension-type headache were more common and caused more burden in females, with male-to-female ratios of less than 0.7. The 84 risks quantified in GBD explain less than 10% of neurological disorder DALY burdens, except stroke, for which 88.8% (86.5-90.9) of DALYs are attributable to risk factors, and to a lesser extent Alzheimer's disease and other dementias (22.3% [11.8-35.1] of DALYs are risk attributable) and idiopathic epilepsy (14.1% [10.8-17.5] of DALYs are risk attributable). Interpretation Globally, the burden of neurological disorders, as measured by the absolute number of DALYs, continues to increase. As populations are growing and ageing, and the prevalence of major disabling neurological disorders steeply increases with age, governments will face increasing demand for treatment, rehabilitation, and support services for neurological disorders. The scarcity of established modifiable risks for most of the neurological burden demonstrates that new knowledge is required to develop effective prevention and treatment strategies. Copyright (C) The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
