METHODS: The International Society of Global Health (ISoGH) used the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method to identify research priorities for future pandemic preparedness. Eighty experts in global health, translational and clinical research identified 163 research ideas, of which 42 experts then scored based on five pre-defined criteria. We calculated intermediate criterion-specific scores and overall research priority scores from the mean of individual scores for each research idea. We used a bootstrap (n = 1000) to compute the 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS: Key priorities included strengthening health systems, rapid vaccine and treatment production, improving international cooperation, and enhancing surveillance efficiency. Other priorities included learning from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, managing supply chains, identifying planning gaps, and promoting equitable interventions. We compared this CHNRI-based outcome with the 14 research priorities generated and ranked by ChatGPT, encountering both striking similarities and clear differences.
CONCLUSIONS: Priority setting processes based on human crowdsourcing - such as the CHNRI method - and the output provided by ChatGPT are both valuable, as they complement and strengthen each other. The priorities identified by ChatGPT were more grounded in theory, while those identified by CHNRI were guided by recent practical experiences. Addressing these priorities, along with improvements in health planning, equitable community-based interventions, and the capacity of primary health care, is vital for better pandemic preparedness and response in many settings.
DESIGN: Population-based prospective observational study.
SETTING: Urban and rural communities in 20 high income, middle income and low income.
PARTICIPANTS: 119 894 community-dwelling middle-aged adults.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Associations of social isolation with mortality, cardiovascular death, non-cardiovascular death and incident diseases.
RESULTS: Social isolation was more common in middle-income and high-income countries compared with low-income countries, in urban areas than rural areas, in older individuals and among women, those with less education and the unemployed. It was more frequent among smokers and those with a poorer diet. Social isolation was associated with greater risk of mortality (HR of 1.26, 95% CI: 1.17 to 1.36), incident stroke (HR: 1.23, 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.40), cardiovascular disease (HR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.05 to 1.25) and pneumonia (HR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.37), but not cancer. The associations between social isolation and mortality were observed in populations in high-income, middle-income and low-income countries (HR (95% CI): 1.69 (1.32 to 2.17), 1.27 (1.15 to 1.40) and 1.47 (1.25 to 1.73), respectively, interaction p=0.02). The HR associated with social isolation was greater in men than women and in younger than older individuals. Mediation analyses for the association between social isolation and mortality showed that unhealthy behaviours and comorbidities may account for about one-fifth of the association.
CONCLUSION: Social isolation is associated with increased risk of mortality in countries at different economic levels. The increasing share of older people in populations in many countries argues for targeted strategies to mitigate its adverse effects.
METHODS: The Prospective Urban-Rural Epidemiology study is a large, longitudinal population study done in 21 countries of varying incomes and sociocultural settings. We enrolled an unbiased sample of households, which were eligible if at least one household member was aged 35-70 years. Height was measured in a standardized manner, without shoes, to the nearest 0.1 cm. During a median follow-up of 10.1 years (interquartile range 8.3-12.0), we assessed the risk of all-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events and cancer.
RESULTS: A total of 154 610 participants, enrolled since January 2003, with known height and vital status, were included in this analysis. Follow-up event data until March 2021 were used; 11 487 (7.4%) participants died, whereas 9291 (6.0%) participants had a major cardiovascular event and 5873 (3.8%) participants had a new diagnosis of cancer. After adjustment, taller individuals had lower hazards of all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) per 10-cm increase in height 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90-0.96] and major cardiovascular events (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.94-1.00), whereas the hazard of cancer was higher in taller participants (HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.18-1.28). The interaction p-values between height and country-income level for all three outcomes were <0.001, suggesting that the association with height varied by country-income level for these outcomes. In low-income countries, height was inversely associated with all-cause mortality (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.84-0.92) and major cardiovascular events (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.82-0.93). There was no association of height with these outcomes in middle- and high-income countries. The respective HRs for cancer in low-, middle- and high-income countries were 1.14 (95% CI 0.99-1.32), 1.12 (95% CI 1.04-1.22) and 1.20 (95% CI 1.14-1.26).
CONCLUSIONS: Unlike high- and middle-income countries, tall stature has a strong inverse association with all-cause mortality and major cardiovascular events in low-income countries. Improved childhood physical development and advances in population-wide cardiovascular treatments in high- and middle-income countries may contribute to this gap. From a life-course perspective, we hypothesize that optimizing maternal and child health in low-income countries may improve rates of premature mortality and cardiovascular events in these countries, at a population level.
METHODS: We performed an observational cohort study in tertiary care hospitals from 14 countries across Asia and Ibero-America. We included patients <5 years old who were admitted to participating pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). We performed descriptive analysis and multivariable logistic regression for risk factors of AHT.
RESULTS: 47 (12%) out of 392 patients were diagnosed with AHT. Compared to those with accidental injuries, children with AHT were more frequently < 2 years old (42, 89.4% vs 133, 38.6%, p
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients ≥18 years old with histologically/cytologically confirmed stage IIIB/IV EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2 were randomized 1:1 to receive erlotinib (oral; 150 mg once daily until progression/unacceptable toxicity) or GP [G 1250 mg/m(2) i.v. days 1 and 8 (3-weekly cycle); P 75 mg/m(2) i.v. day 1, (3-weekly cycle) for up to four cycles]. Primary end point: investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Other end points include objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and safety.
RESULTS: A total of 217 patients were randomized: 110 to erlotinib and 107 to GP. Investigator-assessed median PFS was 11.0 months versus 5.5 months, erlotinib versus GP, respectively [hazard ratio (HR), 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22-0.51; log-rank P < 0.0001]. Independent Review Committee-assessed median PFS was consistent (HR, 0.42). Median OS was 26.3 versus 25.5 months, erlotinib versus GP, respectively (HR, 0.91, 95% CI 0.63-1.31; log-rank P = .607). ORR was 62.7% for erlotinib and 33.6% for GP. Treatment-related serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 2.7% versus 10.6% of erlotinib and GP patients, respectively. The most common grade ≥3 AEs were rash (6.4%) with erlotinib, and neutropenia (25.0%), leukopenia (14.4%), and anemia (12.5%) with GP.
CONCLUSION: These analyses demonstrate that first-line erlotinib provides a statistically significant improvement in PFS versus GP in Asian patients with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC (NCT01342965).
OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to review epidemiological reports to determine the prevalence of MCI and its associated risk factors in LMICs.
METHODS: Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO were searched from inception until November 2019. Eligible articles reported on MCI in population or community-based studies from LMICs and were included as long as MCI was clearly defined.
RESULTS: 5,568 articles were screened, and 78 retained. In total, n = 23 different LMICs were represented; mostly from China (n = 55 studies). Few studies were from countries defined as lower-middle income (n = 14), low income (n = 4), or from population representative samples (n = 4). There was large heterogeneity in how MCI was diagnosed; with Petersen criteria the most commonly applied (n = 26). Prevalence of amnesic MCI (aMCI) (Petersen criteria) ranged from 0.6%to 22.3%. Similar variability existed across studies using the International Working Group Criteria for aMCI (range 4.5%to 18.3%) and all-MCI (range 6.1%to 30.4%). Risk of MCI was associated with demographic (e.g., age), health (e.g., cardio-metabolic disease), and lifestyle (e.g., social isolation, smoking, diet and physical activity) factors.
CONCLUSION: Outside of China, few MCI studies have been conducted in LMIC settings. There is an urgent need for population representative epidemiological studies to determine MCI prevalence in LMICs. MCI diagnostic methodology also needs to be standardized. This will allow for cross-study comparison and future resource planning.