METHODS: The main outcome measures were disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) and mortality (deaths) attributable to high fasting plasma glucose (HFPG), high systolic blood pressure (HSBP), high low-density lipoprotein (HLDL) cholesterol, high body-mass index (HBMI), kidney dysfunction (KDF), and low bone mineral density (LBMD). The average annual percent change (AAPC) between 1990 and 2019 was analyzed using Joinpoint regression.
RESULTS: For all six metabolic risk factors, the rate of DALYs and death increased with age, accelerating for individuals older than 60 and 70 for DALYs and death, respectively. The AAPC value in rate of DALYs and death were higher in male patients than in female patients across 20 age groups. A double-peak pattern was observed for AAPC in the rate of DALYs and death, peaking at age 20-49 and at age 70-95 plus. The age-standardized rate of DALYs increased for HBMI and LBMD, decreased for HFPG, HSBP, KDF, and remained stable for HLDL from 1990 to 2019. In terms of age-standardized rate of DALYs, there was an increasing trend of neoplasms and neurological disorders attributable to HFPG; diabetes and kidney diseases, neurological disorders, sense organ diseases, musculoskeletal disorders, neoplasms, cardiovascular diseases, digestive diseases to HBMI; unintentional injuries to LBMD; and musculoskeletal disorders to KDF. Among 19 countries of Group 20, in 2019, the age-standardized rate of DALYs and death were ranked fourth to sixth for HFPG, HSBP, and HLDL, but ranked 10th to 15th for LBMD, KDF, and HBMI, despite the number of DALYs and death ranked first to second for six metabolic risk factors.
CONCLUSIONS: Population aging continuously accelerates the metabolic risk factor driven disease burden in China. Comprehensive and tight control of metabolic risk factors before 20 and 70 may help to mitigate the increasing disease burden and achieve healthy aging, respectively.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The IPEN Adolescent observational, cross-sectional, multicountry study involves recruiting adolescent participants (ages 11-19 years) and one parent/guardian from neighbourhoods selected to ensure wide variations in walkability and socioeconomic status using common protocols and measures. Fifteen geographically, economically and culturally diverse countries, from six continents, participated: Australia, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Czech Republic, Denmark, Hong Kong SAR, India, Israel, Malaysia, New Zealand, Nigeria, Portugal, Spain and USA. Countries provided survey and accelerometer data (15 countries), GIS data (11), global positioning system data (10), and pedestrian environment audit data (8). A sample of n=6950 (52.6% female; mean age=14.5, SD=1.7) adolescents provided survey data, n=4852 had 4 or more 8+ hours valid days of accelerometer data, and n=5473 had GIS measures. Physical activity and sedentary behaviour were measured by waist-worn ActiGraph accelerometers and self-reports, and body mass index was used to categorise weight status.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was received from each study site's Institutional Review Board for their in-country studies. Informed assent by adolescents and consent by parents was obtained for all participants. No personally identifiable information was transferred to the IPEN coordinating centre for pooled datasets. Results will be communicated through standard scientific channels and findings used to advance the science of environmental correlates of physical activity, sedentary behaviour and weight status, with the ultimate goal to stimulate and guide actions to create more activity-supportive environments internationally.
METHODS: Adolescents and one of their parents (N = 5714 dyads) were recruited from neighborhoods varying in walkability and socio-economic status. To measure perceived neighborhood environment, 14 countries administered the NEWS-Y to parents and one country to adolescents. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to derive comparable country-specific measurement models of the NEWS-Y-IPEN. Country-specific standard deviations quantified within-country variability in the NEWS-Y-IPEN subscales, while linear mixed models determined the percentage of subscale variance due to between-country differences. To examine the construct validity of NEWS-Y-IPEN subscales, we estimated their associations with the categorical measures of area-level walkability and socio-economic status.
RESULTS: Final country-specific measurement models of the factor-analyzable NEWS-Y-IPEN items provided acceptable levels of fit to the data and shared the same factorial structure with five latent factors (Accessibility and walking facilities; Traffic safety; Pedestrian infrastructure and safety; Safety from crime; and Aesthetics). All subscales showed sufficient levels of within-country variability. Residential density had the highest level of between-country variability. Associations between NEWS-Y-IPEN subscales and area-level walkability and socio-economic status provided strong evidence of construct validity.
CONCLUSIONS: A robust measurement model and common scoring protocol of NEWS-Y for the IPEN Adolescent project (NEWS-Y-IPEN) were derived. The NEWS-Y-IPEN possesses good factorial and construct validity, and is able to capture between-country variability in perceived neighborhood environments. Future studies employing NEWS-Y-IPEN should use the proposed scoring protocol to facilitate cross-study comparisons and interpretation of findings.
METHODS: In this study, we report and discuss the methods used in GBD 2017 for injury morbidity and mortality burden estimation. In summary, these methods included estimating cause-specific mortality for every cause of injury, and then estimating incidence for every cause of injury. Non-fatal disability for each cause is then calculated based on the probabilities of suffering from different types of bodily injury experienced.
RESULTS: GBD 2017 produced morbidity and mortality estimates for 38 causes of injury. Estimates were produced in terms of incidence, prevalence, years lived with disability, cause-specific mortality, years of life lost and disability-adjusted life-years for a 28-year period for 22 age groups, 195 countries and both sexes.
CONCLUSIONS: GBD 2017 demonstrated a complex and sophisticated series of analytical steps using the largest known database of morbidity and mortality data on injuries. GBD 2017 results should be used to help inform injury prevention policy making and resource allocation. We also identify important avenues for improving injury burden estimation in the future.
METHODS: We reviewed results for injuries from the GBD 2017 study. GBD 2017 measured injury-specific mortality and years of life lost (YLLs) using the Cause of Death Ensemble model. To measure non-fatal injuries, GBD 2017 modelled injury-specific incidence and converted this to prevalence and years lived with disability (YLDs). YLLs and YLDs were summed to calculate disability-adjusted life years (DALYs).
FINDINGS: In 1990, there were 4 260 493 (4 085 700 to 4 396 138) injury deaths, which increased to 4 484 722 (4 332 010 to 4 585 554) deaths in 2017, while age-standardised mortality decreased from 1079 (1073 to 1086) to 738 (730 to 745) per 100 000. In 1990, there were 354 064 302 (95% uncertainty interval: 338 174 876 to 371 610 802) new cases of injury globally, which increased to 520 710 288 (493 430 247 to 547 988 635) new cases in 2017. During this time, age-standardised incidence decreased non-significantly from 6824 (6534 to 7147) to 6763 (6412 to 7118) per 100 000. Between 1990 and 2017, age-standardised DALYs decreased from 4947 (4655 to 5233) per 100 000 to 3267 (3058 to 3505).
INTERPRETATION: Injuries are an important cause of health loss globally, though mortality has declined between 1990 and 2017. Future research in injury burden should focus on prevention in high-burden populations, improving data collection and ensuring access to medical care.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate cancer burden and trends globally for 204 countries and territories and by Sociodemographic Index (SDI) quintiles from 2010 to 2019.
EVIDENCE REVIEW: The GBD 2019 estimation methods were used to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in 2019 and over the past decade. Estimates are also provided by quintiles of the SDI, a composite measure of educational attainment, income per capita, and total fertility rate for those younger than 25 years. Estimates include 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs).
FINDINGS: In 2019, there were an estimated 23.6 million (95% UI, 22.2-24.9 million) new cancer cases (17.2 million when excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and 10.0 million (95% UI, 9.36-10.6 million) cancer deaths globally, with an estimated 250 million (235-264 million) DALYs due to cancer. Since 2010, these represented a 26.3% (95% UI, 20.3%-32.3%) increase in new cases, a 20.9% (95% UI, 14.2%-27.6%) increase in deaths, and a 16.0% (95% UI, 9.3%-22.8%) increase in DALYs. Among 22 groups of diseases and injuries in the GBD 2019 study, cancer was second only to cardiovascular diseases for the number of deaths, years of life lost, and DALYs globally in 2019. Cancer burden differed across SDI quintiles. The proportion of years lived with disability that contributed to DALYs increased with SDI, ranging from 1.4% (1.1%-1.8%) in the low SDI quintile to 5.7% (4.2%-7.1%) in the high SDI quintile. While the high SDI quintile had the highest number of new cases in 2019, the middle SDI quintile had the highest number of cancer deaths and DALYs. From 2010 to 2019, the largest percentage increase in the numbers of cases and deaths occurred in the low and low-middle SDI quintiles.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The results of this systematic analysis suggest that the global burden of cancer is substantial and growing, with burden differing by SDI. These results provide comprehensive and comparable estimates that can potentially inform efforts toward equitable cancer control around the world.
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 (572 000 deaths and 15.2 million DALYs), and stomach cancer (542 000 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 (819 000 incident cases). The leading causes of cancer deaths and DALYs for women were breast cancer (601 000 deaths and 17.4 million DALYs), TBL cancer (596 000 deaths and 12.6 million DALYs), and colorectal cancer (414 000 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.