METHODS AND RESULTS: We estimated the durations of total daily sleep and daytime naps based on the amount of time in bed and self-reported napping time and examined the associations between them and the composite outcome of deaths and major cardiovascular events in 116 632 participants from seven regions. After a median follow-up of 7.8 years, we recorded 4381 deaths and 4365 major cardiovascular events. It showed both shorter (≤6 h/day) and longer (>8 h/day) estimated total sleep durations were associated with an increased risk of the composite outcome when adjusted for age and sex. After adjustment for demographic characteristics, lifestyle behaviours and health status, a J-shaped association was observed. Compared with sleeping 6-8 h/day, those who slept ≤6 h/day had a non-significant trend for increased risk of the composite outcome [hazard ratio (HR), 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-1.20]. As estimated sleep duration increased, we also noticed a significant trend for a greater risk of the composite outcome [HR of 1.05 (0.99-1.12), 1.17 (1.09-1.25), and 1.41 (1.30-1.53) for 8-9 h/day, 9-10 h/day, and >10 h/day, Ptrend < 0.0001, respectively]. The results were similar for each of all-cause mortality and major cardiovascular events. Daytime nap duration was associated with an increased risk of the composite events in those with over 6 h of nocturnal sleep duration, but not in shorter nocturnal sleepers (≤6 h).

METHODS: The Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology study is ongoing in 21 countries. Here we report an analysis done in 18 countries with data on clinical outcomes. Eligible participants were adults aged 35-70 years without cardiovascular disease, sampled from the general population. We used morning fasting urine to estimate 24 h sodium and potassium excretion as a surrogate for intake. We assessed community-level associations between sodium and potassium intake and BP in 369 communities (all >50 participants) and cardiovascular disease and mortality in 255 communities (all >100 participants), and used individual-level data to adjust for known confounders.

FINDINGS: 95 767 participants in 369 communities were assessed for BP and 82 544 in 255 communities for cardiovascular outcomes with follow-up for a median of 8·1 years. 82 (80%) of 103 communities in China had a mean sodium intake greater than 5 g/day, whereas in other countries 224 (84%) of 266 communities had a mean intake of 3-5 g/day. Overall, mean systolic BP increased by 2·86 mm Hg per 1 g increase in mean sodium intake, but positive associations were only seen among the communities in the highest tertile of sodium intake (p<0·0001 for heterogeneity). The association between mean sodium intake and major cardiovascular events showed significant deviations from linearity (p=0·043) due to a significant inverse association in the lowest tertile of sodium intake (lowest tertile <4·43 g/day, mean intake 4·04 g/day, range 3·42-4·43; change -1·00 events per 1000 years, 95% CI -2·00 to -0·01, p=0·0497), no association in the middle tertile (middle tertile 4·43-5·08 g/day, mean intake 4·70 g/day, 4·44-5.05; change 0·24 events per 1000 years, -2·12 to 2·61, p=0·8391), and a positive but non-significant association in the highest tertile (highest tertile >5·08 g/day, mean intake 5·75 g/day, >5·08-7·49; change 0·37 events per 1000 years, -0·03 to 0·78, p=0·0712). A strong association was seen with stroke in China (mean sodium intake 5·58 g/day, 0·42 events per 1000 years, 95% CI 0·16 to 0·67, p=0·0020) compared with in other countries (4·49 g/day, -0·26 events, -0·46 to -0·06, p=0·0124; p<0·0001 for heterogeneity). All major cardiovascular outcomes decreased with increasing potassium intake in all countries.

INTERPRETATION: Sodium intake was associated with cardiovascular disease and strokes only in communities where mean intake was greater than 5 g/day. A strategy of sodium reduction in these communities and countries but not in others might be appropriate.

METHODS: We analysed the availability, costs, and affordability of blood pressure-lowering medicines with data recorded from 626 communities in 20 countries participating in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiological (PURE) study. Medicines were considered available if they were present in the local pharmacy when surveyed, and affordable if their combined cost was less than 20% of the households' capacity to pay. We related information about availability and affordability to use of these medicines and blood pressure control with multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression models, and compared results for high-income, upper-middle-income, lower-middle-income, and low-income countries. Data for India are presented separately because it has a large generic pharmaceutical industry and a higher availability of medicines than other countries at the same economic level.

FINDINGS: The availability of two or more classes of blood pressure-lowering drugs was lower in low-income and middle-income countries (except for India) than in high-income countries. The proportion of communities with four drug classes available was 94% in high-income countries (108 of 115 communities), 76% in India (68 of 90), 71% in upper-middle-income countries (90 of 126), 47% in lower-middle-income countries (107 of 227), and 13% in low-income countries (nine of 68). The proportion of households unable to afford two blood pressure-lowering medicines was 31% in low-income countries (1069 of 3479 households), 9% in middle-income countries (5602 of 65 471), and less than 1% in high-income countries (44 of 10 880). Participants with known hypertension in communities that had all four drug classes available were more likely to use at least one blood pressure-lowering medicine (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2·23, 95% CI 1·59-3·12); p<0·0001), combination therapy (1·53, 1·13-2·07; p=0·054), and have their blood pressure controlled (2·06, 1·69-2·50; p<0·0001) than were those in communities where blood pressure-lowering medicines were not available. Participants with known hypertension from households able to afford four blood pressure-lowering drug classes were more likely to use at least one blood pressure-lowering medicine (adjusted OR 1·42, 95% CI 1·25-1·62; p<0·0001), combination therapy (1·26, 1·08-1·47; p=0·0038), and have their blood pressure controlled (1·13, 1·00-1·28; p=0·0562) than were those unable to afford the medicines.

INTERPRETATION: A large proportion of communities in low-income and middle-income countries do not have access to more than one blood pressure-lowering medicine and, when available, they are often not affordable. These factors are associated with poor blood pressure control. Ensuring access to affordable blood pressure-lowering medicines is essential for control of hypertension in low-income and middle-income countries.

METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of 133,137 individuals between the ages of 20 and 80 from 24 countries. Country-specific validated questionnaires documented baseline and follow-up medication use. Participants were followed up prospectively at least every 3 years. The main outcome was the development of IBD, including Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Short-term (baseline but not follow-up use) and long-term use (baseline and subsequent follow-up use) were evaluated. Results are presented as adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% CIs.

RESULTS: During a median follow-up period of 11.0 years (interquartile range, 9.2-12.2 y), there were 571 incident IBD cases (143 CD and 428 UC). Incident IBD was associated significantly with baseline antibiotic (aOR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.67-4.73; P = .0001) and hormonal medication use (aOR, 4.43; 95% CI, 1.78-11.01; P = .001). Among females, previous or current oral contraceptive use also was associated with IBD development (aOR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.70-2.77; P < .001). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug users also were observed to have increased odds of IBD (aOR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.23-2.64; P = .002), which was driven by long-term use (aOR, 5.58; 95% CI, 2.26-13.80; P < .001). All significant results were consistent in direction for CD and UC with low heterogeneity.

METHODS: In the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study, participants aged 35-70 years (n=156 625) were recruited from 110 803 households, in 604 communities and 22 countries; availability (presence of any dose of medication in the pharmacy on the day of audit) and medicine cost data were collected from pharmacies with the Environmental Profile of a Community's Health audit tool. Our primary analysis was to describe the availability and affordability of metformin and insulin and also commonly used and prescribed combinations of two medicines for diabetes management (two oral drugs, metformin plus a sulphonylurea [either glibenclamide (also known as glyburide) or gliclazide] and one oral drug plus insulin [metformin plus insulin]). Medicines were defined as affordable if the cost of medicines was less than 20% of capacity-to-pay (the household income minus food expenditure). Our analyses included data collected in pharmacies and data from representative samples of households. Data on availability were ascertained during the pharmacy audit, as were data on cost of medications. These cost data were used to estimate the cost of a month's supply of essential medicines for diabetes. We estimated affordability of medicines using income data from household surveys.

FINDINGS: Metformin was available in 113 (100%) of 113 pharmacies from high-income countries, 112 (88·2%) of 127 pharmacies in upper-middle-income countries, 179 (86·1%) of 208 pharmacies in lower-middle-income countries, 44 (64·7%) of 68 pharmacies in low-income countries (excluding India), and 88 (100%) of 88 pharmacies in India. Insulin was available in 106 (93·8%) pharmacies in high-income countries, 51 (40·2%) pharmacies in upper-middle-income countries, 61 (29·3%) pharmacies in lower-middle-income countries, seven (10·3%) pharmacies in lower-income countries, and 67 (76·1%) of 88 pharmacies in India. We estimated 0·7% of households in high-income countries and 26·9% of households in low-income countries could not afford metformin and 2·8% of households in high-income countries and 63·0% of households in low-income countries could not afford insulin. Among the 13 569 (8·6% of PURE participants) that reported a diagnosis of diabetes, 1222 (74·0%) participants reported diabetes medicine use in high-income countries compared with 143 (29·6%) participants in low-income countries. In multilevel models, availability and affordability were significantly associated with use of diabetes medicines.

INTERPRETATION: Availability and affordability of essential diabetes medicines are poor in low-income and middle-income countries. Awareness of these global differences might importantly drive change in access for patients with diabetes.