Displaying all 4 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Agide FD, Garmaroudi G, Sadeghi R, Shakibazadeh E, Yaseri M, Koricha ZB, et al.
    Eur J Public Health, 2018 12 01;28(6):1156-1162.
    PMID: 30346504 DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/cky197
    Background: Cervical cancer screening reduced cancer morbidity and mortality in developed countries. Health education interventions are expected to enhance screening and early detection. Thus, this review is aimed to see the effectiveness of the interventions in cervical cancer screening uptake.

    Methods: Online databases (PubMed/MEDLINE/PubMed Central, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science and Google Scholar) were searched for all published eligible research articles in the past 12 years (as of January 2005-2017). A total of 17 research articles were included. The interventions were classified as 'individual level', 'community level' and 'cultural sensitive educations' which contains various interventions in their content as compared with usual care. A quality coding system was assessed using Cochrane checklists and rated by each researcher independently and the average score was given accordingly. This study was registered in PROSPERO 2017: CRD42017060405.

    Results: The review dovetailed 17 studies. Ten studies (58.82%) were conducted in the United States, three in Iran (17.65%) and one each in Malaysia, China, Cameroon and Nigeria (23.53%). Almost all levels of the interventions boosted the screening uptake and the Pap test. However, the individual level health education interventions were prioritized in many of the studies.

    Conclusion: The review indicated that health education interventions have immense contributions in boosting the screening uptake. However, the effectiveness varies with study setting, populations and the way of delivery. Therefore, the limited quality of the studies indicated that further research is required to develop a simple and effective intervention to boost cervical cancer screening uptake.

  2. Doglikuu BD, Abdulai A, Yaseri M, Shakibazadeh E, Djazayery A, Mirzaei K
    Malays J Med Sci, 2021 Apr;28(2):84-99.
    PMID: 33958963 DOI: 10.21315/mjms2021.28.2.8
    BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is public health problem. Feeding-recommendations help persons with diabetes control glycaemia. The aim was to access the association between adherence to diabetics' feeding recommendation with glycaemic control and with malnutrition risk.

    METHODS: Cross-sectional study was conducted among 530 baseline normal weight (body mass index [BMI] 18.5 kg/m2-24.9 kg/m2) persons with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in Brong Ahafo region of Ghana, from August 2018 to September 2019. Adherence to feeding recommendation was evaluated with perceived dietary adherence questionnaire (PDAQ). Malnutrition-risk was assessed using malnutrition universal screening tool. Multinomial logistics regression models were used to assess the association between adherence to diabetics' feeding recommendation with glycaemic control and with malnutrition risk.

    RESULTS: Participants were generally healthy. Weight (P = 0.011), total cholesterol (P = 0.003) and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c)% (P < 0.001) were significant with adherence to diabetics feeding recommendation. Low adherence to diabetics' feeding recommendation (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 2.56; 95% CI: 1.44, 4.56; P < 0.001), low adherence to fruit and vegetables (AOR 2.71; 95% CI: 1.48, 4.99; P < 0.001), low adherence to whole grain, beans, starchy-fruits and plantain (AOR 3.29; 95% CI: 1.81, 6.02; P < 0.001), and low adherence to foods prepared with walnut, canola, sunflower, cotton seed and fish oils (AOR 2.62; 95% CI: 1.49, 4.58; P < 0.001) were significant with poor glycaemic control. Furthermore, low adherence to food prepared with walnut, canola, sunflower, cotton seed, fish or soy oils (AOR 0.54; 95% CI: 0.31, 0.95; P = 0.034) and low adherence to fish and lean meat (AOR 2.09; 95% CI: 1.14, 3.86; P = 0.017) were significant with moderate malnutrition risk.

    CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that poor adherence feeding recommendation could be related to glycaemic control and malnutrition risk.

  3. James SL, Lucchesi LR, Bisignano C, Castle CD, Dingels ZV, Fox JT, et al.
    Inj Prev, 2020 Oct;26(Supp 1):i46-i56.
    PMID: 31915274 DOI: 10.1136/injuryprev-2019-043302
    BACKGROUND: The global burden of road injuries is known to follow complex geographical, temporal and demographic patterns. While health loss from road injuries is a major topic of global importance, there has been no recent comprehensive assessment that includes estimates for every age group, sex and country over recent years.

    METHODS: We used results from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 study to report incidence, prevalence, years lived with disability, deaths, years of life lost and disability-adjusted life years for all locations in the GBD 2017 hierarchy from 1990 to 2017 for road injuries. Second, we measured mortality-to-incidence ratios by location. Third, we assessed the distribution of the natures of injury (eg, traumatic brain injury) that result from each road injury.

    RESULTS: Globally, 1 243 068 (95% uncertainty interval 1 191 889 to 1 276 940) people died from road injuries in 2017 out of 54 192 330 (47 381 583 to 61 645 891) new cases of road injuries. Age-standardised incidence rates of road injuries increased between 1990 and 2017, while mortality rates decreased. Regionally, age-standardised mortality rates decreased in all but two regions, South Asia and Southern Latin America, where rates did not change significantly. Nine of 21 GBD regions experienced significant increases in age-standardised incidence rates, while 10 experienced significant decreases and two experienced no significant change.

    CONCLUSIONS: While road injury mortality has improved in recent decades, there are worsening rates of incidence and significant geographical heterogeneity. These findings indicate that more research is needed to better understand how road injuries can be prevented.

  4. Global Burden of Disease Cancer Collaboration, Fitzmaurice C, Abate D, Abbasi N, Abbastabar H, Abd-Allah F, et al.
    JAMA Oncol, 2019 Dec 01;5(12):1749-1768.
    PMID: 31560378 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.2996
    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 (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.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links