Author
David Gunnell
Other affiliations: University of Peradeniya, Manchester Royal Infirmary, RMIT University ...read more
Bio: David Gunnell is an academic researcher from University of Bristol. The author has contributed to research in topics: Poison control & Suicide prevention. The author has an hindex of 114, co-authored 688 publications receiving 79867 citations. Previous affiliations of David Gunnell include University of Peradeniya & Manchester Royal Infirmary.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors estimated deaths and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs; sum of years lived with disability [YLD] and years of life lost [YLL]) attributable to the independent effects of 67 risk factors and clusters of risk factors for 21 regions in 1990 and 2010.
9,324 citations
TL;DR: Prevalence and severity of health loss were weakly correlated and age-specific prevalence of YLDs increased with age in all regions and has decreased slightly from 1990 to 2010, but population growth and ageing have increased YLD numbers and crude rates over the past two decades.
7,021 citations
TL;DR: The results for 1990 and 2010 supersede all previously published Global Burden of Disease results and highlight the importance of understanding local burden of disease and setting goals and targets for the post-2015 agenda taking such patterns into account.
6,861 citations
TL;DR: In the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013 (GBD 2013) as discussed by the authors, the authors used the GBD 2010 methods with some refinements to improve accuracy applied to an updated database of vital registration, survey, and census data.
5,792 citations
Mohammad H. Forouzanfar1, Lily Alexander, H. Ross Anderson, Victoria F Bachman1 +733 more•Institutions (289)
TL;DR: The Global Burden of Disease, Injuries, and Risk Factor study 2013 (GBD 2013) as discussed by the authors provides a timely opportunity to update the comparative risk assessment with new data for exposure, relative risks, and evidence on the appropriate counterfactual risk distribution.
5,668 citations
Cited by
More filters
TL;DR: An Explanation and Elaboration of the PRISMA Statement is presented and updated guidelines for the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses are presented.
Abstract: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential to summarize evidence relating to efficacy and safety of health care interventions accurately and reliably. The clarity and transparency of these reports, however, is not optimal. Poor reporting of systematic reviews diminishes their value to clinicians, policy makers, and other users.
Since the development of the QUOROM (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analysis) Statement—a reporting guideline published in 1999—there have been several conceptual, methodological, and practical advances regarding the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Also, reviews of published systematic reviews have found that key information about these studies is often poorly reported. Realizing these issues, an international group that included experienced authors and methodologists developed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) as an evolution of the original QUOROM guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of evaluations of health care interventions.
The PRISMA Statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram. The checklist includes items deemed essential for transparent reporting of a systematic review. In this Explanation and Elaboration document, we explain the meaning and rationale for each checklist item. For each item, we include an example of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature. The PRISMA Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.prisma-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
25,711 citations
TL;DR: There are striking variations in the risk of different cancers by geographic area, most of the international variation is due to exposure to known or suspected risk factors related to lifestyle or environment, and provides a clear challenge to prevention.
Abstract: Estimates of the worldwide incidence, mortality and prevalence of 26 cancers in the year 2002 are now available in the GLOBOCAN series of the International Agency for Research on Cancer. The results are presented here in summary form, including the geographic variation between 20 large "areas" of the world. Overall, there were 10.9 million new cases, 6.7 million deaths, and 24.6 million persons alive with cancer (within three years of diagnosis). The most commonly diagnosed cancers are lung (1.35 million), breast (1.15 million), and colorectal (1 million); the most common causes of cancer death are lung cancer (1.18 million deaths), stomach cancer (700,000 deaths), and liver cancer (598,000 deaths). The most prevalent cancer in the world is breast cancer (4.4 million survivors up to 5 years following diagnosis). There are striking variations in the risk of different cancers by geographic area. Most of the international variation is due to exposure to known or suspected risk factors related to lifestyle or environment, and provides a clear challenge to prevention.
17,730 citations
TL;DR: The meaning and rationale for each checklist item is explained, and an example of good reporting is included and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are included.
Abstract: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential to summarise evidence relating to efficacy and safety of healthcare interventions accurately and reliably. The clarity and transparency of these reports, however, are not optimal. Poor reporting of systematic reviews diminishes their value to clinicians, policy makers, and other users. Since the development of the QUOROM (quality of reporting of meta-analysis) statement—a reporting guideline published in 1999—there have been several conceptual, methodological, and practical advances regarding the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Also, reviews of published systematic reviews have found that key information about these studies is often poorly reported. Realising these issues, an international group that included experienced authors and methodologists developed PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) as an evolution of the original QUOROM guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of evaluations of health care interventions. The PRISMA statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram. The checklist includes items deemed essential for transparent reporting of a systematic review. In this explanation and elaboration document, we explain the meaning and rationale for each checklist item. For each item, we include an example of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature. The PRISMA statement, this document, and the associated website (www.prisma-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
13,813 citations
TL;DR: Authors/Task Force Members: Piotr Ponikowski* (Chairperson) (Poland), Adriaan A. Voors* (Co-Chair person) (The Netherlands), Stefan D. Anker (Germany), Héctor Bueno (Spain), John G. F. Cleland (UK), Andrew J. S. Coats (UK)
13,400 citations
TL;DR: The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2010 aimed to estimate annual deaths for the world and 21 regions between 1980 and 2010 for 235 causes, with uncertainty intervals (UIs), separately by age and sex, using the Cause of Death Ensemble model.
11,809 citations