Author
Mohsen Naghavi
Other affiliations: Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Public Health Foundation of India, University of Queensland ...read more
Bio: Mohsen Naghavi is an academic researcher from Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. The author has contributed to research in topics: Population & Mortality rate. The author has an hindex of 139, co-authored 381 publications receiving 169048 citations. Previous affiliations of Mohsen Naghavi include Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust & Public Health Foundation of India.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
University of Pittsburgh1, Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation2, University of Washington3, University of British Columbia4, The George Institute for Global Health5, Federal University of São Paulo6, Charité7, University of London8, Seattle Children's9, University of São Paulo10, University of Melbourne11
TL;DR: Despite declining age-standardised incidence and mortality, sepsis remains a major cause of health loss worldwide and has an especially high health-related burden in sub-Saharan Africa.
2,419 citations
Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation1, University of Washington2, Iran University of Medical Sciences3, King's College London4, Arabian Gulf University5, University of North Texas6, Auckland University of Technology7, Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium8, Columbia University9, Wuhan University10, Imperial College London11, University of Alabama at Birmingham12, University at Albany, SUNY13, City University of New York14, University of California, San Francisco15, Griffith University16, Environment Agency17, New York University18, Southern University College19, Emory University20, University of Ottawa21, Kosin University22, University of Toronto23, University of British Columbia24, United Arab Emirates University25, Albert Einstein College of Medicine26, University of São Paulo27, Nova Southeastern University28, University of Sydney29, Heidelberg University30, Case Western Reserve University31, Cancer Treatment Centers of America32, University of Oxford33, George Mason University34, James Cook University35, University of Trieste36, University of Calgary37, Wageningen University and Research Centre38, University of the Witwatersrand39, University of Gothenburg40, Harvard University41, Jackson State University42, University of Arizona43, University of Hong Kong44, Tehran University of Medical Sciences45, University of Western Australia46, Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust47, Veterans Health Administration48, University of Colorado Denver49, Royal Children's Hospital50, University of Melbourne51, Australian National University52, University of Marburg53, Charité54, Health Canada55, College of Health Sciences, Bahrain56, Karolinska Institutet57, University of Edinburgh58, Northumbria University59, National Research University – Higher School of Economics60, Queen Mary University of London61, Addis Ababa University62, Northwestern University63, Northeastern University64, Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research65, Arak University of Medical Sciences66, University of Nottingham67, University of Tokyo68, Public Health Foundation of India69, University of Groningen70, University of the Philippines Manila71, University of Bologna72, Kyung Hee University73, Brighton and Sussex Medical School74, University of Bergen75, Stavanger University Hospital76, University of Queensland77, National Centre for Disease Control78, University of Sheffield79, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana80, University College London81, Genentech82, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman83, Norwegian Institute of Public Health84
TL;DR: To estimate mortality, incidence, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life-years for 28 cancers in 188 countries by sex from 1990 to 2013, the general methodology of the Global Burden of Disease 2013 study was used.
Abstract: Importance Cancer is among the leading causes of death worldwide. Current estimates of cancer burden in individual countries and regions are necessary to inform local cancer control strategies. Objective To estimate mortality, incidence, years lived with disability (YLDs), years of life lost (YLLs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 28 cancers in 188 countries by sex from 1990 to 2013. Evidence Review The general methodology of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2013 study was used. Cancer registries were the source for cancer incidence data as well as mortality incidence (MI) ratios. Sources for cause of death data include vital registration system data, verbal autopsy studies, and other sources. The MI ratios were used to transform incidence data to mortality estimates and cause of death estimates to incidence estimates. Cancer prevalence was estimated using MI ratios as surrogates for survival data; YLDs were calculated by multiplying prevalence estimates with disability weights, which were derived from population-based surveys; YLLs were computed by multiplying the number of estimated cancer deaths at each age with a reference life expectancy; and DALYs were calculated as the sum of YLDs and YLLs. Findings In 2013 there were 14.9 million incident cancer cases, 8.2 million deaths, and 196.3 million DALYs. Prostate cancer was the leading cause for cancer incidence (1.4 million) for men and breast cancer for women (1.8 million). Tracheal, bronchus, and lung (TBL) cancer was the leading cause for cancer death in men and women, with 1.6 million deaths. For men, TBL cancer was the leading cause of DALYs (24.9 million). For women, breast cancer was the leading cause of DALYs (13.1 million). Age-standardized incidence rates (ASIRs) per 100 000 and age-standardized death rates (ASDRs) per 100 000 for both sexes in 2013 were higher in developing vs developed countries for stomach cancer (ASIR, 17 vs 14; ASDR, 15 vs 11), liver cancer (ASIR, 15 vs 7; ASDR, 16 vs 7), esophageal cancer (ASIR, 9 vs 4; ASDR, 9 vs 4), cervical cancer (ASIR, 8 vs 5; ASDR, 4 vs 2), lip and oral cavity cancer (ASIR, 7 vs 6; ASDR, 2 vs 2), and nasopharyngeal cancer (ASIR, 1.5 vs 0.4; ASDR, 1.2 vs 0.3). Between 1990 and 2013, ASIRs for all cancers combined (except nonmelanoma skin cancer and Kaposi sarcoma) increased by more than 10% in 113 countries and decreased by more than 10% in 12 of 188 countries. Conclusions and Relevance Cancer poses a major threat to public health worldwide, and incidence rates have increased in most countries since 1990. The trend is a particular threat to developing nations with health systems that are ill-equipped to deal with complex and expensive cancer treatments. The annual update on the Global Burden of Cancer will provide all stakeholders with timely estimates to guide policy efforts in cancer prevention, screening, treatment, and palliation.
2,375 citations
TL;DR: This study provides the first comprehensive assessment of the global burden of AMR, as well as an evaluation of the availability of data, and estimates aggregated to the global and regional level.
2,222 citations
TL;DR: Although only 23 countries are on track to achieve a 75% decrease in MMR by 2015, countries such as Egypt, China, Ecuador, and Bolivia have been achieving accelerated progress and substantial, albeit varied, progress has been made towards MDG 5.
2,163 citations
Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation1, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio2, Emory University3, Mayo Clinic4, Harvard University5, Boston University6, Michigan State University7, National Institutes of Health8, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center9, Health Effects Institute10, Loyola University Chicago11, University of Washington12, University of California, San Diego13, University of Pennsylvania14, Veterans Health Administration15, Beth Israel Medical Center16, Johns Hopkins University17, Imperial College London18, Carnegie Mellon University19, Howard University20, University of California, San Francisco21, Columbia University22, New York University23, Karolinska Institutet24, George Mason University25, Nova Southeastern University26, University of Miami27, Northwestern University28, Thomas Jefferson University29, China Medical Board30, Pacific Institute31, Duke University32, Brigham and Women's Hospital33, California Environmental Protection Agency34, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services35, Brigham Young University36, University of Missouri37, University of California, Los Angeles38, Vanderbilt University39, University of Maryland, College Park40, University of Alabama at Birmingham41, Brandeis University42, University of Tokyo43, The Queen's Medical Center44, Drexel University45, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center46, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health47, Brown University48, University of Melbourne49
TL;DR: To measure the burden of diseases, injuries, and leading risk factors in the United States from 1990 to 2010 and to compare these measurements with those of the 34 countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), systematic analysis of descriptive epidemiology was used.
Abstract: Importance Understanding the major health problems in the United States and how they are changing over time is critical for informing national health policy. Objectives To measure the burden of diseases, injuries, and leading risk factors in the United States from 1990 to 2010 and to compare these measurements with those of the 34 countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. Design We used the systematic analysis of descriptive epidemiology of 291 diseases and injuries, 1160 sequelae of these diseases and injuries, and 67 risk factors or clusters of risk factors from 1990 to 2010 for 187 countries developed for the Global Burden of Disease 2010 Study to describe the health status of the United States and to compare US health outcomes with those of 34 OECD countries. Years of life lost due to premature mortality (YLLs) were computed by multiplying the number of deaths at each age by a reference life expectancy at that age. Years lived with disability (YLDs) were calculated by multiplying prevalence (based on systematic reviews) by the disability weight (based on population-based surveys) for each sequela; disability in this study refers to any short- or long-term loss of health. Disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) were estimated as the sum of YLDs and YLLs. Deaths and DALYs related to risk factors were based on systematic reviews and meta-analyses of exposure data and relative risks for risk-outcome pairs. Healthy life expectancy (HALE) was used to summarize overall population health, accounting for both length of life and levels of ill health experienced at different ages. Results US life expectancy for both sexes combined increased from 75.2 years in 1990 to 78.2 years in 2010; during the same period, HALE increased from 65.8 years to 68.1 years. The diseases and injuries with the largest number of YLLs in 2010 were ischemic heart disease, lung cancer, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and road injury. Age-standardized YLL rates increased for Alzheimer disease, drug use disorders, chronic kidney disease, kidney cancer, and falls. The diseases with the largest number of YLDs in 2010 were low back pain, major depressive disorder, other musculoskeletal disorders, neck pain, and anxiety disorders. As the US population has aged, YLDs have comprised a larger share of DALYs than have YLLs. The leading risk factors related to DALYs were dietary risks, tobacco smoking, high body mass index, high blood pressure, high fasting plasma glucose, physical inactivity, and alcohol use. Among 34 OECD countries between 1990 and 2010, the US rank for the age-standardized death rate changed from 18th to 27th, for the age-standardized YLL rate from 23rd to 28th, for the age-standardized YLD rate from 5th to 6th, for life expectancy at birth from 20th to 27th, and for HALE from 14th to 26th. Conclusions and Relevance From 1990 to 2010, the United States made substantial progress in improving health. Life expectancy at birth and HALE increased, all-cause death rates at all ages decreased, and age-specific rates of years lived with disability remained stable. However, morbidity and chronic disability now account for nearly half of the US health burden, and improvements in population health in the United States have not kept pace with advances in population health in other wealthy nations.
2,159 citations
Cited by
More filters
TL;DR: The overall cancer death rate dropped continuously from 1991 to 2016 by a total of 27%, translating into approximately 2,629,200 fewer cancer deaths than would have been expected if death rates had remained at their peak.
Abstract: Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths that will occur in the United States and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival. Incidence data, available through 2015, were collected by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program; the National Program of Cancer Registries; and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data, available through 2016, were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2019, 1,762,450 new cancer cases and 606,880 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. Over the past decade of data, the cancer incidence rate (2006-2015) was stable in women and declined by approximately 2% per year in men, whereas the cancer death rate (2007-2016) declined annually by 1.4% and 1.8%, respectively. The overall cancer death rate dropped continuously from 1991 to 2016 by a total of 27%, translating into approximately 2,629,200 fewer cancer deaths than would have been expected if death rates had remained at their peak. Although the racial gap in cancer mortality is slowly narrowing, socioeconomic inequalities are widening, with the most notable gaps for the most preventable cancers. For example, compared with the most affluent counties, mortality rates in the poorest counties were 2-fold higher for cervical cancer and 40% higher for male lung and liver cancers during 2012-2016. Some states are home to both the wealthiest and the poorest counties, suggesting the opportunity for more equitable dissemination of effective cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment strategies. A broader application of existing cancer control knowledge with an emphasis on disadvantaged groups would undoubtedly accelerate progress against cancer.
16,028 citations
TL;DR: The combined cancer death rate dropped continuously from 1991 to 2015 by a total of 26%, translating to approximately 2,378,600 fewer cancer deaths than would have been expected if death rates had remained at their peak.
Abstract: Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths that will occur in the United States and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival. Incidence data, available through 2014, were collected by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program; the National Program of Cancer Registries; and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data, available through 2015, were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2018, 1,735,350 new cancer cases and 609,640 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. Over the past decade of data, the cancer incidence rate (2005-2014) was stable in women and declined by approximately 2% annually in men, while the cancer death rate (2006-2015) declined by about 1.5% annually in both men and women. The combined cancer death rate dropped continuously from 1991 to 2015 by a total of 26%, translating to approximately 2,378,600 fewer cancer deaths than would have been expected if death rates had remained at their peak. Of the 10 leading causes of death, only cancer declined from 2014 to 2015. In 2015, the cancer death rate was 14% higher in non-Hispanic blacks (NHBs) than non-Hispanic whites (NHWs) overall (death rate ratio [DRR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.13-1.15), but the racial disparity was much larger for individuals aged <65 years (DRR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.29-1.32) compared with those aged ≥65 years (DRR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.06-1.09) and varied substantially by state. For example, the cancer death rate was lower in NHBs than NHWs in Massachusetts for all ages and in New York for individuals aged ≥65 years, whereas for those aged <65 years, it was 3 times higher in NHBs in the District of Columbia (DRR, 2.89; 95% CI, 2.16-3.91) and about 50% higher in Wisconsin (DRR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.56-2.02), Kansas (DRR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.25-1.81), Louisiana (DRR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.38-1.60), Illinois (DRR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.39-1.57), and California (DRR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.38-1.54). Larger racial inequalities in young and middle-aged adults probably partly reflect less access to high-quality health care. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:7-30. © 2018 American Cancer Society.
14,011 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
Theo Vos1, Amanuel Alemu Abajobir, Kalkidan Hassen Abate2, Cristiana Abbafati3 +775 more•Institutions (305)
TL;DR: The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) provides a comprehensive assessment of prevalence, incidence, and years lived with disability (YLDs) for 328 causes in 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2016.
10,401 citations