Years lived with disability (YLDs) for 1160 sequelae of 289 diseases and injuries 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010
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.
About: This article is published in The Lancet.The article was published on 2012-12-15 and is currently open access. It has received 7021 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Years of potential life lost & Global health.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: Eastern and Western research perspectives are presented, laying out bases for what could be the consequences of applying a reductionist versus holistic approach to research in nutrition vis-à-vis public health, environmental sustainability, breeding, biodiversity, food science and processing, and physiology for improving nutritional recommendations.
155 citations
Vanderbilt University Medical Center1, University of Western Australia2, University of Edinburgh3, French Institute of Health and Medical Research4, Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation5, University of California, San Diego6, Northwestern University7, National Institutes of Health8, Imperial College London9
TL;DR: Prevalence was higher in developed versus developing nations, and the rates within each development stratum decreased between 1990 and 2010, while regional prevalence increased in Oceania, tropical Latin America, Asia Pacific high income, Southern Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), Central SSA, South Asia, Western SSA and Central Asia.
Abstract: The global burden of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) has not been studied previously. Such information is important given the emergence of cardiovascular diseases in developing countries. We conducted a systematic literature review and estimated the global and regional incidence and prevalence of AAA in 21 world regions by age and sex. The search for prevalence and incidence of AAA using standard clinical and epidemiological terms was conducted using MEDLINE (1950 to 2010), EMBASE (1980 to 2010), AMED (1985 to 2010), CINAHL (1982 to 2010), and LILACS (2008 to 2010). Data abstracted from the systematic review served as priors for Bayesian meta-regression analyses. The analysis drew from 26 high-quality studies to estimate AAA prevalence and incidence. In 1990, the global age-specific prevalence rate per 100,000 ranged from 8.43 (95% CI: 7.03 to 10.14) in the 40 to 44 years age group to 2,422.53 (95% CI: 2,298.63 to 2,562.25) in the 75 to 79 years age group; the corresponding range in 2010 was 7.88 (95% CI: 6.54 to 9.59) to 2,274.82 (95% CI: 2,149.77 to 2,410.17). Prevalence was higher in developed versus developing nations, and the rates within each development stratum decreased between 1990 and 2010. Globally, the age-specific annual incidence rate per 100,000 in 1990 ranged from 0.89 (95% CI: 0.66 to 1.17) in 40 to 44 years age group to 176.08 (95% CI: 162.72 to 190.28) in the 75 to 79 years age group. In 2010, this range was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.61 to 1.11) to 164.57 (95% CI: 152.20 to 178.78). The highest prevalence in 1990 was in Australasia and North America high income regions: 382.65 (95% CI: 356.27 to 410.88) and 300.59 (95% CI: 280.93 to 321.54), respectively. Australasia had the highest prevalence in 2010, although the prevalence decreased to 310.27 (95% CI: 289.01 to 332.94). Regional prevalence increased in Oceania, tropical Latin America, Asia Pacific high income, Southern Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), Central SSA, South Asia, Western SSA, and Central Asia. AAA global prevalence and incidence rates have decreased over the last 20 years. However, rising rates in some regions highlight the need for policies to enhance global disease surveillance and prevention.
155 citations
TL;DR: This review found no evidence from good quality randomised controlled studies to support the use of topical lidocaine to treat neuropathic pain, although individual studies indicated that it was effective for relief of pain.
Abstract: Background
Lidocaine is a local anaesthetic that is sometimes used on the skin to treat neuropathic pain.
Objectives
To assess the analgesic efficacy of topical lidocaine for chronic neuropathic pain in adults, and to assess the associated adverse events.
Search methods
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE from inception to 1 July 2014, together with the reference lists of retrieved papers and other reviews. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal to identify additional published or unpublished data.
Selection criteria
We included randomised, double-blind studies of at least two weeks' duration comparing any formulation of topical lidocaine with placebo or another active treatment in chronic neuropathic pain. Participants were adults aged 18 and over. We included only full journal publication articles.
Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and examined issues of study quality. We performed analysis using three tiers of evidence. First tier evidence derived from data meeting current best standards and subject to minimal risk of bias (outcome equivalent to substantial pain intensity reduction, intention-to-treat analysis without imputation for dropouts; at least 200 participants in the comparison, 8 to 12 weeks' duration, parallel design); second tier evidence from data that failed to meet one or more of these criteria and that we considered at some risk of bias but with adequate numbers in the comparison; and third tier evidence from data involving small numbers of participants that we considered very likely to be biased or used outcomes of limited clinical utility, or both.
Main results
We included 12 studies (508 participants) in comparisons with placebo or an active control. Six studies enrolled participants with moderate or severe postherpetic neuralgia, and the remaining studies enrolled different, or mixed, neuropathic pain conditions, including trigeminal neuralgia and postsurgical or post-traumatic neuralgia. Four different formulations were used: 5% medicated patch, 5% cream, 5% gel, and 8% spray. Most studies used a cross-over design, and two used a parallel-group design. Two studies used enriched enrolment with randomised withdrawal. Seven studies used multiple doses, with one to four-week treatment periods, and five used single applications. We judged all of the studies at high risk of bias because of small size or incomplete outcome assessment, or both.
There was no first or second tier evidence, and no pooling of data was possible for efficacy outcomes. Only one multiple-dose study reported our primary outcome of participants with ≥ 50% or ≥ 30% pain intensity reduction. Three single-dose studies reported participants who were pain-free at a particular time point, or had a 2-point (of 10) reduction in pain intensity. The two enriched enrolment, randomised withdrawal studies reported time to loss of efficacy. In all but one study, third tier (very low quality) evidence indicated that lidocaine was better than placebo for some measure of pain relief. Pooling multiple-dose studies across conditions demonstrated no clear evidence of an effect of lidocaine on the incidence of adverse events or withdrawals, but there were few events and the withdrawal phase of enriched enrolment designs is not suitable to assess the true impact of adverse events (very low quality evidence).
Authors' conclusions
This review found no evidence from good quality randomised controlled studies to support the use of topical lidocaine to treat neuropathic pain, although individual studies indicated that it was effective for relief of pain. Clinical experience also supports efficacy in some patients. Several large ongoing studies, of adequate duration, with clinically useful outcomes should provide more robust conclusions about both efficacy and harm.
155 citations
TL;DR: Some evidence for dietary interventions improving depression outcomes is found, however, as only one trial specifically investigated the impact of a dietary intervention in individuals with clinical depression, appropriately powered trials that examine the effects of dietary improvement on mental health outcomes in those with clinical disorders are required.
Abstract: Objective Non-pharmacological approaches to the treatment of depression and anxiety are of increasing importance, with emerging evidence supporting a role for lifestyle factors in the development of these disorders Observational evidence supports a relationship between habitual diet quality and depression Less is known about the causative effects of diet on mental health outcomes Therefore a systematic review was undertaken of randomised controlled trials of dietary interventions that used depression and/or anxiety outcomes and sought to identify characteristics of programme success Design A systematic search of the Cochrane, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed and PyscInfo databases was conducted for articles published between April 1971 and May 2014 Results Of the 1274 articles identified, seventeen met eligibility criteria and were included All reported depression outcomes and ten reported anxiety or total mood disturbance Compared with a control condition, almost half (47 %) of the studies observed significant effects on depression scores in favour of the treatment group The remaining studies reported a null effect Effective dietary interventions were based on a single delivery mode, employed a dietitian and were less likely to recommend reducing red meat intake, select leaner meat products or follow a low-cholesterol diet Conclusions Although there was a high level of heterogeneity, we found some evidence for dietary interventions improving depression outcomes However, as only one trial specifically investigated the impact of a dietary intervention in individuals with clinical depression, appropriately powered trials that examine the effects of dietary improvement on mental health outcomes in those with clinical disorders are required
153 citations
TL;DR: The GBD 2013 burden findings for anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa are presented and the methodology underpinning these estimates are explored and limitations of the available raw data and methodological challenges are discussed.
Abstract: Purpose of reviewIn 2015, the findings of the most recent Global Burden of Disease Study (GBD), GBD 2013, were published. Burden was quantified for two eating disorders: anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa.Recent findingsIn GBD 2013, burden was attributed to both anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervos
152 citations
References
More filters
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
Book•
31 Dec 1997
TL;DR: The aim of this study was to establish a database of histological groups and to provide a level of consistency and quality of data that could be applied in the design of future registries.
Abstract: 1. Techniques of registration 2. Classification and coding 3. Histological groups 4. Comparability and quality of data 5. Data processing 6. Age-standardization 7. Incidence data by site and sex for each registry 8. Summary tables presenting age-standardized rates 9. Data on histological type for selected sites
10,160 citations
TL;DR: Notably, major depressive disorder is a common disorder, widely distributed in the population, and usually associated with substantial symptom severity and role impairment, and while the recent increase in treatment is encouraging, inadequate treatment is a serious concern.
Abstract: ContextUncertainties exist about prevalence and correlates of major depressive
disorder (MDD).ObjectiveTo present nationally representative data on prevalence and correlates
of MDD by Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,
Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria, and on study
patterns and correlates of treatment and treatment adequacy from the recently
completed National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R).DesignFace-to-face household survey conducted from February 2001 to December
2002.SettingThe 48 contiguous United States.ParticipantsHousehold residents ages 18 years or older (N = 9090) who responded
to the NCS-R survey.Main Outcome MeasuresPrevalence and correlates of MDD using the World Health Organization's
(WHO) Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), 12-month severity
with the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report (QIDS-SR),
the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and the WHO disability assessment scale
(WHO-DAS). Clinical reinterviews used the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV.ResultsThe prevalence of CIDI MDD for lifetime was 16.2% (95% confidence interval
[CI], 15.1-17.3) (32.6-35.1 million US adults) and for 12-month was 6.6% (95%
CI, 5.9-7.3) (13.1-14.2 million US adults). Virtually all CIDI 12-month cases
were independently classified as clinically significant using the QIDS-SR,
with 10.4% mild, 38.6% moderate, 38.0% severe, and 12.9% very severe. Mean
episode duration was 16 weeks (95% CI, 15.1-17.3). Role impairment as measured
by SDS was substantial as indicated by 59.3% of 12-month cases with severe
or very severe role impairment. Most lifetime (72.1%) and 12-month (78.5%)
cases had comorbid CIDI/DSM-IV disorders, with MDD
only rarely primary. Although 51.6% (95% CI, 46.1-57.2) of 12-month cases
received health care treatment for MDD, treatment was adequate in only 41.9%
(95% CI, 35.9-47.9) of these cases, resulting in 21.7% (95% CI, 18.1-25.2)
of 12-month MDD being adequately treated. Sociodemographic correlates of treatment
were far less numerous than those of prevalence.ConclusionsMajor depressive disorder is a common disorder, widely distributed in
the population, and usually associated with substantial symptom severity and
role impairment. While the recent increase in treatment is encouraging, inadequate
treatment is a serious concern. Emphasis on screening and expansion of treatment
needs to be accompanied by a parallel emphasis on treatment quality improvement.
7,706 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1996
TL;DR: This is the first in a planned series of 10 volumes that will attempt to "summarize epidemiological knowledge about all major conditions and most risk factors" and use historical trends in main determinants to project mortality and disease burden forward to 2020.
Abstract: This is the first in a planned series of 10 volumes that will attempt to "summarize epidemiological knowledge about all major conditions and most risk factors;...generate assessments of numbers of deaths by cause that are consistent with the total numbers of deaths by age sex and region provided by demographers;...provide methodologies for and assessments of aggregate disease burden that combine--into the Disability-Adjusted Life Year or DALY measure--burden from premature mortality with that from living with disability; and...use historical trends in main determinants to project mortality and disease burden forward to 2020." This first volume includes chapters summarizing results from the project as a whole. (EXCERPT)
7,154 citations