Estimating individual lifetime risk of incident cardiovascular events in adults with Type 2 diabetes: an update and geographical calibration of the DIAbetes Lifetime perspective model (DIAL2).

AIMS: The 2021 European Society of Cardiology cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention guidelines recommend the use of (lifetime) risk prediction models to aid decisions regarding intensified preventive treatment options in adults with Type 2 diabetes, e.g. the DIAbetes Lifetime perspective model (DIAL model). The aim of this study was to update the DIAL model using contemporary and representative registry data (DIAL2) and to systematically calibrate the model for use in other European countries. METHODS AND RESULTS: The DIAL2 model was derived in 467 856 people with Type 2 diabetes without a history of CVD from the Swedish National Diabetes Register, with a median follow-up of 7.3 years (interquartile range: 4.0-10.6 years) and comprising 63 824 CVD (including fatal CVD, non-fatal stroke and non-fatal myocardial infarction) events and 66 048 non-CVD mortality events. The model was systematically recalibrated to Europe's low- and moderate-risk regions using contemporary incidence data and mean risk factor distributions. The recalibrated DIAL2 model was externally validated in 218 267 individuals with Type 2 diabetes from the Scottish Care Information-Diabetes (SCID) and Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). In these individuals, 43 074 CVD events and 27 115 non-CVD fatal events were observed. The DIAL2 model discriminated well, with C-indices of 0.732 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.726-0.739] in CPRD and 0.700 (95% CI 0.691-0.709) in SCID. CONCLUSION: The recalibrated DIAL2 model provides a useful tool for the prediction of CVD-free life expectancy and lifetime CVD risk for people with Type 2 diabetes without previous CVD in the European low- and moderate-risk regions. These long-term individualized measures of CVD risk are well suited for shared decision-making in clinical practice as recommended by the 2021 CVD ESC prevention guidelines.

Mortality in homeless people enrolled in the French housing first randomized controlled trial: a secondary outcome analysis of predictors and causes of death.

BACKGROUND: Homeless people face large excess mortality in comparison with the general population, but little is known about the effect of housing interventions like Housing First (HF) on their mortality. AIMS OF THE STUDY: 1) to explore 2-years mortality among homeless people with severe mental illness (SMI) included in French HF randomized controlled trial (RCT). 2) To examine causes of death among homeless participants. METHODS: For 703 participants of HF RCT: 353 in experimental group (HF) and 350 in control group (Treatment As Usual - TAU), any proof of life or death and causes of death were collected with a thorough retrospective investigation among relatives, institutions and administrative databases. Data collection took place from March to June 2017. RESULTS: 4.8% (n = 34) of the study participants died over the study period. Mean age of death was 40.9 (+/- 11.4) years. The overall 2-years mortality rate was 0.065 in the HF group (n = 23) versus 0.034 in the TAU group (n = 11). Mortality was associated with medications for opioid use disorder in multivariate Cox analysis (HR: 2.37, 95%CI 1.15-5.04, p = 0.025). Those in HF group seem to be more at risk of death compared to TAU group, mainly during the first 6 months of being housed, although the difference did not reach significance (HR: 0.49, 95%CI 0.24-1.01, p = 0.054). Violent deaths occurred in 52.2% of HF group's deaths versus 18.2% of TAU group's deaths, this excess being explained by 34.8% (n = 8) deaths by overdoses in HF group versus none in TAU group. LIMITATIONS: 1) 8.7% (n = 2) people in HF group died before HF intervention but were analyzed in intention-to-treat. 2) No proof of life or death has been found for only 0.6% in HF group (n = 2) but for 9.5% people in TAU group (n = 33) that could be anonymous deaths. 3) Undetermined causes represented 8.7% of deaths in HF group versus 36.4% in TAU group. 4) The small number of events (deaths) in the study population is a limitation for statistical analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Due to important limitations, we cannot conclude on HF effect on mortality, but our results nevertheless confirm that the vulnerability of long-term homeless people with SMI persists after accessing independent housing. Earlier intervention in the pathways of homelessness should be considered, alongside active specific support for addictions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Ethics Committee Sud Mediterrannée V n° 11.050: trial number 2011-A00668-33: 28/07/2011. Clinicaltrials ID NCT01570712 : 4/4/2012.

Europeans' willingness to pay for ending homelessness: A contingent valuation study.

The purpose of this study is to assess the utility value European citizens put on an innovative social program aimed at reducing homelessness. The Housing First (HF) model involves access to regular, scattered, independent and integrated housing in the community with the support of a multidisciplinary team. Currently, HF is not implemented by most European countries or funded by healthcare or social plans, but randomised controlled trials have stressed significant results for improved housing stability, recovery and healthcare services use. The broader implementation of HF across Europe would benefit from a better understanding of citizens' preferences and "willingness to pay" (WTP) for medico-social interventions like HF. We conducted a representative telephone survey between March and December 2017 in eight European countries (France, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden). Respondent's WTP for HF (N = 5631) was assessed through a contingent valuation method with a bidding algorithm. 42.3% of respondents were willing to pay more taxes to reduce homelessness through the HF model, and significant differences were found between countries (p < 0.001); 30.4% of respondents who did not value the HF model were protest zeros (either contested the payment vehicle-taxes- or the survey instrument). Respondents were willing to pay €28.2 (±11) through annual taxation for the HF model. Respondents with higher educational attainment, who paid national taxes, reported positive attitudes about homelessness, or reported practices to reduce homelessness (donations, volunteering) were more likely to value the HF model, with some countries' differences also related to factors at the environmental level. These findings inform key stakeholders that European citizens are aware of the issue of homelessness in their countries and that scaling up the HF model across Europe is both feasible and likely to have public support.

Lifetime, 5-year and past-year prevalence of homelessness in Europe: a cross-national survey in eight European nations.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the lifetime, 5-year and past-year prevalence of homelessness among European citizens in eight European nations. DESIGN: A nationally representative telephone survey using trained bilingual interviewers and computer-assisted telephone interview software. SETTING: The study was conducted in France, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain and Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: European adult citizens, selected from opt-in panels from March to December 2017. Total desired sample size was 5600, with 700 per country. Expected response rates of approximately 30% led to initial sample sizes of 2500 per country. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: History of homelessness was assessed for lifetime, past 5 years and past year. Sociodemographic data were collected to assess correlates of homelessness prevalence using generalised linear models for clustered and weighted samples. RESULTS: Response rates ranged from 30.4% to 33.5% (n=5631). Homelessness prevalence was 4.96% for lifetime (95% CI 4.39% to 5.59%), 1.92% in the past 5 years (95% CI 1.57% to 2.33%) and 0.71% for the past year (95% CI 0.51% to 0.98%) and varied significantly between countries (pairwise comparison difference test, p<0.0001). Time spent homeless ranged between less than a week (21%) and more than a year (18%), with high contrasts between countries (p<0.0001). Male gender, age 45-54, lower secondary education, single status, unemployment and an urban environment were all independently strongly associated with lifetime homelessness (all OR >1.5). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of homelessness among the surveyed nations is significantly higher than might be expected from point-in-time and homeless service use statistics. There was substantial variation in estimated prevalence across the eight nations. Coupled with the well-established health impacts of homelessness, medical professionals need to be aware of the increased health risks of those with experience of homelessness. These findings support policies aiming to improve health services for people exposed to homelessness.

Lead in New York City community garden chicken eggs: influential factors and health implications.

Raising chickens for eggs in urban areas is becoming increasingly common. Urban chickens may be exposed to lead, a common urban soil contaminant. We measured lead concentrations in chicken eggs from New York City (NYC) community gardens and collected information on factors that might affect those concentrations. Lead was detected between 10 and 167 µg/kg in 48 % of NYC eggs. Measures of lead in eggs from a henhouse were significantly associated (p < 0.005) with lead concentrations in soil. The association between soil and egg lead has been evaluated only once before, by a study of a rural region in Belgium. In our study, the apparent lead soil-to-egg transfer efficiency was considerably lower than that found in Belgium, suggesting that there may be important geographic differences in this transfer. We developed models that suggested that, for sites like ours, lead concentrations in >50 % of eggs from a henhouse would exceed store-bought egg concentrations (<7-13 µg/kg; 3 % above detection limit) at soil lead concentrations >120 mg/kg and that the concentration in one of six eggs from a henhouse would exceed a 100 µg/kg guidance value at soil lead concentrations >410 mg/kg. Our models also suggested that the availability of dietary calcium supplements was another influential factor that reduced egg lead concentrations. Estimates of health risk from consuming eggs with the lead concentrations we measured generally were not significant. However, soil lead concentrations in this study were <600 mg/kg, and considerably higher concentrations are not uncommon. Efforts to reduce lead transfer to chicken eggs and associated exposure are recommended for urban chicken keepers.