RESUMO
BACKGROUND: This article is part of a series commissioned by the International Epidemiological Association, aimed at describing population health and epidemiological resources in the six World Health Organization (WHO) regions. It covers 32 of the 53 WHO European countries, namely the Western European countries, the Balkan countries and the Baltic countries. METHODS: The burdens of mortality and morbidity and the patterns of risk factors and inequalities have been reviewed in order to identify health priorities and challenges. Literature and internet searches were conducted to stock-take epidemiological teaching, research activities, funding and scientific productivity. FINDINGS: These countries have among the highest life expectancies worldwide. However, within- and between-country inequalities persist, which are largely due to inequalities in distribution of main health determinants. There is a long tradition of epidemiological research and teaching in most countries, in particular in the Western European countries. Cross-national networks and collaborations are increasing through the support of the European Union which fosters procedures to standardize educational systems across Europe and provides funding for epidemiological research through framework programmes. The number of Medline-indexed epidemiological research publications per year led by Western European countries has been increasing. The countries accounts for nearly a third of the global epidemiological publication. CONCLUSIONS: Although population health has improved considerably overall, persistent within- and between-country inequalities continue to challenge national and European health institutions. More research, policy and action on the social determinants of health are required in the region. Epidemiological training, research and workforce in the Baltic and Balkan countries should be strengthened. European epidemiologists can play pivotal roles and must influence legislation concerning production and access to high-quality data.
Assuntos
Nível de Saúde , Morbidade/tendências , Mortalidade/tendências , Doenças Cardiovasculares/epidemiologia , Causas de Morte , Poluição Ambiental , Europa (Continente)/epidemiologia , Europa Oriental/epidemiologia , Comportamentos Relacionados com a Saúde , Disparidades nos Níveis de Saúde , Humanos , Expectativa de Vida , Neoplasias/epidemiologia , Saúde Ocupacional , Saúde Pública/educação , Fatores de Risco , Determinantes Sociais da Saúde , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Organização Mundial da SaúdeRESUMO
A conflict of interest arises by having two conflicting goals in one's research. The primary goal of research relevant to public health is to produce impartial evidence on health hazards for humans. Several entities - including industry - may have public health as a goal among others, but this is not their primary goal. Primary goals are in those cases profit or career, that conflict with the goal of health. It is a role of the State to foster research whose primary goal is impartial evidence on factors affecting population health. Disclosure of conflicts of interest is not enough: the view that disclosure solves all problems amounts to say that a declaration of having produced unbiased evidence is a self-fulfilling guarantee that the evidence will not be affected by conflicts of interest. This concept is seriously misleading. A conflict of interest arises from the circumstances in which research occurs and does not exist only in the opinion of some people or groups (or the authors of a paper).
Assuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica/ética , Conflito de Interesses , Apoio Financeiro/ética , Indústrias/ética , Saúde Pública/ética , Pesquisa Biomédica/economia , Conflito de Interesses/economia , Revelação/ética , Humanos , Indústrias/economia , Saúde Pública/economiaAssuntos
Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Epidemiológicos , Disparidades nos Níveis de Saúde , População Suburbana/estatística & dados numéricos , População Urbana/estatística & dados numéricos , Causas de Morte , Feminino , Inquéritos Epidemiológicos , Humanos , Incidência , Itália/epidemiologia , Masculino , Prevalência , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
In this article, we use the principlist approach to identify, analyse and attempt to solve the ethical problem raised by a pregnant woman's request for cesarean delivery in absence of medical indications. We use two different types of premises: factual (facts about cesarean delivery and specifically attitudes of obstetricians as derived from the EUROBS European study) and value premises (principles of beneficence and non-maleficence, respect for autonomy and justice).Beneficence/non-maleficence entails physicians' responsibility to minimise harms and maximise benefits. Avoiding its inherent risks makes a prima facie case against cesarean section without medical indication. However, as vaginal delivery can have unintended consequences, there is a need to balance the somewhat dissimilar risks and benefits. The principle of autonomy poses a challenge in case of disagreement between the pregnant woman and the physician. Improved communication aimed to enable better informed choice may overcome some instances of disagreement. The principle of justice prohibits unfair discrimination, and broadly favours optimising resource utilisation. Available evidence supports vaginal birth in uncomplicated term pregnancies as the standard of care. The principlist approach offered a useful framework for ethical analysis of cesarean delivery on maternal request, identified the rights and duties of those involved, and helped reach a conclusion, although conflict at the individual level may remain challenging.
Assuntos
Cesárea/ética , Mães , Relações Médico-Paciente/ética , Ética Baseada em Princípios , Adulto , Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Beneficência , Cesárea/economia , Cesárea/estatística & dados numéricos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos/ética , Ética Clínica , Europa (Continente)/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Autonomia Pessoal , Gravidez , Justiça SocialAssuntos
Epidemiologia/tendências , Serviços de Saúde/tendências , Saúde Pública/tendências , Justiça Social/tendências , Projetos de Pesquisa Epidemiológica , Feminino , Saúde Global , Serviços de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Serviços de Saúde/normas , Humanos , Masculino , Saúde Pública/legislação & jurisprudência , Saúde Pública/normas , Pesquisa/legislação & jurisprudência , Pesquisa/normas , Pesquisa/tendências , Justiça Social/legislação & jurisprudência , Fatores SocioeconômicosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Several countries are discussing new legislation on the ban of smoking in public places, and on the acceptable levels of traffic-related air pollutants. It is therefore useful to estimate the burden of disease associated with indoor and outdoor air pollution. METHODS: We have estimated exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) and to air pollution in never smokers and ex-smokers in a large prospective study in 10 European countries (European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition)(N = 520,000). We report estimates of the proportion of lung cancers attributable to ETS and air pollution in this population. RESULTS: The proportion of lung cancers in never- and ex-smokers attributable to ETS was estimated as between 16 and 24%, mainly due to the contribution of work-related exposure. We have also estimated that 5-7% of lung cancers in European never smokers and ex-smokers are attributable to high levels of air pollution, as expressed by NO2 or proximity to heavy traffic roads. NO2 is the expression of a mixture of combustion (traffic-related) particles and gases, and is also related to power plants and waste incinerator emissions. DISCUSSION: We have estimated risks of lung cancer attributable to ETS and traffic-related air pollution in a large prospective study in Europe. Information bias can be ruled out due to the prospective design, and we have thoroughly controlled for potential confounders, including restriction to never smokers and long-term ex-smokers. Concerning traffic-related air pollution, the thresholds for indicators of exposure we have used are rather strict, i.e. they correspond to the high levels of exposure that characterize mainly Southern European countries (levels of NO2 in Denmark and Sweden are closer to 10-20 ug/m3, whereas levels in Italy are around 30 or 40, or higher).Therefore, further reduction in exposure levels below 30 ug/m3 would correspond to additional lung cancer cases prevented, and our estimate of 5-7% is likely to be an underestimate. Overall, our prospective study draws attention to the need for strict legislation concerning the quality of air in Europe.