Associations between dimensions of the social environment and cardiometabolic risk factors: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Aim: The social environment (SE), including social contacts, norms and support, is an understudied element of the living environment which impacts health. We aim to comprehensively summarize the evidence on the association between the SE and risk factors of cardiometabolic disease (CMD). Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis based on studies published in PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection from inception to 16 February 2021. Studies that used a risk factor of CMD, e.g., HbA1c or blood pressure, as outcome and social environmental factors such as area-level deprivation or social network size as independent variables were included. Titles and abstracts were screened in duplicate. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data appraisal and extraction were based on the study protocol published in PROSPERO. Data were synthesized through vote counting and meta-analyses. Results: From the 7521 records screened, 168 studies reported 1050 associations were included in this review. Four meta-analyses based on 24 associations suggested that an unfavorable social environment was associated with increased risk of cardiometabolic risk factors, with three of them being statistically significant. For example, individuals that experienced more economic and social disadvantage had a higher "CVD risk scores" (OR = 1.54, 95%CI: 1.35 to 1.84). Of the 458 associations included in the vote counting, 323 (71%) pointed towards unfavorable social environments being associated with higher CMD risk. Conclusion: Higher economic and social disadvantage seem to contribute to unfavorable CMD risk factor profiles, while evidence for other dimensions of the social environment is limited.

A generic theory of change-based framework with core indicators for monitoring the effectiveness of large-scale food fortification programs in low- and middle-income countries.

Large-scale food fortification (LSFF) programs are widely implemented in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) to alleviate micronutrient deficiencies. However, these programs may not achieve the desired impact due to poor design or bottlenecks in program implementation. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) frameworks and a set of agreed indicators can help to benchmark progress and to strengthen the evidence-base of effectiveness in a standardized way. We aimed to formulate recommendations towards core indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of LSFF programs with their associated metrics, methods, and tools (IMMT). For this, we used a multi-method iterative approach, including a mapping review of the literature, semi-structured interviews with international experts, compilation of a generic Theory of Change (ToC) framework for LSFF program delivery, and selection of IMMT for M&E of LSFF programs at key stages along the ToC delivery framework. Lastly, we conducted exploratory, qualitative interviews with key informants in Nigeria to explore experiences and perceptions related to the implementation of LSFF programs in Nigeria's context, and their opinion towards the proposed set of core IMMT. The literature search resulted in 14 published and 15 grey literature documents, from which we extracted a total of 41 indicators. Based on the available literature and interviews with international experts, we mapped a ToC delivery framework and selected nine core indicators at the output, outcome and impact level for M&E of the effectiveness of LSFF programs. Key informants in Nigeria revealed that the main bottlenecks for implementation of the proposed IMMT are related to the lack of technical capacity, equipment, laboratory infrastructure, and financial resources. In conclusion, we propose a set of nine core indicators for enabling comprehensive M&E of the effectiveness of LSFF programs in LMIC. This proposed set of core indicators can be used for further evaluation, harmonization and integration in national and international protocols for M&E of LSFF programs.

Critical review of indicators, metrics, methods, and tools for monitoring and evaluation of biofortification programs at scale.

Sound monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems are needed to inform effective biofortification program management and implementation. Despite the existence of M&E frameworks for biofortification programs, the use of indicators, metrics, methods, and tools (IMMT) are currently not harmonized, rendering the tracking of biofortification programs difficult. We aimed to compile IMMT for M&E of existing biofortification programs and recommend a sub-set of high-level indicators (HLI) for a harmonized global M&E framework. We conducted (1) a mapping review to compile IMMT for M&E biofortification programs; (2) semi-structured interviews (SSIs) with biofortification programming experts (and other relevant stakeholders) to contextualize findings from step 1; and (3) compiled a generic biofortification program Theory of Change (ToC) to use it as an analytical framework for selecting the HLI. This study revealed diversity in seed systems and crop value chains across countries and crops, resulting in differences in M&E frameworks. Yet, sufficient commonalities between implementation pathways emerged. A set of 17 HLI for tracking critical results along the biofortification implementation pathway represented in the ToC is recommended for a harmonized global M&E framework. Further research is needed to test, revise, and develop mechanisms to harmonize the M&E framework across programs, institutions, and countries.

Environmental risk factors of type 2 diabetes-an exposome approach.

Type 2 diabetes is one of the major chronic diseases accounting for a substantial proportion of disease burden in Western countries. The majority of the burden of type 2 diabetes is attributed to environmental risks and modifiable risk factors such as lifestyle. The environment we live in, and changes to it, can thus contribute substantially to the prevention of type 2 diabetes at a population level. The 'exposome' represents the (measurable) totality of environmental, i.e. nongenetic, drivers of health and disease. The external exposome comprises aspects of the built environment, the social environment, the physico-chemical environment and the lifestyle/food environment. The internal exposome comprises measurements at the epigenetic, transcript, proteome, microbiome or metabolome level to study either the exposures directly, the imprints these exposures leave in the biological system, the potential of the body to combat environmental insults and/or the biology itself. In this review, we describe the evidence for environmental risk factors of type 2 diabetes, focusing on both the general external exposome and imprints of this on the internal exposome. Studies provided established associations of air pollution, residential noise and area-level socioeconomic deprivation with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, while neighbourhood walkability and green space are consistently associated with a reduced risk of type 2 diabetes. There is little or inconsistent evidence on the contribution of the food environment, other aspects of the social environment and outdoor temperature. These environmental factors are thought to affect type 2 diabetes risk mainly through mechanisms incorporating lifestyle factors such as physical activity or diet, the microbiome, inflammation or chronic stress. To further assess causality of these associations, future studies should focus on investigating the longitudinal effects of our environment (and changes to it) in relation to type 2 diabetes risk and whether these associations are explained by these proposed mechanisms.

Validity Coefficient of Repeated Measurements of Urinary Marker of Sugar Intake Is Comparable to Urinary Nitrogen as Marker of Protein Intake in Free-living Subjects.

BACKGROUND: Studies do not show consistent relationships between self-reported intake of sugar and outcome of disease. To overcome the drawbacks of self-reported intake methods, we investigated whether there is an agreement in ranking of individuals between their self-reported sugar intake and urinary sucrose and fructose. METHODS: We used data of 198 Dutch adults (106 women) from the DUPLO study. Sugar intake of all foods and drinks consumed over 24-hour period was estimated by collecting duplicate portions (DP) and 24-hour recalls (24hR), telephone (24hRT) and Web-based (24hRW), while sugar excretion was based on 24-hour urine samples. Sugar content of 24hR was calculated using a newly developed sugar database and sugar content of DPs and urine samples was calculated using high-performance liquid chromatography-atomic emission spectrometry and LC/MS-MS, respectively. Measurement error models assessed validity coefficients (VC) and attenuation factors (AF). Coefficients were compared with those of protein biomarker. RESULTS: The VC for the marker, using DP as reference, showed comparability with substantially better ranking of participants (0.72 for women and 0.93 for men), than 24hRT (0.57 and 0.78) or 24hRW (0.70 and 0.78) as reference in the sucrose models. The VC of the sucrose models was within 10% of the protein models, except for the model with 24hRT as reference, among women. The AF started at higher values and increased by a greater factor compared with the VC. CONCLUSIONS: Repeated measurements of urinary sucrose and fructose as a marker of daily sucrose intake had a ranking performance comparable to urinary nitrogen as marker of protein intake in free-living Dutch adults. IMPACT: The validation of the sugar biomarker in a free-living population with three different dietary assessment methods and its comparable ranking ability with a good recovery biomarker (i.e., protein biomarker) have important research applications. The biomarker may be used for validating dietary assessment methods, for monitoring compliance in human feeding studies, for monitoring the effect of public health interventions, and as a surrogate for ranking subjects according to sucrose intake when information on sucrose in food composition databases is lacking.

Early Measles Vaccination During an Outbreak in the Netherlands: Short-Term and Long-Term Decreases in Antibody Responses Among Children Vaccinated Before 12 Months of Age.

BACKGROUND: The majority of infants will not be protected by maternal antibodies until their first measles vaccination, between 12 and 15 months of age. This provides incentive to reduce the age at measles vaccination, but immunological consequences are insufficiently understood, and long-term effects are largely unknown. METHODS: A total of 79 infants who received early measles vaccination between 6 and 12 months age and a second dose at 14 months of age were compared to 44 children in a control group who received 1 dose at 14 months of age. Measles virus-specific neutralizing antibody concentrations and avidity were determined up to 4 years of age. RESULTS: Infants who first received measles vaccination before 12 months of age had a long-term decrease in the concentration and avidity of measles virus-specific neutralizing antibodies, compared with infants in the control group. For 11.1% of children with a first dose before 9 months of age, antibody levels at 4 years of age had dropped below the cutoff for clinical protection. CONCLUSIONS: Early measles vaccination provides immediate protection in the majority of infants but yields a long-term decrease in neutralizing antibody responses, compared to vaccination at a later age. Additional vaccination at 14 months of age does not improve this. Over the long term, this may result in an increasing number of children susceptible to measles.