A burden of proof study on alcohol consumption and ischemic heart disease.

Cohort and case-control data have suggested an association between low to moderate alcohol consumption and decreased risk of ischemic heart disease (IHD), yet results from Mendelian randomization (MR) studies designed to reduce bias have shown either no or a harmful association. Here we conducted an updated systematic review and re-evaluated existing cohort, case-control, and MR data using the burden of proof meta-analytical framework. Cohort and case-control data show low to moderate alcohol consumption is associated with decreased IHD risk - specifically, intake is inversely related to IHD and myocardial infarction morbidity in both sexes and IHD mortality in males - while pooled MR data show no association, confirming that self-reported versus genetically predicted alcohol use data yield conflicting findings about the alcohol-IHD relationship. Our results highlight the need to advance MR methodologies and emulate randomized trials using large observational databases to obtain more definitive answers to this critical public health question.

Health effects associated with chewing tobacco: a Burden of Proof study.

Chewing tobacco use poses serious health risks; yet it has not received as much attention as other tobacco-related products. This study synthesizes existing evidence regarding the health impacts of chewing tobacco while accounting for various sources of uncertainty. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of chewing tobacco and seven health outcomes, drawing on 103 studies published from 1970 to 2023. We use a Burden of Proof meta-analysis to generate conservative risk estimates and find weak-to-moderate evidence that tobacco chewers have an increased risk of stroke, lip and oral cavity cancer, esophageal cancer, nasopharynx cancer, other pharynx cancer, and laryngeal cancer. We additionally find insufficient evidence of an association between chewing tobacco and ischemic heart disease. Our findings highlight a need for policy makers, researchers, and communities at risk to devote greater attention to chewing tobacco by both advancing tobacco control efforts and investing in strengthening the existing evidence base.

Health effects associated with exposure to secondhand smoke: a Burden of Proof study.

Despite a gradual decline in smoking rates over time, exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) continues to cause harm to nonsmokers, who are disproportionately children and women living in low- and middle-income countries. We comprehensively reviewed the literature published by July 2022 concerning the adverse impacts of SHS exposure on nine health outcomes. Following, we quantified each exposure-response association accounting for various sources of uncertainty and evaluated the strength of the evidence supporting our analyses using the Burden of Proof Risk Function methodology. We found all nine health outcomes to be associated with SHS exposure. We conservatively estimated that SHS increases the risk of ischemic heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes and lung cancer by at least around 8%, 5%, 1% and 1%, respectively, with the evidence supporting these harmful associations rated as weak (two stars). The evidence supporting the harmful associations between SHS and otitis media, asthma, lower respiratory infections, breast cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was weaker (one star). Despite the weak underlying evidence for these associations, our results reinforce the harmful effects of SHS on health and the need to prioritize advancing efforts to reduce active and passive smoking through a combination of public health policies and education initiatives.

Meningococcal A conjugate vaccine coverage in the meningitis belt of Africa from 2010 to 2021: a modelling study.

Background: As of the end of 2021, twenty-four countries in the African meningitis belt have rolled out mass campaigns of MenAfriVac®, a meningococcal A conjugate vaccine (MACV) first introduced in 2010. Twelve have completed introduction of MACV into routine immunisation (RI) schedules. Although select post-campaign coverage data are published, no study currently comprehensively estimates MACV coverage from both routine and campaign sources in the meningitis belt across age, country, and time. Methods: In this modelling study, we assembled campaign data from the twenty-four countries that had introduced any immunisation activity during or before the year 2021 (Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Eritrea, the Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Kenya, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, South Sudan, Sudan, Togo and Uganda) via WHO reports and RI data via systematic review. Next, we modelled RI coverage using Spatiotemporal Gaussian Process Regression. Then, we synthesized these estimates with campaign data into a cohort model, tracking coverage for each age cohort from age 1 to 29 years over time for each country. Findings: Coverage in high-risk locations amongst children aged 1-4 in 2021 was estimated to be highest in Togo with 96.0% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 92.0-99.0), followed by Niger with 87.2% (95% UI 85.3-89.0) and Burkina Faso, with 86.4% (95% UI 85.1-87.6). These countries had high coverage values driven by an initial successful mass immunisation campaign, followed by a catch-up campaign, followed by introduction of RI. Due to the influence of older mass vaccination campaigns, coverage proportions skewed higher in the 1-29 age group than the 1-4 group, with a median coverage of 82.9% in 2021 in the broader age group compared to 45.6% in the narrower age group. Interpretation: These estimates highlight where gaps in immunisation remain and emphasise the need for broader efforts to strengthen RI systems. This methodological framework can be applied to estimate coverage for any vaccine that has been delivered in both routine and supplemental immunisation activities. Funding: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

The Burden of Proof studies: assessing the evidence of risk.

Exposure to risks throughout life results in a wide variety of outcomes. Objectively judging the relative impact of these risks on personal and population health is fundamental to individual survival and societal prosperity. Existing mechanisms to quantify and rank the magnitude of these myriad effects and the uncertainty in their estimation are largely subjective, leaving room for interpretation that can fuel academic controversy and add to confusion when communicating risk. We present a new suite of meta-analyses-termed the Burden of Proof studies-designed specifically to help evaluate these methodological issues objectively and quantitatively. Through this data-driven approach that complements existing systems, including GRADE and Cochrane Reviews, we aim to aggregate evidence across multiple studies and enable a quantitative comparison of risk-outcome pairs. We introduce the burden of proof risk function (BPRF), which estimates the level of risk closest to the null hypothesis that is consistent with available data. Here we illustrate the BPRF methodology for the evaluation of four exemplar risk-outcome pairs: smoking and lung cancer, systolic blood pressure and ischemic heart disease, vegetable consumption and ischemic heart disease, and unprocessed red meat consumption and ischemic heart disease. The strength of evidence for each relationship is assessed by computing and summarizing the BPRF, and then translating the summary to a simple star rating. The Burden of Proof methodology provides a consistent way to understand, evaluate and summarize evidence of risk across different risk-outcome pairs, and informs risk analysis conducted as part of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study.

Effects of elevated systolic blood pressure on ischemic heart disease: a Burden of Proof study.

High systolic blood pressure (SBP) is a major risk factor for ischemic heart disease (IHD), the leading cause of death worldwide. Using data from published observational studies and controlled trials, we estimated the mean SBP-IHD dose-response function and burden of proof risk function (BPRF), and we calculated a risk outcome score (ROS) and corresponding star rating (one to five). We found a very strong, significant harmful effect of SBP on IHD, with a mean risk-relative to that at 100 mm Hg SBP-of 1.39 (95% uncertainty interval including between-study heterogeneity 1.34-1.44) at 120 mm Hg, 1.81 (1.70-1.93) at 130 mm Hg and 4.48 (3.81-5.26) at 165 mm Hg. The conservative BPRF measure indicated that SBP exposure between 107.5 and 165.0 mm Hg raised risk by 101.36% on average, yielding a ROS of 0.70 and star rating of five. Our analysis shows that IHD risk was already increasing at 120 mm Hg SBP, rising steadily up to 165 mm Hg and increasing less steeply above that point. Our study endorses the need to prioritize and strengthen strategies for screening, to raise awareness of the need for timely diagnosis and treatment of hypertension and to increase the resources allocated for understanding primordial prevention of elevated blood pressure.

Health effects associated with vegetable consumption: a Burden of Proof study.

Previous research suggests a protective effect of vegetable consumption against chronic disease, but the quality of evidence underlying those findings remains uncertain. We applied a Bayesian meta-regression tool to estimate the mean risk function and quantify the quality of evidence for associations between vegetable consumption and ischemic heart disease (IHD), ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, type 2 diabetes and esophageal cancer. Increasing from no vegetable consumption to the theoretical minimum risk exposure level (306-372 g daily) was associated with a 23.2% decline (95% uncertainty interval, including between-study heterogeneity: 16.4-29.4) in ischemic stroke risk; a 22.9% (13.6-31.3) decline in IHD risk; a 15.9% (1.7-28.1) decline in hemorrhagic stroke risk; a 28.5% (-0.02-51.4) decline in esophageal cancer risk; and a 26.1% (-3.6-48.3) decline in type 2 diabetes risk. We found statistically significant protective effects of vegetable consumption for ischemic stroke (three stars), IHD (two stars), hemorrhagic stroke (two stars) and esophageal cancer (two stars). Including between-study heterogeneity, we did not detect a significant association with type 2 diabetes, corresponding to a one-star rating. Although current evidence supports increased efforts and policies to promote vegetable consumption, remaining uncertainties suggest the need for continued research.

Health effects associated with consumption of unprocessed red meat: a Burden of Proof study.

Characterizing the potential health effects of exposure to risk factors such as red meat consumption is essential to inform health policy and practice. Previous meta-analyses evaluating the effects of red meat intake have generated mixed findings and do not formally assess evidence strength. Here, we conducted a systematic review and implemented a meta-regression-relaxing conventional log-linearity assumptions and incorporating between-study heterogeneity-to evaluate the relationships between unprocessed red meat consumption and six potential health outcomes. We found weak evidence of association between unprocessed red meat consumption and colorectal cancer, breast cancer, type 2 diabetes and ischemic heart disease. Moreover, we found no evidence of an association between unprocessed red meat and ischemic stroke or hemorrhagic stroke. We also found that while risk for the six outcomes in our analysis combined was minimized at 0 g unprocessed red meat intake per day, the 95% uncertainty interval that incorporated between-study heterogeneity was very wide: from 0-200 g d-1. While there is some evidence that eating unprocessed red meat is associated with increased risk of disease incidence and mortality, it is weak and insufficient to make stronger or more conclusive recommendations. More rigorous, well-powered research is needed to better understand and quantify the relationship between consumption of unprocessed red meat and chronic disease.

Health effects associated with smoking: a Burden of Proof study.

As a leading behavioral risk factor for numerous health outcomes, smoking is a major ongoing public health challenge. Although evidence on the health effects of smoking has been widely reported, few attempts have evaluated the dose-response relationship between smoking and a diverse range of health outcomes systematically and comprehensively. In the present study, we re-estimated the dose-response relationships between current smoking and 36 health outcomes by conducting systematic reviews up to 31 May 2022, employing a meta-analytic method that incorporates between-study heterogeneity into estimates of uncertainty. Among the 36 selected outcomes, 8 had strong-to-very-strong evidence of an association with smoking, 21 had weak-to-moderate evidence of association and 7 had no evidence of association. By overcoming many of the limitations of traditional meta-analyses, our approach provides comprehensive, up-to-date and easy-to-use estimates of the evidence on the health effects of smoking. These estimates provide important information for tobacco control advocates, policy makers, researchers, physicians, smokers and the public.

Quantifying the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on gender equality on health, social, and economic indicators: a comprehensive review of data from March, 2020, to September, 2021.

BACKGROUND: Gender is emerging as a significant factor in the social, economic, and health effects of COVID-19. However, most existing studies have focused on its direct impact on health. Here, we aimed to explore the indirect effects of COVID-19 on gender disparities globally. METHODS: We reviewed publicly available datasets with information on indicators related to vaccine hesitancy and uptake, health care services, economic and work-related concerns, education, and safety at home and in the community. We used mixed effects regression, Gaussian process regression, and bootstrapping to synthesise all data sources. We accounted for uncertainty in the underlying data and modelling process. We then used mixed effects logistic regression to explore gender gaps globally and by region. FINDINGS: Between March, 2020, and September, 2021, women were more likely to report employment loss (26·0% [95% uncertainty interval 23·8-28·8, by September, 2021) than men (20·4% [18·2-22·9], by September, 2021), as well as forgoing work to care for others (ratio of women to men: 1·8 by March, 2020, and 2·4 by September, 2021). Women and girls were 1·21 times (1·20-1·21) more likely than men and boys to report dropping out of school for reasons other than school closures. Women were also 1·23 (1·22-1·23) times more likely than men to report that gender-based violence had increased during the pandemic. By September 2021, women and men did not differ significantly in vaccine hesitancy or uptake. INTERPRETATION: The most significant gender gaps identified in our study show intensified levels of pre-existing widespread inequalities between women and men during the COVID-19 pandemic. Political and social leaders should prioritise policies that enable and encourage women to participate in the labour force and continue their education, thereby equipping and enabling them with greater ability to overcome the barriers they face. FUNDING: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Estimating global and regional disruptions to routine childhood vaccine coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and efforts to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission substantially affected health services worldwide. To better understand the impact of the pandemic on childhood routine immunisation, we estimated disruptions in vaccine coverage associated with the pandemic in 2020, globally and by Global Burden of Disease (GBD) super-region. METHODS: For this analysis we used a two-step hierarchical random spline modelling approach to estimate global and regional disruptions to routine immunisation using administrative data and reports from electronic immunisation systems, with mobility data as a model input. Paired with estimates of vaccine coverage expected in the absence of COVID-19, which were derived from vaccine coverage models from GBD 2020, Release 1 (GBD 2020 R1), we estimated the number of children who missed routinely delivered doses of the third-dose diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP3) vaccine and first-dose measles-containing vaccine (MCV1) in 2020. FINDINGS: Globally, in 2020, estimated vaccine coverage was 76·7% (95% uncertainty interval 74·3-78·6) for DTP3 and 78·9% (74·8-81·9) for MCV1, representing relative reductions of 7·7% (6·0-10·1) for DTP3 and 7·9% (5·2-11·7) for MCV1, compared to expected doses delivered in the absence of the COVID-19 pandemic. From January to December, 2020, we estimated that 30·0 million (27·6-33·1) children missed doses of DTP3 and 27·2 million (23·4-32·5) children missed MCV1 doses. Compared to expected gaps in coverage for eligible children in 2020, these estimates represented an additional 8·5 million (6·5-11·6) children not routinely vaccinated with DTP3 and an additional 8·9 million (5·7-13·7) children not routinely vaccinated with MCV1 attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic. Globally, monthly disruptions were highest in April, 2020, across all GBD super-regions, with 4·6 million (4·0-5·4) children missing doses of DTP3 and 4·4 million (3·7-5·2) children missing doses of MCV1. Every GBD super-region saw reductions in vaccine coverage in March and April, with the most severe annual impacts in north Africa and the Middle East, south Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean. We estimated the lowest annual reductions in vaccine delivery in sub-Saharan Africa, where disruptions remained minimal throughout the year. For some super-regions, including southeast Asia, east Asia, and Oceania for both DTP3 and MCV1, the high-income super-region for DTP3, and south Asia for MCV1, estimates suggest that monthly doses were delivered at or above expected levels during the second half of 2020. INTERPRETATION: Routine immunisation services faced stark challenges in 2020, with the COVID-19 pandemic causing the most widespread and largest global disruption in recent history. Although the latest coverage trajectories point towards recovery in some regions, a combination of lagging catch-up immunisation services, continued SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and persistent gaps in vaccine coverage before the pandemic still left millions of children under-vaccinated or unvaccinated against preventable diseases at the end of 2020, and these gaps are likely to extend throughout 2021. Strengthening routine immunisation data systems and efforts to target resources and outreach will be essential to minimise the risk of vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks, reach children who missed routine vaccine doses during the pandemic, and accelerate progress towards higher and more equitable vaccination coverage over the next decade. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Forecasting life expectancy, years of life lost, and all-cause and cause-specific mortality for 250 causes of death: reference and alternative scenarios for 2016-40 for 195 countries and territories.

BACKGROUND: Understanding potential trajectories in health and drivers of health is crucial to guiding long-term investments and policy implementation. Past work on forecasting has provided an incomplete landscape of future health scenarios, highlighting a need for a more robust modelling platform from which policy options and potential health trajectories can be assessed. This study provides a novel approach to modelling life expectancy, all-cause mortality and cause of death forecasts -and alternative future scenarios-for 250 causes of death from 2016 to 2040 in 195 countries and territories. METHODS: We modelled 250 causes and cause groups organised by the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) hierarchical cause structure, using GBD 2016 estimates from 1990-2016, to generate predictions for 2017-40. Our modelling framework used data from the GBD 2016 study to systematically account for the relationships between risk factors and health outcomes for 79 independent drivers of health. We developed a three-component model of cause-specific mortality: a component due to changes in risk factors and select interventions; the underlying mortality rate for each cause that is a function of income per capita, educational attainment, and total fertility rate under 25 years and time; and an autoregressive integrated moving average model for unexplained changes correlated with time. We assessed the performance by fitting models with data from 1990-2006 and using these to forecast for 2007-16. Our final model used for generating forecasts and alternative scenarios was fitted to data from 1990-2016. We used this model for 195 countries and territories to generate a reference scenario or forecast through 2040 for each measure by location. Additionally, we generated better health and worse health scenarios based on the 85th and 15th percentiles, respectively, of annualised rates of change across location-years for all the GBD risk factors, income per person, educational attainment, select intervention coverage, and total fertility rate under 25 years in the past. We used the model to generate all-cause age-sex specific mortality, life expectancy, and years of life lost (YLLs) for 250 causes. Scenarios for fertility were also generated and used in a cohort component model to generate population scenarios. For each reference forecast, better health, and worse health scenarios, we generated estimates of mortality and YLLs attributable to each risk factor in the future. FINDINGS: Globally, most independent drivers of health were forecast to improve by 2040, but 36 were forecast to worsen. As shown by the better health scenarios, greater progress might be possible, yet for some drivers such as high body-mass index (BMI), their toll will rise in the absence of intervention. We forecasted global life expectancy to increase by 4·4 years (95% UI 2·2 to 6·4) for men and 4·4 years (2·1 to 6·4) for women by 2040, but based on better and worse health scenarios, trajectories could range from a gain of 7·8 years (5·9 to 9·8) to a non-significant loss of 0·4 years (-2·8 to 2·2) for men, and an increase of 7·2 years (5·3 to 9·1) to essentially no change (0·1 years [-2·7 to 2·5]) for women. In 2040, Japan, Singapore, Spain, and Switzerland had a forecasted life expectancy exceeding 85 years for both sexes, and 59 countries including China were projected to surpass a life expectancy of 80 years by 2040. At the same time, Central African Republic, Lesotho, Somalia, and Zimbabwe had projected life expectancies below 65 years in 2040, indicating global disparities in survival are likely to persist if current trends hold. Forecasted YLLs showed a rising toll from several non-communicable diseases (NCDs), partly driven by population growth and ageing. Differences between the reference forecast and alternative scenarios were most striking for HIV/AIDS, for which a potential increase of 120·2% (95% UI 67·2-190·3) in YLLs (nearly 118 million) was projected globally from 2016-40 under the worse health scenario. Compared with 2016, NCDs were forecast to account for a greater proportion of YLLs in all GBD regions by 2040 (67·3% of YLLs [95% UI 61·9-72·3] globally); nonetheless, in many lower-income countries, communicable, maternal, neonatal, and nutritional (CMNN) diseases still accounted for a large share of YLLs in 2040 (eg, 53·5% of YLLs [95% UI 48·3-58·5] in Sub-Saharan Africa). There were large gaps for many health risks between the reference forecast and better health scenario for attributable YLLs. In most countries, metabolic risks amenable to health care (eg, high blood pressure and high plasma fasting glucose) and risks best targeted by population-level or intersectoral interventions (eg, tobacco, high BMI, and ambient particulate matter pollution) had some of the largest differences between reference and better health scenarios. The main exception was sub-Saharan Africa, where many risks associated with poverty and lower levels of development (eg, unsafe water and sanitation, household air pollution, and child malnutrition) were projected to still account for substantive disparities between reference and better health scenarios in 2040. INTERPRETATION: With the present study, we provide a robust, flexible forecasting platform from which reference forecasts and alternative health scenarios can be explored in relation to a wide range of independent drivers of health. Our reference forecast points to overall improvements through 2040 in most countries, yet the range found across better and worse health scenarios renders a precarious vision of the future-a world with accelerating progress from technical innovation but with the potential for worsening health outcomes in the absence of deliberate policy action. For some causes of YLLs, large differences between the reference forecast and alternative scenarios reflect the opportunity to accelerate gains if countries move their trajectories toward better health scenarios-or alarming challenges if countries fall behind their reference forecasts. Generally, decision makers should plan for the likely continued shift toward NCDs and target resources toward the modifiable risks that drive substantial premature mortality. If such modifiable risks are prioritised today, there is opportunity to reduce avoidable mortality in the future. However, CMNN causes and related risks will remain the predominant health priority among lower-income countries. Based on our 2040 worse health scenario, there is a real risk of HIV mortality rebounding if countries lose momentum against the HIV epidemic, jeopardising decades of progress against the disease. Continued technical innovation and increased health spending, including development assistance for health targeted to the world's poorest people, are likely to remain vital components to charting a future where all populations can live full, healthy lives. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Toward a systems approach to enteric pathogen transmission: from individual independence to community interdependence.

Diarrheal disease is still a major cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide; thus a large body of research has been produced describing its risks. We review more than four decades of literature on diarrheal disease epidemiology. These studies detail a progression in the conceptual understanding of transmission of enteric pathogens and demonstrate that diarrheal disease is caused by many interdependent pathways. However, arguments by diarrheal disease researchers in favor of attending to interaction and interdependencies have only recently yielded more formal systems-level approaches. Therefore, interdependence has not yet been highlighted in significant new research initiatives or policy decisions. We argue for a systems-level framework that will contextualize transmission and inform prevention and control efforts so that they can integrate transmission pathways. These systems approaches should be employed to account for community effects (i.e., interactions among individuals and/or households).