Differences across the lifespan between females and males in the top 20 causes of disease burden globally: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021.

BACKGROUND: Sex and gender shape health. There is a growing body of evidence focused on comprehensively and systematically examining the magnitude, persistence, and nature of differences in health between females and males. Here, we aimed to quantify differences in the leading causes of disease burden between females and males across ages and geographies. METHODS: We used the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021 to compare disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) rates for females and males for the 20 leading causes of disease burden for individuals older than 10 years at the global level and across seven world regions, between 1990 and 2021. We present absolute and relative differences in the cause-specific DALY rates between females and males. FINDINGS: Globally, females had a higher burden of morbidity-driven conditions with the largest differences in DALYs for low back pain (with 478·5 [95% uncertainty interval 346·3-632·8] more DALYs per 100 000 individuals among females than males), depressive disorders (348·3 [241·3-471·0]), and headache disorders (332·9 [48·3-731·9]), whereas males had higher DALY rates for mortality-driven conditions with the largest differences in DALYs for COVID-19 (with 1767·8 [1581·1-1943·5] more DALYs per 100 000 among males than females), road injuries (1012·2 [934·1-1092·9]), and ischaemic heart disease (1611·8 [1405·0-1856·3]). The differences between sexes became larger over age and remained consistent over time for all conditions except HIV/AIDS. The largest difference in HIV/AIDS was observed among those aged 25-49 years in sub-Saharan Africa with 1724·8 (918·8-2613·7) more DALYs per 100 000 among females than males. INTERPRETATION: The notable health differences between females and males point to an urgent need for policies to be based on sex-specific and age-specific data. It is also important to continue promoting gender-sensitive research, and ultimately, implement interventions that not only reduce the burden of disease but also achieve greater health equity. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Single nucleotide polymorphisms of ANKK1, DDR4, and GRIN2B genes predict behavior in a prospective cohort of Mexican children and adolescents.

Numerous studies have established associations between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and various behavioral and neurodevelopmental conditions. This study explores the links between SNPs in candidate genes involved in central nervous system (CNS) physiology and their implications for the behavioral and emotional aspects in children and teenagers. A total of 590 participants, aged 7-15 years, from the Early Life Exposures In Mexico To Environmental Toxicants (ELEMENT) cohort study in Mexico City, underwent genotyping for at least one of 15 CNS gene-related SNPs at different timepoints. We employed multiple linear regression models to assess the potential impact of genetic variations on behavioral and cognitive traits, as measured by the Behavioral Assessment System for Children (BASC) and Conners parent rating scales. Significant associations were observed, including the rs1800497 TC genotype (ANKK1) with the Cognitive Problems/Inattention variable (p value = 0.003), the rs1800955 CT genotype (DDR4) with the Emotional Lability Global index variable (p value = 0.01), and the rs10492138 GA and rs7970177 TC genotypes (GRIN2B) with the Depression variable (p values 0.007 and 0.012, respectively). These finds suggest potential genetic profiles associated with "risk" and "protective" behaviors for these SNPs. Our results provide valuable insights into the role of genetic variations in neurobehavior and highlight the need for further research in the early identification and intervention in individuals at risk for these conditions.

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.

Meat consumption & positive mental health: A scoping review.

The objective of this scoping review was to examine the breadth of the existing literature on the relation between meat consumption or meat abstention and positive psychological functioning. In April 2022, we conducted a systematic search of online databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, Medline, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) for primary research examining positive psychological functioning in meat consumers and those who abstain from meat. Thirteen studies met the inclusion/exclusion criteria, representing 89,138 participants (54,413 females and 33,863 males) with 78,562 meat consumers and 10,148 meat abstainers (13-102 years) from multiple geographic regions. The primary outcomes were life satisfaction, "positive mental health", self-esteem, and vigor. The secondary outcomes were "meaning in life", optimism, positive emotions, and psychological well-being. Eight of the 13 studies demonstrated no differences between the groups on positive psychological functioning, three studies showed mixed results, and two studies showed that compared to meat abstainers, meat consumers had greater self-esteem, "positive mental health", and "meaning in life". Studies varied substantially in methods and outcomes. Although a small minority of studies showed that meat consumers had more positive psychological functioning, no studies suggested that meat abstainers did. There was mixed evidence for temporal relations, but study designs precluded causal inferences. Our review demonstrates the need for future research given the equivocal nature of the extant literature on the relation between meat consumption and meat abstention and positive psychological functioning.

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.

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.

Academic-humanitarian partnerships: leveraging strengths to combat COVID-19.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has overwhelmed many health systems globally. Innovative initiatives are needed to combat the pandemic and scaleup response efforts. This communication describes a collaborative partnership between an international humanitarian organization and an academic university to develop and rapidly deploy a remote digital COVID-19 trainer-of-trainers (TOT) program to enhance global response. The ongoing program has resulted in more than 900 TOT personnel who have themselves trained over 22,000 frontline response providers from 21 different countries and territories. The developed and implemented COVID-19 digital training program is a key example of how academic-humanitarian partnerships can be leveraged to strengthen healthcare training and response capacity during pandemics.

The use of technology in the sexual health education especially among minority adolescent girls in the United States.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to examine current sexual health education technologies for adolescents and identify gaps in knowledge. Disparities in sexual health education are prominent and mainly affect young women of color. As a result, the use of technology to reach these marginalized populations could potentially invoke change. Thus, it is crucial to determine the viability of technology as a mechanism to bridge the knowledge gap regarding sexual health for adolescents that are most at risk of sexually transmitted infections and unwanted pregnancies. RECENT FINDINGS: With a lack of standardized, evidenced-based sexual health education programs in the United States, the future of comprehensive sexual health education is moving toward smartphone apps. Many sexual health technologies exist that target adolescents, most of which have been proven to demonstrate positive effects. Use of mobile apps, especially for vulnerable populations, can be more effective because of privacy and widespread dissemination. SUMMARY: Ultimately, more research needs to be conducted to determine the most effective content for these sexual health apps. Additionally, more research should be conducted on effective sexual health apps for marginalized populations to determine whether technology is a viable solution.

Selective antimicrobial activity of chitosan on beer spoilage bacteria and brewing yeasts.

Chitosan (0.1 g l(-1)), assayed in a simple medium, reduced the viability of four lactic acid bacteria isolated during the beer production process by 5 logarithmic cycles, whereas activity against seven commercial brewing yeasts required up to 1 g chitosan l(-1). Antimicrobial activity was inversely affected by the pH of the assay medium. In brewery wort, chitosan (0.1 g l(-1)) selectively inhibited bacterial growth without altering yeast viability or fermenting performance.