Project description:BackgroundInfant mortality rates in the US exceed those in all other developed countries and in many less developed countries, suggesting political factors may contribute.MethodsAnnual time series on overall, White and Black infant mortality rates in the US were analysed over the 1965-2010 time period to ascertain whether infant mortality rates varied across presidential administrations. Data were de-trended using cubic splines and analysed using both graphical and time series regression methods.ResultsAcross all nine presidential administrations, infant mortality rates were below trend when the President was a Democrat and above trend when the President was a Republican. This was true for overall, neonatal and postneonatal mortality. Regression estimates show that, relative to trend, Republican administrations were characterized by infant mortality rates that were, on average, 3% higher than Democratic administrations. In proportional terms, effect size is similar for US Whites and Blacks. US Black rates are more than twice as high as White, implying substantially larger absolute effects for Blacks.ConclusionsWe found a robust, quantitatively important association between net of trend US infant mortality rates and the party affiliation of the president. There may be overlooked ways by which macro-dynamics of policy impact microdynamics of physiology, suggesting the political system is a component of the underlying mechanism generating health inequality in the USA.
Project description:With the development of reliable endoscopic closure techniques and tools, endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is emerging as a therapeutic option for the treatment of subepithelial tumors and epithelial neoplasia with significant fibrosis. EFTR may be categorized as "exposed" and "nonexposed." In exposed EFTR, the full-thickness resection is undertaken with a tunneled or nontunneled technique, with subsequent closure of the defect. In nonexposed EFTR, a secure serosa-to-serosa apposition is achieved before full-thickness resection of the isolated lesion. This document reviews current techniques and devices used for EFTR and reviews clinical applications and outcomes.
Project description:Background and study aims American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guidelines recommend categorizing patients by risk for choledocholithiasis to determine management. The goal of our study was to compare the accuracy of criteria proposed in these guidelines. Patients and methods All patients with suspected choledocholithiasis at our institution were prospectively identified. Based upon initial test results, patients were categorized as low, intermediate, and high risk for choledocholithiasis per ASGE 2010 and 2019, and ESGE criteria. Patients were followed until 30 days post-discharge. Results of endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP), endoscopic ultrasound, and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography were used as criteria standard for choledocholithiasis. The accuracy of each criterion for choledocholithiasis was computed. Results During the study period, 359 consecutive patients with suspected choledocholithiasis were identified, of whom 225 had choledocholithiasis. Median patient age was 69 years and 55.3% were women. ESGE criteria categorized 47.9% as high-risk, lower than ASGE 2010 (62.7%, P <0.01), and 2019 criteria (54.6%, P =0.07). In high-risk patients, choledocholithiasis was noted in 83.1% for ESGE criteria, similar for ASGE 2019 (81.6%, P =0.7) and 2010 criteria (79.1%, P =0.3). The percentage of patients who underwent unnecessary ERCP was 8.1% per ESGE criteria, lower than ASGE 2010 (13.1%, P =0.03), but similar to 2019 criteria (10%, P =0.4). No difference in accuracy for choledocholithiasis was noted among the three criteria. No 30-day readmissions for choledocholithiasis were noted in the low-risk category. Conclusions ESGE and ASGE guidelines have similar accuracy for diagnosis of choledocholithiasis. However, ESGE criteria result in more patients needing additional testing, but also a smaller proportion of patients undergoing unnecessary ERCP.
Project description:Each year choledocholithiasis results in biliary obstruction, cholangitis, and pancreatitis in a significant number of patients. The primary treatment, ERCP, is minimally invasive but associated with adverse events in 6% to 15%. This American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Standard of Practice (SOP) Guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the endoscopic evaluation and treatment of choledocholithiasis. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to rigorously review and synthesize the contemporary literature regarding the following topics: EUS versus MRCP for diagnosis, the role of early ERCP in gallstone pancreatitis, endoscopic papillary dilation after sphincterotomy versus sphincterotomy alone for large bile duct stones, and impact of ERCP-guided intraductal therapy for large and difficult choledocholithiasis. Comprehensive systematic reviews were also performed to assess the following: same-admission cholecystectomy for gallstone pancreatitis, clinical predictors of choledocholithiasis, optimal timing of ERCP vis-à-vis cholecystectomy, management of Mirizzi syndrome and hepatolithiasis, and biliary stent therapy for choledocholithiasis. Core clinical questions were derived using an iterative process by the ASGE SOP Committee. This body developed all recommendations founded on the certainty of the evidence, balance of risks and harms, consideration of stakeholder preferences, resource utilization, and cost-effectiveness.
Project description:BackgroundAlthough significant progress has been made in reducing malaria transmission globally in recent years, a large number of people remain at risk and hence the gains made are fragile. Funding lags well behind amounts needed to protect all those at risk and ongoing contributions from major donors, such as the President's Malaria Initiative (PMI), are vital to maintain progress and pursue further reductions in burden. We use a mathematical modelling approach to estimate the impact of PMI investments to date in reducing malaria burden and to explore the potential negative impact on malaria burden should a proposed 44% reduction in PMI funding occur.Methods and findingsWe combined an established mathematical model of Plasmodium falciparum transmission dynamics with epidemiological, intervention, and PMI-financing data to estimate the contribution PMI has made to malaria control via funding for long-lasting insecticide treated nets (LLINs), indoor residual spraying (IRS), and artemisinin combination therapies (ACTs). We estimate that PMI has prevented 185 million (95% CrI: 138 million, 230 million) malaria cases and saved 940,049 (95% CrI: 545,228, 1.4 million) lives since 2005. If funding is maintained, PMI-funded interventions are estimated to avert a further 162 million (95% CrI: 116 million, 194 million) cases, saving a further 692,589 (95% CrI: 392,694, 955,653) lives between 2017 and 2020. With an estimate of US$94 (95% CrI: US$51, US$166) per Disability Adjusted Life Year (DALY) averted, PMI-funded interventions are highly cost-effective. We also demonstrate the further impact of this investment by reducing caseloads on health systems. If a 44% reduction in PMI funding were to occur, we predict that this loss of direct aid could result in an additional 67 million (95% CrI: 49 million, 82 million) cases and 290,649 (95% CrI: 167,208, 395,263) deaths between 2017 and 2020. We have not modelled indirect impacts of PMI funding (such as health systems strengthening) in this analysis.ConclusionsOur model estimates that PMI has played a significant role in reducing malaria cases and deaths since its inception. Reductions in funding to PMI could lead to large increases in the number of malaria cases and deaths, damaging global goals of malaria control and elimination.
Project description:BackgroundSince 2003, the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) has been the most ambitious initiative to address the global HIV epidemic. However, the effect of PEPFAR on HIV-related outcomes is unknown.ObjectiveTo assess the effect of PEPFAR on HIV-related deaths, the number of people living with HIV, and HIV prevalence in sub-Saharan Africa.DesignComparison of trends before and after the initiation of PEPFAR's activities.Setting12 African focus countries and 29 control countries with a generalized HIV epidemic from 1997 to 2007 (451 country-year observations).InterventionA 5-year, $15 billion program for HIV treatment, prevention, and care that started in late 2003.MeasurementsHIV-related deaths, the number of people living with HIV, and HIV prevalence.ResultsBetween 2004 and 2007, the difference in the annual change in the number of HIV-related deaths was 10.5% lower in the focus countries than in the control countries (P = 0.001). The difference in trends between the groups before 2003 was not significant. The annual growth in the number of people living with HIV was 3.7% slower in the focus countries than in the control countries from 1997 to 2002 (P = 0.05), but during PEPFAR's activities, the difference was no longer significant. The difference in the change in HIV prevalence did not significantly differ throughout the study period. These estimates were stable after sensitivity analysis.LimitationThe selection of the focus countries was not random, which limits the generalizability of the results.ConclusionAfter 4 years of PEPFAR activity, HIV-related deaths decreased in sub-Saharan African focus countries compared with control countries, but trends in adult prevalence did not differ. Assessment of epidemiologic effectiveness should be part of PEPFAR's evaluation programs.Primary funding sourceAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
Project description:ObjectiveThe National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) is a continuous, nationwide, household interview survey of the civilian noninstitutionalized population of the United States. This annual survey is conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics, part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Since 1965, the survey and its supplements have provided data on issues related to the use of cigarettes and other tobacco products. This paper describes the survey, provides an overview of peer-reviewed and government-issued research that uses tobacco-related data from the NHIS, and suggests additional areas for exploration and directions for future research.Data sourcesWe performed literature searches using the PubMed database, selecting articles from 1966 to 2008. Study selection. Inclusion criteria were relevancy to tobacco research and primary use of NHIS data; 117 articles met these criteria. Data extraction and synthesis. Tobacco-related data from the NHIS have been used to analyze smoking prevalence and trends; attitudes, knowledge, and beliefs; initiation; cessation and advice to quit; health care practices; health consequences; secondhand smoke exposure; and use of smokeless tobacco. To date, use of these data has had broad application; however, great potential still exists for additional use.ConclusionNHIS data provide information that can be useful to both practitioners and researchers. It is important to explore new and creative ways to best use these data and to address the full range of salient tobacco-related topics. Doing so will better inform future tobacco control research and programs.
Project description:Social media has arguably shifted political agenda-setting power away from mainstream media onto politicians. Current U.S. President Trump's reliance on Twitter is unprecedented, but the underlying implications for agenda setting are poorly understood. Using the president as a case study, we present evidence suggesting that President Trump's use of Twitter diverts crucial media (The New York Times and ABC News) from topics that are potentially harmful to him. We find that increased media coverage of the Mueller investigation is immediately followed by Trump tweeting increasingly about unrelated issues. This increased activity, in turn, is followed by a reduction in coverage of the Mueller investigation-a finding that is consistent with the hypothesis that President Trump's tweets may also successfully divert the media from topics that he considers threatening. The pattern is absent in placebo analyses involving Brexit coverage and several other topics that do not present a political risk to the president. Our results are robust to the inclusion of numerous control variables and examination of several alternative explanations, although the generality of the successful diversion must be established by further investigation.