Mapping age- and sex-specific HIV prevalence in adults in sub-Saharan Africa, 2000–2018

Background: Human immunodeficiency virus and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) is still among the leading causes of disease burden and mortality in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), and the world is not on track to meet targets set for ending the epidemic by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Precise HIV burden information is critical for effective geographic and epidemiological targeting of prevention and treatment interventions. Age- and sex-specific HIV prevalence estimates are widely available at the national level, and region-wide local estimates were recently published for adults overall. We add further dimensionality to previous analyses by estimating HIV prevalence at local scales, stratified into sex-specific 5-year age groups for adults ages 15–59 years across SSA. Methods: We analyzed data from 91 seroprevalence surveys and sentinel surveillance among antenatal care clinic (ANC) attendees using model-based geostatistical methods to produce estimates of HIV prevalence across 43 countries in SSA, from years 2000 to 2018, at a 5 × 5-km resolution and presented among second administrative level (typically districts or counties) units. Results: We found substantial variation in HIV prevalence across localities, ages, and sexes that have been masked in earlier analyses. Within-country variation in prevalence in 2018 was a median 3.5 times greater across ages and sexes, compared to for all adults combined. We note large within-district prevalence differences between age groups: for men, 50% of districts displayed at least a 14-fold difference between age groups with the highest and lowest prevalence, and at least a 9-fold difference for women. Prevalence trends also varied over time; between 2000 and 2018, 70% of all districts saw a reduction in prevalence greater than five percentage points in at least one sex and age group. Meanwhile, over 30% of all districts saw at least a five percentage point prevalence increase in one or more sex and age group. Conclusions: As the HIV epidemic persists and evolves in SSA, geographic and demographic shifts in prevention and treatment efforts are necessary. These estimates offer epidemiologically informative detail to better guide more targeted interventions, vital for combating HIV in SSA. © 2022, The Author(s).Funding text 1: S Afzal acknowledges support of the Pakistan Society of Medical Infectious Diseases and King Edward Medical University to access the relevant data of HIV from various sources. T W Bärnighausen was supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation through the Alexander von Humboldt Professor award, funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research. F Carvalho and E Fernandes acknowledge support from Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), I.P., in the scope of the project UIDP/04378/2020 and UIDB/04378/2020 of the Research Unit on Applied Molecular Biosciences - UCIBIO and the project LA/P/0140/2020 of the Associate Laboratory Institute for Health and Bioeconomy - i4HB; FCT/MCTES (Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Ensino Superior) through the project UIDB/50006/2020. K Deribe acknowledges support by the Wellcome Trust [grant number 201900/Z/16/Z] as part of his International Intermediate Fellowship. C Herteliu and A Pana are partially supported by a grant of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation, CNDS-UEFISCDI, project number PN-III-P4-ID-PCCF-2016-0084. Claudiu Herteliu is partially supported by a grant of the Romanian Ministry of Research Innovation and Digitalization, MCID, project number ID-585-CTR-42-PFE-2021. Y J Kim acknowledges support by the Research Management Centre, Xiamen University Malaysia [No. XMUMRF/2020-C6/ITCM/0004]. S L Koulmane Laxminarayana acknowledges institutional support by the Manipal Academy of Higher Education. K Krishan acknowledges non-financial support from UGC Centre of Advanced Study, CAS II, Department of Anthropology, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India. M Kumar would like to acknowledge NIH/FIC K43 TW010716-04. I Landires is a member of the Sistema Nacional de Investigación (SNI), supported by the Secretaría Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (SENACYT), Panama. V Nuñez-Samudio is a member of the Sistema Nacional de Investigación (SNI), which is supported by Panama’s Secretaría Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (SENACYT). O O Odukoya was supported by the Fogarty International Center of the National Institutes of Health under the Award Number K43TW010704. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. Z Quazi Syed acknowledges support from JNMC, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences. A I Ribeiro was supported by National Funds through FCT, under the ‘Stimulus of Scientific Employment – Individual Support’ program within the contract CEECIND/02386/2018. A M Samy acknowledges the support from a fellowship of the Egyptian Fulbright Mission program and Ain Shams University. R Shrestha acknowledges support from NIDA K01 Award: K01DA051346. N Taveira acknowledges support from FCT and Aga Khan Development Network (AKDN) - Portugal Collaborative Research Network in Portuguese speaking countries in Africa (project reference: 332821690), and by the European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP), UE (project reference: RIA2016MC-1615). B Unnikrishnan acknowledges support from Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal. ; Funding text 2: LBD sub-Saharan Africa HIV Prevalence Collaborators S Afzal acknowledges support of the Pakistan Society of Medical Infectious Diseases and King Edward Medical University to access the relevant data of HIV from various sources. T W Bärnighausen was supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation through the Alexander von Humboldt Professor award, funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research. F Carvalho and E Fernandes acknowledge support from Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), I.P., in the scope of the project UIDP/04378/2020 and UIDB/04378/2020 of the Research Unit on Applied Molecular Biosciences - UCIBIO and the project LA/P/0140/2020 of the Associate Laboratory Institute for Health and Bioeconomy - i4HB; FCT/MCTES (Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Ensino Superior) through the project UIDB/50006/2020. K Deribe acknowledges support by the Wellcome Trust [grant number 201900/Z/16/Z] as part of his International Intermediate Fellowship. C Herteliu and A Pana are partially supported by a grant of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation, CNDS-UEFISCDI, project number PN-III-P4-ID-PCCF-2016-0084. Claudiu Herteliu is partially supported by a grant of the Romanian Ministry of Research Innovation and Digitalization, MCID, project number ID-585-CTR-42-PFE-2021. Y J Kim acknowledges support by the Research Management Centre, Xiamen University Malaysia [No. XMUMRF/2020-C6/ITCM/0004]. S L Koulmane Laxminarayana acknowledges institutional support by the Manipal Academy of Higher Education. K Krishan acknowledges non-financial support from UGC Centre of Advanced Study, CAS II, Department of Anthropology, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India. M Kumar would like to acknowledge NIH/FIC K43 TW010716-04. I Landires is a member of the Sistema Nacional de Investigación (SNI), supported by the Secretaría Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (SENACYT), Panama. V Nuñez-Samudio is a member of the Sistema Nacional de Investigación (SNI), which is supported by Panama’s Secretaría Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (SENACYT). O O Odukoya was supported by the Fogarty International Center of the National Institutes of Health under the Award Number K43TW010704. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. Z Quazi Syed acknowledges support from JNMC, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences. A I Ribeiro was supported by National Funds through FCT, under the ‘Stimulus of Scientific Employment – Individual Support’ program within the contract CEECIND/02386/2018. A M Samy acknowledges the support from a fellowship of the Egyptian Fulbright Mission program and Ain Shams University. R Shrestha acknowledges support from NIDA K01 Award: K01DA051346. N Taveira acknowledges support from FCT and Aga Khan Development Network (AKDN) - Portugal Collaborative Research Network in Portuguese speaking countries in Africa (project reference: 332821690), and by the European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP), UE (project reference: RIA2016MC-1615). B Unnikrishnan acknowledges support from Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal.; Funding text 3: This work was primarily supported by grant OPP1132415 from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The funder of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, writing of the report, or decision to publish. The corresponding authors had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication. ; Funding text 4: S Afzal reports leadership or fiduciary role in other board, society, committee or advocacy group, unpaid, with the Pakistan society of Community Medicine & Public Health, the Pakistan Association of Medical Editors, and the Pakistan Society of Medical Infectious Diseases, all outside the submitted work. R Ancuceanu reports 5 payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Avvie, Sandoz, and B Braun, all outside the submitted work. T W Bärnighausen reports research grants from the European Union (Horizon 2020 and EIT Health), German Research Foundation (DFG), US National Institutes of Health, German Ministry of Education and Research, Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Else-Kröner-Fresenius-Foundation, Wellcome Trust, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, KfW, UNAIDS, and WHO; consulting fees from KfW on the OSCAR initiative in Vietnam; participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board with the NIH-funded study “Healthy Options” (PIs: Smith Fawzi, Kaaya), Chair, Data Safety and Monitoring Board (DSMB), German National Committee on the “Future of Public Health Research and Education,” Chair of the scientific advisory board to the EDCTP Evaluation, Member of the UNAIDS Evaluation Expert Advisory Committee, National Institutes of Health Study Section Member on Population and Public Health Approaches to HIV/AIDS (PPAH), US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Committee for the “Evaluation of Human Resources for Health in the Republic of Rwanda under the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR),” University of Pennsylvania (UPenn) Population Aging Research Center (PARC) External Advisory Board Member; leadership or fiduciary role in other board, society, committee or advocacy group, paid or unpaid, as co-chair of the Global Health Hub Germany (which was initiated by the German Ministry of Health); all outside the submitted work. J das Neves reports grants or contracts from Ref. 13605 – Programa GÉNESE, Gilead Portugal (PGG/002/2016 – Programa GÉNESE, Gilead Portugal) outside the submitted work. L Dwyer-Lindgren reports support for the present manuscript from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation through grant OPP1132415. I Filip reports other financial or non-financial interests from Avicenna Medical and Clinical Research Institute, outside the submitted work. E Haeuser reports support for the present manuscript from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation through grant OPP1132415. C Herteliu reports grants from Romanian Ministry of Research Innovation and Digitalization, MCID, for project number ID-585-CTR-42-PFE-2021 (Jan 2022-Jun 2023) “Enhancing institutional performance through development of infrastructure and transdisciplinary research ecosystem within socio-economic domain – PERFECTIS,” from Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation, CNDS-UEFISCDI, for project number PN-III-P4-ID-PCCF-2016-0084 (Oct 2018-Sep 2022) “Understanding and modelling time-space patterns of psychology-related inequalities and polarization,” and project number PN-III-P2-2.1-SOL-2020-2-0351 (Jun 2020-Oct 2020) “Approaches within public health management in the context of COVID-19 pandemic,” and from the Ministry of Labour and Social Justice, Romania for project number “Agenda for skills Romania 2020-2025”; all outside the submitted work. J J Jozwiak reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Teva, Amgen, Synexus, Boehringer Ingelheim, Zentiva, and Sanofi as personal fees, all outside the submitted work. J Khubchandani reports other financial interests from Teva Pharmaceuticals, all outside the submitted work. K Krishnan reports other non-financial support from UGC Centre of Advanced Study, CAS II, Department of Anthropology, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India, outside the submitted work. H J Larson reports grants or contracts from the MacArthur Foundation and Merck to London School of Hygeine and Tropical Medicine, and from the Vaccine Confidence Fund to the University of Washington; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Center for Strategic and International Studies as payment to LSHTM for co-chairing HighLevel Panel and from GSK as personal payment for developing training sessions and lectures; leadership or fiduciary role in other board, society, committee or advocacy group, pair, with the ApiJect Advisory Board; all outside the submitted work. O O Odukoya reports support for the present manuscript from the Fogarty International Center of the National Institutes of Health under the Award Number K43TW010704. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. A Pans reports grants from Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation, CNDS-UEFISCDI, for project number PN-III-P4-ID-PCCF-2016-0084 (Oct 2018-Sep 2022) “Understanding and modelling time-space patterns of psychology-related inequalities and polarization,” and project number PN-III-P2-2.1-SOL-2020-2-0351 (Jun 2020-Oct 2020) “Approaches within public health management in the context of COVID-19 pandemic,” outside the submitted work. S R Pandi-Perumal reports royalties from Springer for editing services; stock or stock options in Somnogen Canada Inc as the President and Chief Executive Officer; all outside the submitted work. A Radfar reports other financial or non-financial interests from Avicenna Medical and Clinical Research Institute, outside the submitted work. A I Ribeiro reports grants or contracts from National Funds through FCT, under the ‘Stimulus of Scientific Employment – Individual Support’ program within the contract CEECIND/02386/2018, outside the submitted work. J M Ross reports support for the present manuscript from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation through grant OPP1132415; grants or contracts from National Institutes of Health and Firland Foundation as payments to their institution; consulting fees from United States Agency for International Development as personal payments, and from KNCV Tuberculosis Foundation as payments to their institution; all outside the submitted work. E Rubagotti reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from the Greenwich China Office and Unviersity Prince Mohammad VI, Morocco, all outside the submitted work. B Sartorius reports grants or contracts from DHSC – GRAM Project; Leadership or fiduciary role in other board, society, committee or advocacy group, paid or unpaid, as a member of the GBD Scientific Council and a Member of WHO RGHS; all outside the submitted work. J A Singh reports consulting fees from Crealta/Horizon, Medisys, Fidia, PK Med, Two labs Inc, Adept Field Solutions, Clinical Care options, Clearview healthcare partners, Putnam associates, Focus forward, Navigant consulting, Spherix, MedIQ, Jupiter Life Science LLC, UBM LLC, Trio Health, Medscape, WebMD, and Practice Point communications, and the National Institutes of Health and the American College of Rheumatology; payment or honoraria for participating in the speakers bureau for Simply Speaking; support for attending meetings and/or travel from the steering committee of OMERACT, to attend their meeting every 2 years; participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board as an unpaid member of the FDA Arthritis Advisory Committee; leadership or fiduciary role in other board, society, committee or advocacy group, paid or unpaid, as a member of the steering committee of OMERACT, an international organization that develops measures for clinical trials and receives arm’s length funding from 12 pharmaceutical companies, with the Veterans Affairs Rheumatology Field Advisory Committee as Chair, and with the UAB Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group Satellite Center on Network Meta-analysis as a director and editor; stock or stock options in TPT Global Tech, Vaxart pharmaceuticals, Atyu Biopharma, Adaptimmune Therapeutics, GeoVax Labs, Pieris Pharmaceuticals, Enzolytics Inc, Series Therapeutics, Tonix Pharmaceuticals, and Charlotte’s Web Holdings Inc. and previously owned stock options in Amarin, Viking, and Moderna pharmaceuticals; all outside the submitted work. N Taveira reports grants or contracts from FCT and Aga Khan Development Network (AKDN) – Portugal Collaborative Research Network in Portuguese speaking countries in Africa (Project reference: 332821690) and from European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP), UE (Project reference: RIA2016MC-1615), as payments made to their institution, all outside the submitted work

Mapping inequalities in exclusive breastfeeding in low- and middle-income countries, 2000–2018

Exclusive breastfeeding (EBF)-giving infants only breast-milk for the first 6 months of life-is a component of optimal breastfeeding practices effective in preventing child morbidity and mortality. EBF practices are known to vary by population and comparable subnational estimates of prevalence and progress across low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are required for planning policy and interventions. Here we present a geospatial analysis of EBF prevalence estimates from 2000 to 2018 across 94 LMICs mapped to policy-relevant administrative units (for example, districts), quantify subnational inequalities and their changes over time, and estimate probabilities of meeting the World Health Organization's Global Nutrition Target (WHO GNT) of ≥70% EBF prevalence by 2030. While six LMICs are projected to meet the WHO GNT of ≥70% EBF prevalence at a national scale, only three are predicted to meet the target in all their district-level units by 2030.This work was primarily supported by grant no. OPP1132415 from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Co-authors used by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (E.G.P. and R.R.3) provided feedback on initial maps and drafts of this manuscript. L.G.A. has received support from Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior, Brasil (CAPES), Código de Financiamento 001 and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) (grant nos. 404710/2018-2 and 310797/2019-5). O.O.Adetokunboh acknowledges the National Research Foundation, Department of Science and Innovation and South African Centre for Epidemiological Modelling and Analysis. M.Ausloos, A.Pana and C.H. are partially supported by a grant from the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation, CNDS-UEFISCDI, project no. PN-III-P4-ID-PCCF-2016-0084. P.C.B. would like to acknowledge the support of F. Alam and A. Hussain. T.W.B. was supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation through the Alexander von Humboldt Professor award, funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research. K.Deribe is supported by the Wellcome Trust (grant no. 201900/Z/16/Z) as part of his international intermediate fellowship. C.H. and A.Pana are partially supported by a grant of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation, CNDS-UEFISCDI, project no. PN-III-P2-2.1-SOL-2020-2-0351. B.Hwang is partially supported by China Medical University (CMU109-MF-63), Taichung, Taiwan. M.Khan acknowledges Jatiya Kabi Kazi Nazrul Islam University for their support. A.M.K. acknowledges the other collaborators and the corresponding author. Y.K. was supported by the Research Management Centre, Xiamen University Malaysia (grant no. XMUMRF/2020-C6/ITM/0004). K.Krishan is supported by a DST PURSE grant and UGC Centre of Advanced Study (CAS II) awarded to the Department of Anthropology, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India. M.Kumar would like to acknowledge FIC/NIH K43 TW010716-03. I.L. is a member of the Sistema Nacional de Investigación (SNI), which is supported by the Secretaría Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (SENACYT), Panamá. M.L. was supported by China Medical University, Taiwan (CMU109-N-22 and CMU109-MF-118). W.M. is currently a programme analyst in Population and Development at the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) Country Office in Peru, which does not necessarily endorses this study. D.E.N. acknowledges Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council. G.C.P. is supported by an NHMRC research fellowship. P.Rathi acknowledges support from Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India. Ramu Rawat acknowledges the support of the GBD Secretariat for supporting the reviewing and collaboration of this paper. B.R. acknowledges support from Manipal College of Health Professions, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal. A.Ribeiro was supported by National Funds through FCT, under the programme of ‘Stimulus of Scientific Employment—Individual Support’ within the contract no. info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/FCT/CEEC IND 2018/CEECIND/02386/2018/CP1538/CT0001/PT. S.Sajadi acknowledges colleagues at Global Burden of Diseases and Local Burden of Disease. A.M.S. acknowledges the support from the Egyptian Fulbright Mission Program. F.S. was supported by the Shenzhen Science and Technology Program (grant no. KQTD20190929172835662). A.Sheikh is supported by Health Data Research UK. B.K.S. acknowledges Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal for all the academic support. B.U. acknowledges support from Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal. C.S.W. is supported by the South African Medical Research Council. Y.Z. was supported by Science and Technology Research Project of Hubei Provincial Department of Education (grant no. Q20201104) and Outstanding Young and Middle-aged Technology Innovation Team Project of Hubei Provincial Department of Education (grant no. T2020003). The funders of the study had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript. The corresponding author had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication. All maps presented in this study are generated by the authors and no permissions are required to publish them

Estimating global injuries morbidity and mortality: methods and data used in the Global Burden of Disease 2017 study

BACKGROUND: While there is a long history of measuring death and disability from injuries, modern research methods must account for the wide spectrum of disability that can occur in an injury, and must provide estimates with sufficient demographic, geographical and temporal detail to be useful for policy makers. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 study used methods to provide highly detailed estimates of global injury burden that meet these criteria. METHODS: In this study, we report and discuss the methods used in GBD 2017 for injury morbidity and mortality burden estimation. In summary, these methods included estimating cause-specific mortality for every cause of injury, and then estimating incidence for every cause of injury. Non-fatal disability for each cause is then calculated based on the probabilities of suffering from different types of bodily injury experienced. RESULTS: GBD 2017 produced morbidity and mortality estimates for 38 causes of injury. Estimates were produced in terms of incidence, prevalence, years lived with disability, cause-specific mortality, years of life lost and disability-adjusted life-years for a 28-year period for 22 age groups, 195 countries and both sexes. CONCLUSIONS: GBD 2017 demonstrated a complex and sophisticated series of analytical steps using the largest known database of morbidity and mortality data on injuries. GBD 2017 results should be used to help inform injury prevention policy making and resource allocation. We also identify important avenues for improving injury burden estimation in the future

Global, regional, and national mortality among young people aged 10–24 years, 1950–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

Summary: Background Documentation of patterns and long-term trends in mortality in young people, which reflect huge changes in demographic and social determinants of adolescent health, enables identification of global investment priorities for this age group. We aimed to analyse data on the number of deaths, years of life lost, and mortality rates by sex and age group in people aged 10–24 years in 204 countries and territories from 1950 to 2019 by use of estimates from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019. Methods We report trends in estimated total numbers of deaths and mortality rate per 100 000 population in young people aged 10–24 years by age group (10–14 years, 15–19 years, and 20–24 years) and sex in 204 countries and territories between 1950 and 2019 for all causes, and between 1980 and 2019 by cause of death. We analyse variation in outcomes by region, age group, and sex, and compare annual rate of change in mortality in young people aged 10–24 years with that in children aged 0–9 years from 1990 to 2019. We then analyse the association between mortality in people aged 10–24 years and socioeconomic development using the GBD Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a composite measure based on average national educational attainment in people older than 15 years, total fertility rate in people younger than 25 years, and income per capita. We assess the association between SDI and all-cause mortality in 2019, and analyse the ratio of observed to expected mortality by SDI using the most recent available data release (2017). Findings In 2019 there were 1·49 million deaths (95% uncertainty interval 1·39–1·59) worldwide in people aged 10–24 years, of which 61% occurred in males. 32·7% of all adolescent deaths were due to transport injuries, unintentional injuries, or interpersonal violence and conflict; 32·1% were due to communicable, nutritional, or maternal causes; 27·0% were due to non-communicable diseases; and 8·2% were due to self-harm. Since 1950, deaths in this age group decreased by 30·0% in females and 15·3% in males, and sex-based differences in mortality rate have widened in most regions of the world. Geographical variation has also increased, particularly in people aged 10–14 years. Since 1980, communicable and maternal causes of death have decreased sharply as a proportion of total deaths in most GBD super-regions, but remain some of the most common causes in sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia, where more than half of all adolescent deaths occur. Annual percentage decrease in all-cause mortality rate since 1990 in adolescents aged 15–19 years was 1·3% in males and 1·6% in females, almost half that of males aged 1–4 years (2·4%), and around a third less than in females aged 1–4 years (2·5%). The proportion of global deaths in people aged 0–24 years that occurred in people aged 10–24 years more than doubled between 1950 and 2019, from 9·5% to 21·6%. Interpretation Variation in adolescent mortality between countries and by sex is widening, driven by poor progress in reducing deaths in males and older adolescents. Improving global adolescent mortality will require action to address the specific vulnerabilities of this age group, which are being overlooked. Furthermore, indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic are likely to jeopardise efforts to improve health outcomes including mortality in young people aged 10–24 years. There is an urgent need to respond to the changing global burden of adolescent mortality, address inequities where they occur, and improve the availability and quality of primary mortality data in this age group

Five insights from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019 provides a rules-based synthesis of the available evidence on levels and trends in health outcomes, a diverse set of risk factors, and health system responses. GBD 2019 covered 204 countries and territories, as well as first administrative level disaggregations for 22 countries, from 1990 to 2019. Because GBD is highly standardised and comprehensive, spanning both fatal and non-fatal outcomes, and uses a mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive list of hierarchical disease and injury causes, the study provides a powerful basis for detailed and broad insights on global health trends and emerging challenges. GBD 2019 incorporates data from 281 586 sources and provides more than 3.5 billion estimates of health outcome and health system measures of interest for global, national, and subnational policy dialogue. All GBD estimates are publicly available and adhere to the Guidelines on Accurate and Transparent Health Estimate Reporting. From this vast amount of information, five key insights that are important for health, social, and economic development strategies have been distilled. These insights are subject to the many limitations outlined in each of the component GBD capstone papers.Peer reviewe

The global, regional, and national burden of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017

Background Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease is a common chronic ailment that causes uncomfortable symptoms and increases the risk of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. We aimed to report the burden of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in 195 countries and territories between 1990 and 2017, using data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2017. Methods We did a systematic review to identify measurements of the prevalence of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in geographically defined populations worldwide between 1990 and 2017. These estimates were analysed with DisMod-MR, a Bayesian mixed-effects meta-regression tool that incorporates predictive covariates and adjustments for differences in study design in a geographical cascade of models. Fitted values for broader geographical units inform prior distributions for finer geographical units. Prevalence was estimated for 195 countries and territories. Reports of the frequency and severity of symptoms among individuals with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease were used to estimate the prevalence of cases with no, mild to moderate, or severe to very severe symptoms at a given time; these estimates were multiplied by disability weights to estimate years lived with disability (YLD). Findings Data to estimate gastro-oesophageal reflux disease burden were scant, totalling 144 location-years (unique measurements from a year and location, regardless of whether a study reported them alongside measurements for other locations or years) of prevalence data. These came from six (86%) of seven GBD super-regions, 11 (52%) of 21 GBD regions, and 39 (20%) of 195 countries and territories. Mean estimates of age-standardised prevalence for all locations in 2017 ranged from 4408 cases per 100 000 population to 14 035 cases per 100 000 population. Age-standardised prevalence was highest (>11 000 cases per 100 000 population) in the USA, Italy, Greece, New Zealand, and several countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, north Africa and the Middle East, and eastern Europe; it was lowest (<7000 cases per 100 000 population) in the high-income Asia Pacific, east Asia, Iceland, France, Denmark, and Switzerland. Global prevalence peaked at ages 75–79 years, at 18 820 (95% uncertainty interval [95% UI] 13 770–24 000) cases per 100 000 population. Global age-standardised prevalence was stable between 1990 and 2017 (8791 [95% UI 7772–9834] cases per 100 000 population in 1990 and 8819 [7781–9863] cases per 100 000 population in 2017, percentage change 0·3% [–0·3 to 0·9]), but all-age prevalence increased by 18·1% (15·6–20·4) between 1990 and 2017, from 7859 (6905–8851) cases per 100  000 population in 1990 to 9283 (8189–10 400) cases per 100  000 population in 2017. YLDs increased by 67·1% (95% UI 63·5–70·3) between 1990 and 2017, from 3·60 million (1·93–6·12) in 1990 to 6·01 million (3·22–10·19) in 2017. Interpretation Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease is common worldwide, although less so in much of eastern Asia. The stability of our global age-standardised prevalence estimates over time suggests that the epidemiology of the disease has not changed, but the estimates of all-age prevalence and YLDs, which increased between 1990 and 2017, suggest that the burden of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease is nonetheless increasing as a result of ageing and population growth. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

The burden of injury in Central, Eastern, and Western European sub-region: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease 2019 Study.

Background Injury remains a major concern to public health in the European region. Previous iterations of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study showed wide variation in injury death and disability adjusted life year (DALY) rates across Europe, indicating injury inequality gaps between sub-regions and countries. The objectives of this study were to: 1) compare GBD 2019 estimates on injury mortality and DALYs across European sub-regions and countries by cause-of-injury category and sex; 2) examine changes in injury DALY rates over a 20 year-period by cause-of-injury category, sub-region and country; and 3) assess inequalities in injury mortality and DALY rates across the countries. Methods We performed a secondary database descriptive study using the GBD 2019 results on injuries in 44 European countries from 2000 to 2019. Inequality in DALY rates between these countries was assessed by calculating the DALY rate ratio between the highest-ranking country and lowest-ranking country in each year. Results In 2019, in Eastern Europe 80 [95% uncertainty interval (UI): 71 to 89] people per 100,000 died from injuries; twice as high compared to Central Europe (38 injury deaths per 100,000; 95% UI 34 to 42) and three times as high compared to Western Europe (27 injury deaths per 100,000; 95%UI 25 to 28). The injury DALY rates showed less pronounced differences between Eastern (5129 DALYs per 100,000; 95% UI: 4547 to 5864), Central (2940 DALYs per 100,000; 95% UI: 2452 to 3546) and Western Europe (1782 DALYs per 100,000; 95% UI: 1523 to 2115). Injury DALY rate was lowest in Italy (1489 DALYs per 100,000) and highest in Ukraine (5553 DALYs per 100,000). The difference in injury DALY rates by country was larger for males compared to females. The DALY rate ratio was highest in 2005, with DALY rate in the lowest-ranking country (Russian Federation) 6.0 times higher compared to the highest-ranking country (Malta). After 2005, the DALY rate ratio between the lowest- and the highest-ranking country gradually decreased to 3.7 in 2019. Conclusions Injury mortality and DALY rates were highest in Eastern Europe and lowest in Western Europe, although differences in injury DALY rates declined rapidly, particularly in the past decade. The injury DALY rate ratio of highest- and lowest-ranking country declined from 2005 onwards, indicating declining inequalities in injuries between European countries

Population-level risks of alcohol consumption by amount, geography, age, sex, and year: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2020

Background The health risks associated with moderate alcohol consumption continue to be debated. Small amounts of alcohol might lower the risk of some health outcomes but increase the risk of others, suggesting that the overall risk depends, in part, on background disease rates, which vary by region, age, sex, and year. Methods For this analysis, we constructed burden-weighted dose–response relative risk curves across 22 health outcomes to estimate the theoretical minimum risk exposure level (TMREL) and non-drinker equivalence (NDE), the consumption level at which the health risk is equivalent to that of a non-drinker, using disease rates from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2020 for 21 regions, including 204 countries and territories, by 5-year age group, sex, and year for individuals aged 15–95 years and older from 1990 to 2020. Based on the NDE, we quantified the population consuming harmful amounts of alcohol. Findings The burden-weighted relative risk curves for alcohol use varied by region and age. Among individuals aged 15–39 years in 2020, the TMREL varied between 0 (95% uncertainty interval 0–0) and 0·603 (0·400–1·00) standard drinks per day, and the NDE varied between 0·002 (0–0) and 1·75 (0·698–4·30) standard drinks per day. Among individuals aged 40 years and older, the burden-weighted relative risk curve was J-shaped for all regions, with a 2020 TMREL that ranged from 0·114 (0–0·403) to 1·87 (0·500–3·30) standard drinks per day and an NDE that ranged between 0·193 (0–0·900) and 6·94 (3·40–8·30) standard drinks per day. Among individuals consuming harmful amounts of alcohol in 2020, 59·1% (54·3–65·4) were aged 15–39 years and 76·9% (73·0–81·3) were male. Interpretation There is strong evidence to support recommendations on alcohol consumption varying by age and location. Stronger interventions, particularly those tailored towards younger individuals, are needed to reduce the substantial global health loss attributable to alcohol. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

Measuring universal health coverage based on an index of effective coverage of health services in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

Background Achieving universal health coverage (UHC) involves all people receiving the health services they need, of high quality, without experiencing financial hardship. Making progress towards UHC is a policy priority for both countries and global institutions, as highlighted by the agenda of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and WHO's Thirteenth General Programme of Work (GPW13). Measuring effective coverage at the health-system level is important for understanding whether health services are aligned with countries' health profiles and are of sufficient quality to produce health gains for populations of all ages. Methods Based on the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019, we assessed UHC effective coverage for 204 countries and territories from 1990 to 2019. Drawing from a measurement framework developed through WHO's GPW13 consultation, we mapped 23 effective coverage indicators to a matrix representing health service types (eg, promotion, prevention, and treatment) and five population-age groups spanning from reproductive and newborn to older adults (≥65 years). Effective coverage indicators were based on intervention coverage or outcome-based measures such as mortality-to-incidence ratios to approximate access to quality care; outcome-based measures were transformed to values on a scale of 0–100 based on the 2·5th and 97·5th percentile of location-year values. We constructed the UHC effective coverage index by weighting each effective coverage indicator relative to its associated potential health gains, as measured by disability-adjusted life-years for each location-year and population-age group. For three tests of validity (content, known-groups, and convergent), UHC effective coverage index performance was generally better than that of other UHC service coverage indices from WHO (ie, the current metric for SDG indicator 3.8.1 on UHC service coverage), the World Bank, and GBD 2017. We quantified frontiers of UHC effective coverage performance on the basis of pooled health spending per capita, representing UHC effective coverage index levels achieved in 2019 relative to country-level government health spending, prepaid private expenditures, and development assistance for health. To assess current trajectories towards the GPW13 UHC billion target—1 billion more people benefiting from UHC by 2023—we estimated additional population equivalents with UHC effective coverage from 2018 to 2023. Findings Globally, performance on the UHC effective coverage index improved from 45·8 (95% uncertainty interval 44·2–47·5) in 1990 to 60·3 (58·7–61·9) in 2019, yet country-level UHC effective coverage in 2019 still spanned from 95 or higher in Japan and Iceland to lower than 25 in Somalia and the Central African Republic. Since 2010, sub-Saharan Africa showed accelerated gains on the UHC effective coverage index (at an average increase of 2·6% [1·9–3·3] per year up to 2019); by contrast, most other GBD super-regions had slowed rates of progress in 2010–2019 relative to 1990–2010. Many countries showed lagging performance on effective coverage indicators for non-communicable diseases relative to those for communicable diseases and maternal and child health, despite non-communicable diseases accounting for a greater proportion of potential health gains in 2019, suggesting that many health systems are not keeping pace with the rising non-communicable disease burden and associated population health needs. In 2019, the UHC effective coverage index was associated with pooled health spending per capita (r=0·79), although countries across the development spectrum had much lower UHC effective coverage than is potentially achievable relative to their health spending. Under maximum efficiency of translating health spending into UHC effective coverage performance, countries would need to reach $1398 pooled health spending per capita (US$ adjusted for purchasing power parity) in order to achieve 80 on the UHC effective coverage index. From 2018 to 2023, an estimated 388·9 million (358·6–421·3) more population equivalents would have UHC effective coverage, falling well short of the GPW13 target of 1 billion more people benefiting from UHC during this time. Current projections point to an estimated 3·1 billion (3·0–3·2) population equivalents still lacking UHC effective coverage in 2023, with nearly a third (968·1 million [903·5–1040·3]) residing in south Asia. Interpretation The present study demonstrates the utility of measuring effective coverage and its role in supporting improved health outcomes for all people—the ultimate goal of UHC and its achievement. Global ambitions to accelerate progress on UHC service coverage are increasingly unlikely unless concerted action on non-communicable diseases occurs and countries can better translate health spending into improved performance. Focusing on effective coverage and accounting for the world's evolving health needs lays the groundwork for better understanding how close—or how far—all populations are in benefiting from UHC. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation