The Conundrum of Low COVID-19 Mortality Burden in sub-Saharan Africa: Myth or Reality?

The burden of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has been substantially lower compared to other regions of the world. Extensive morbidity and mortality were not observed among countries in SSA during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. To explain this phenomenon, several hypotheses have been formulated, including the low median age of the population in most SSA countries, lack of long-term care facilities, cross-protection from other local coronaviruses, insufficient testing and reporting resulting in an undercounting of COVID-related deaths, genetic risk factors, or the benefit of early lockdowns that were extensive in many SSA countries. Early lockdowns in SSA have been some of the strictest and resulted in devastating economic and social consequences and increased mortality from other health-related problems including maternal deaths. We review the literature and rationale supporting the various hypotheses that have been put forward to account for relatively low hospitalization and death rates for COVID-19 in SSA. We conclude that the strongest evidence would support the demographic age structure with a very low median age as the primary factor in leading to the low mortality seen in the first wave of the pandemic. The impact of new variants of concern in SSA raises the risk of more severe waves. Nevertheless, furthering the understanding of the underlying explanations for the low morbidity and mortality seen across SSA countries may allow the adoption of unique strategies for limiting the spread of COVID-19 without the need for stringent lockdowns

Estimates, trends, and drivers of the global burden of type 2 diabetes attributable to PM2·5 air pollution, 1990–2019 : an analysis of data from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

Background: Experimental and epidemiological studies indicate an association between exposure to particulate matter (PM) air pollution and increased risk of type 2 diabetes. In view of the high and increasing prevalence of diabetes, we aimed to quantify the burden of type 2 diabetes attributable to PM2·5 originating from ambient and household air pollution. Methods: We systematically compiled all relevant cohort and case-control studies assessing the effect of exposure to household and ambient fine particulate matter (PM2·5) air pollution on type 2 diabetes incidence and mortality. We derived an exposure–response curve from the extracted relative risk estimates using the MR-BRT (meta-regression—Bayesian, regularised, trimmed) tool. The estimated curve was linked to ambient and household PM2·5 exposures from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019, and estimates of the attributable burden (population attributable fractions and rates per 100 000 population of deaths and disability-adjusted life-years) for 204 countries from 1990 to 2019 were calculated. We also assessed the role of changes in exposure, population size, age, and type 2 diabetes incidence in the observed trend in PM2·5-attributable type 2 diabetes burden. All estimates are presented with 95% uncertainty intervals. Findings: In 2019, approximately a fifth of the global burden of type 2 diabetes was attributable to PM2·5 exposure, with an estimated 3·78 (95% uncertainty interval 2·68–4·83) deaths per 100 000 population and 167 (117–223) disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) per 100 000 population. Approximately 13·4% (9·49–17·5) of deaths and 13·6% (9·73–17·9) of DALYs due to type 2 diabetes were contributed by ambient PM2·5, and 6·50% (4·22–9·53) of deaths and 5·92% (3·81–8·64) of DALYs by household air pollution. High burdens, in terms of numbers as well as rates, were estimated in Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, and South America. Since 1990, the attributable burden has increased by 50%, driven largely by population growth and ageing. Globally, the impact of reductions in household air pollution was largely offset by increased ambient PM2·5. Interpretation: Air pollution is a major risk factor for diabetes. We estimated that about a fifth of the global burden of type 2 diabetes is attributable PM2·5 pollution. Air pollution mitigation therefore might have an essential role in reducing the global disease burden resulting from type 2 diabetes. Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. **Please note that there are multiple authors for this article therefore only the name of the first 30 including Federation University Australia affiliate “Muhammad Aziz Rahman” is provided in this record*

Changes in preterm birth and stillbirth during COVID-19 lockdowns in 26 countries

Funding Information: M.B.A. holds a Tier 2 Canada Research Chair in the Developmental Origins of Chronic Disease at the University of Manitoba and is a Fellow in the Canadian Institutes for Advanced Research (CIFAR) Humans and the Microbiome Program. Her effort on this project was partly supported by HDR UK and ICODA. K.K.C.M. declares support from The Innovation and Technology Commission of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government, and Hong Kong Research Grants Council Collaborative Research Fund Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) and Novel Infectious Disease Research Exercise (Ref: C7154-20G) and grants from C W Maplethorpe Fellowship, National Institute of Health Research UK, European Commission Framework Horizon 2020 and has consulted for IQVIA Ltd. A.S. is supported by ICODA and HDR UK, and has received a research grant from HDR UK to the BREATHE Hub. He participates on the Scottish and UK Government COVID-19 Advisory Committees, unremunerated. S.J.S. is supported by a Wellcome Trust Clinical Career Development Fellowship (209560/Z/17/Z) and HDR UK, and has received personal fees from Hologic and Natera outside the submitted work. D.B. is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia) Investigator Grant (GTN1175744). I.C.K.W. declares support from The Innovation and Technology Commission of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government, and Hong Kong Research Grants Council Collaborative Research Fund Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) and Novel Infectious Disease Research Exercise (Ref: C7154-20G), and grants from Hong Kong Research Grant Council, National Institute of Health Research UK, and European Commission Framework Horizon 2020. H.Z. is supported by a UNSW Scientia Program Award and reports grants from European Commission Framework Horizon 2020, Icelandic Centre for Research, and Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council. H.Z. was an employee of the UNSW Centre for Big Data Research in Health, which received funding from AbbVie Australia to conduct research, unrelated to the current study. I.I.A.A., C.D.A., K.A., A.I.A., L.C., S.S., G.E.-G., O.W.G., L. Huicho, S.H., A.K., K.L., V.N., I.P., N.R.R., T.R., T.A.H.R., V.L.S., E.M.S., L.T., R.W. and H.Z. received funding from HDRUK (grant #2020.106) to support data collection for the iPOP study. K.H., R.B., S.O.E., A.R.-P. and J.H. receive salary from ICODA. M.B. received trainee funding from HDRUK (grant #2020.106). J.E.M. received trainee funding from HDRUK (grant #2020.109). Other relevant funding awarded to authors to conduct research for iPOP include: M.G. received funding from THL, Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare to support data collection. K.D. received funding from EDCTP RIA2019 and HDRUK (grant #2020.106) to support data collection. R.B. received funding from Alzheimer’s Disease Data Initiative and ICODA for the development of federated analysis. A.D.M. received funding from HDR UK who receives its funding from the UK Medical Research Council, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, Economic and Social Research Council, Department of Health and Social Care (England), Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates, Health and Social Care Research and Development Division (Welsh Government), Public Health Agency (Northern Ireland), British Heart Foundation (BHF) and the Wellcome Trust; and Administrative Data Research UK, which is funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (grant ES/S007393/1). N.A. received funding from the National Institutes of Health (R35GM138353). O.S received funding from NordForsk (grant #105545). The remaining authors declare no competing interests. Funding Information: Funding and in-kind support: This work was supported by the International COVID-19 Data Alliance (ICODA), an initiative funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Minderoo as part of the COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator and convened by Health Data Research (HDR) UK, in addition to support from the HDR UK BREATHE Hub. Several ICODA partners contributed to the study, including: Cytel (statistical support), the Odd Group (data visualization) and Aridhia Informatics (development of federated analysis using a standardized protocol ([Common API] https://github.com/federated-data-sharing/ ) to be used in future work). Additional contributors: We acknowledge the important contributions from the following individuals: A. C. Hennemann and D. Suguitani (patient partners from Prematuridade: Brazilian Parents of Preemies’ Association, Porto Alegre, Brazil); N. Postlethwaite (implementation of processes supporting the trustworthy collection, governance and analysis of data from ICODA, HDR UK, London, UK); A. S. Babatunde (led data acquisition from University of Uyo Teaching Hospital, Uyo, Nigeria); N. Silva (data quality, revision and visualization assessment from Methods, Analytics and Technology for Health (M.A.T.H) Consortium, Belo Horizonte, Brazil); J. Söderling (data management from the Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden). We also acknowledge the following individuals who assisted with data collection efforts: R. Goemaes (Study Centre for Perinatal Epidemiology (SPE), Brussels, Belgium); C. Leroy (Le Centre d'Épidémiologie Périnatale (CEpiP), Brussels, Belgium); J. Gamba and K. Ronald (St. Francis Nsambya Hospital, Kampala, Uganda); M. Heidarzadeh (Tabriz Medical University, Tabriz, Iran); M. J. Ojeda (Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile); S. Nangia (Lady Hardinge Medical College, New Delhi, India); C. Nelson, S. Metcalfe and W. Luo (Maternal Infant Health Section of the Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Canada); K. Sitcov (Foundation for Health Care Quality, Seattle, United States); A. Valek (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary); M. R. Yanlin Liu (Mater Data and Analytics, Brisbane, Australia). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript. Funding Information: Funding and in-kind support: This work was supported by the International COVID-19 Data Alliance (ICODA), an initiative funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Minderoo as part of the COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator and convened by Health Data Research (HDR) UK, in addition to support from the HDR UK BREATHE Hub. Several ICODA partners contributed to the study, including: Cytel (statistical support), the Odd Group (data visualization) and Aridhia Informatics (development of federated analysis using a standardized protocol ([Common API] https://github.com/federated-data-sharing/) to be used in future work). Additional contributors: We acknowledge the important contributions from the following individuals: A. C. Hennemann and D. Suguitani (patient partners from Prematuridade: Brazilian Parents of Preemies’ Association, Porto Alegre, Brazil); N. Postlethwaite (implementation of processes supporting the trustworthy collection, governance and analysis of data from ICODA, HDR UK, London, UK); A. S. Babatunde (led data acquisition from University of Uyo Teaching Hospital, Uyo, Nigeria); N. Silva (data quality, revision and visualization assessment from Methods, Analytics and Technology for Health (M.A.T.H) Consortium, Belo Horizonte, Brazil); J. Söderling (data management from the Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden). We also acknowledge the following individuals who assisted with data collection efforts: R. Goemaes (Study Centre for Perinatal Epidemiology (SPE), Brussels, Belgium); C. Leroy (Le Centre d'Épidémiologie Périnatale (CEpiP), Brussels, Belgium); J. Gamba and K. Ronald (St. Francis Nsambya Hospital, Kampala, Uganda); M. Heidarzadeh (Tabriz Medical University, Tabriz, Iran); M. J. Ojeda (Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile); S. Nangia (Lady Hardinge Medical College, New Delhi, India); C. Nelson, S. Metcalfe and W. Luo (Maternal Infant Health Section of the Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Canada); K. Sitcov (Foundation for Health Care Quality, Seattle, United States); A. Valek (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary); M. R. Yanlin Liu (Mater Data and Analytics, Brisbane, Australia). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript. Publisher Copyright: © 2023, The Author(s).Preterm birth (PTB) is the leading cause of infant mortality worldwide. Changes in PTB rates, ranging from −90% to +30%, were reported in many countries following early COVID-19 pandemic response measures (‘lockdowns’). It is unclear whether this variation reflects real differences in lockdown impacts, or perhaps differences in stillbirth rates and/or study designs. Here we present interrupted time series and meta-analyses using harmonized data from 52 million births in 26 countries, 18 of which had representative population-based data, with overall PTB rates ranging from 6% to 12% and stillbirth ranging from 2.5 to 10.5 per 1,000 births. We show small reductions in PTB in the first (odds ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.95–0.98, P value <0.0001), second (0.96, 0.92–0.99, 0.03) and third (0.97, 0.94–1.00, 0.09) months of lockdown, but not in the fourth month of lockdown (0.99, 0.96–1.01, 0.34), although there were some between-country differences after the first month. For high-income countries in this study, we did not observe an association between lockdown and stillbirths in the second (1.00, 0.88–1.14, 0.98), third (0.99, 0.88–1.12, 0.89) and fourth (1.01, 0.87–1.18, 0.86) months of lockdown, although we have imprecise estimates due to stillbirths being a relatively rare event. We did, however, find evidence of increased risk of stillbirth in the first month of lockdown in high-income countries (1.14, 1.02–1.29, 0.02) and, in Brazil, we found evidence for an association between lockdown and stillbirth in the second (1.09, 1.03–1.15, 0.002), third (1.10, 1.03–1.17, 0.003) and fourth (1.12, 1.05–1.19, <0.001) months of lockdown. With an estimated 14.8 million PTB annually worldwide, the modest reductions observed during early pandemic lockdowns translate into large numbers of PTB averted globally and warrant further research into causal pathways.Peer reviewe

Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015

Background The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2015 provides an up-to-date synthesis of the evidence for risk factor exposure and the attributable burden of disease. By providing national and subnational assessments spanning the past 25 years, this study can inform debates on the importance of addressing risks in context. Methods We used the comparative risk assessment framework developed for previous iterations of the Global Burden of Disease Study to estimate attributable deaths, disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and trends in exposure by age group, sex, year, and geography for 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks from 1990 to 2015. This study included 388 risk-outcome pairs that met World Cancer Research Fund-defi ned criteria for convincing or probable evidence. We extracted relative risk and exposure estimates from randomised controlled trials, cohorts, pooled cohorts, household surveys, census data, satellite data, and other sources. We used statistical models to pool data, adjust for bias, and incorporate covariates. We developed a metric that allows comparisons of exposure across risk factors—the summary exposure value. Using the counterfactual scenario of theoretical minimum risk level, we estimated the portion of deaths and DALYs that could be attributed to a given risk. We decomposed trends in attributable burden into contributions from population growth, population age structure, risk exposure, and risk-deleted cause-specifi c DALY rates. We characterised risk exposure in relation to a Socio-demographic Index (SDI).Background The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2015 provides an up-to-date synthesis of the evidence for risk factor exposure and the attributable burden of disease. By providing national and subnational assessments spanning the past 25 years, this study can inform debates on the importance of addressing risks in context. Methods We used the comparative risk assessment framework developed for previous iterations of the Global Burden of Disease Study to estimate attributable deaths, disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and trends in exposure by age group, sex, year, and geography for 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks from 1990 to 2015. This study included 388 risk-outcome pairs that met World Cancer Research Fund-defi ned criteria for convincing or probable evidence. We extracted relative risk and exposure estimates from randomised controlled trials, cohorts, pooled cohorts, household surveys, census data, satellite data, and other sources. We used statistical models to pool data, adjust for bias, and incorporate covariates. We developed a metric that allows comparisons of exposure across risk factors—the summary exposure value. Using the counterfactual scenario of theoretical minimum risk level, we estimated the portion of deaths and DALYs that could be attributed to a given risk. We decomposed trends in attributable burden into contributions from population growth, population age structure, risk exposure, and risk-deleted cause-specifi c DALY rates. We characterised risk exposure in relation to a Socio-demographic Index (SDI)

Estimates, trends, and drivers of the global burden of type 2 diabetes attributable to PM2.5 air pollution, 1990-2019 : An analysis of data from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

Background Experimental and epidemiological studies indicate an association between exposure to particulate matter (PM) air pollution and increased risk of type 2 diabetes. In view of the high and increasing prevalence of diabetes, we aimed to quantify the burden of type 2 diabetes attributable to PM2·5 originating from ambient and household air pollution. Methods We systematically compiled all relevant cohort and case-control studies assessing the effect of exposure to household and ambient fine particulate matter (PM2·5) air pollution on type 2 diabetes incidence and mortality. We derived an exposure–response curve from the extracted relative risk estimates using the MR-BRT (meta-regression—Bayesian, regularised, trimmed) tool. The estimated curve was linked to ambient and household PM2·5 exposures from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019, and estimates of the attributable burden (population attributable fractions and rates per 100 000 population of deaths and disability-adjusted life-years) for 204 countries from 1990 to 2019 were calculated. We also assessed the role of changes in exposure, population size, age, and type 2 diabetes incidence in the observed trend in PM2·5-attributable type 2 diabetes burden. All estimates are presented with 95% uncertainty intervals. Findings In 2019, approximately a fifth of the global burden of type 2 diabetes was attributable to PM2·5 exposure, with an estimated 3·78 (95% uncertainty interval 2·68–4·83) deaths per 100 000 population and 167 (117–223) disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) per 100 000 population. Approximately 13·4% (9·49–17·5) of deaths and 13·6% (9·73–17·9) of DALYs due to type 2 diabetes were contributed by ambient PM2·5, and 6·50% (4·22–9·53) of deaths and 5·92% (3·81–8·64) of DALYs by household air pollution. High burdens, in terms of numbers as well as rates, were estimated in Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, and South America. Since 1990, the attributable burden has increased by 50%, driven largely by population growth and ageing. Globally, the impact of reductions in household air pollution was largely offset by increased ambient PM2·5. Interpretation Air pollution is a major risk factor for diabetes. We estimated that about a fifth of the global burden of type 2 diabetes is attributable PM2·5 pollution. Air pollution mitigation therefore might have an essential role in reducing the global disease burden resulting from type 2 diabetes

Estimates, trends, and drivers of the global burden of type 2 diabetes attributable to PM2.5 air pollution, 1990-2019 : an analysis of data from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

Background Experimental and epidemiological studies indicate an association between exposure to particulate matter (PM) air pollution and increased risk of type 2 diabetes. In view of the high and increasing prevalence of diabetes, we aimed to quantify the burden of type 2 diabetes attributable to PM2.5 originating from ambient and household air pollution.Methods We systematically compiled all relevant cohort and case-control studies assessing the effect of exposure to household and ambient fine particulate matter (PM2.5) air pollution on type 2 diabetes incidence and mortality. We derived an exposure-response curve from the extracted relative risk estimates using the MR-BRT (meta-regression-Bayesian, regularised, trimmed) tool. The estimated curve was linked to ambient and household PM2.5 exposures from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019, and estimates of the attributable burden (population attributable fractions and rates per 100 000 population of deaths and disability-adjusted life-years) for 204 countries from 1990 to 2019 were calculated. We also assessed the role of changes in exposure, population size, age, and type 2 diabetes incidence in the observed trend in PM2.5-attributable type 2 diabetes burden. All estimates are presented with 95% uncertainty intervals.Findings In 2019, approximately a fifth of the global burden of type 2 diabetes was attributable to PM2.5 exposure, with an estimated 3.78 (95% uncertainty interval 2.68-4.83) deaths per 100 000 population and 167 (117-223) disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) per 100 000 population. Approximately 13.4% (9.49-17.5) of deaths and 13.6% (9.73-17.9) of DALYs due to type 2 diabetes were contributed by ambient PM2.5, and 6.50% (4.22-9.53) of deaths and 5.92% (3.81-8.64) of DALYs by household air pollution. High burdens, in terms of numbers as well as rates, were estimated in Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, and South America. Since 1990, the attributable burden has increased by 50%, driven largely by population growth and ageing. Globally, the impact of reductions in household air pollution was largely offset by increased ambient PM2.5.Interpretation Air pollution is a major risk factor for diabetes. We estimated that about a fifth of the global burden of type 2 diabetes is attributable PM2.5 pollution. Air pollution mitigation therefore might have an essential role in reducing the global disease burden resulting from type 2 diabetes. Copyright (C) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.Peer reviewe

Mapping 123 million neonatal, infant and child deaths between 2000 and 2017

Since 2000, many countries have achieved considerable success in improving child survival, but localized progress remains unclear. To inform efforts towards United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 3.2—to end preventable child deaths by 2030—we need consistently estimated data at the subnational level regarding child mortality rates and trends. Here we quantified, for the period 2000–2017, the subnational variation in mortality rates and number of deaths of neonates, infants and children under 5 years of age within 99 low- and middle-income countries using a geostatistical survival model. We estimated that 32% of children under 5 in these countries lived in districts that had attained rates of 25 or fewer child deaths per 1,000 live births by 2017, and that 58% of child deaths between 2000 and 2017 in these countries could have been averted in the absence of geographical inequality. This study enables the identification of high-mortality clusters, patterns of progress and geographical inequalities to inform appropriate investments and implementations that will help to improve the health of all populations

Mapping development and health effects of cooking with solid fuels in low-income and middle-income countries, 2000-18 : a geospatial modelling study

Background More than 3 billion people do not have access to clean energy and primarily use solid fuels to cook. Use of solid fuels generates household air pollution, which was associated with more than 2 million deaths in 2019. Although local patterns in cooking vary systematically, subnational trends in use of solid fuels have yet to be comprehensively analysed. We estimated the prevalence of solid-fuel use with high spatial resolution to explore subnational inequalities, assess local progress, and assess the effects on health in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) without universal access to clean fuels.Methods We did a geospatial modelling study to map the prevalence of solid-fuel use for cooking at a 5 km x 5 km resolution in 98 LMICs based on 2.1 million household observations of the primary cooking fuel used from 663 population-based household surveys over the years 2000 to 2018. We use observed temporal patterns to forecast household air pollution in 2030 and to assess the probability of attaining the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target indicator for clean cooking. We aligned our estimates of household air pollution to geospatial estimates of ambient air pollution to establish the risk transition occurring in LMICs. Finally, we quantified the effect of residual primary solid-fuel use for cooking on child health by doing a counterfactual risk assessment to estimate the proportion of deaths from lower respiratory tract infections in children younger than 5 years that could be associated with household air pollution.Findings Although primary reliance on solid-fuel use for cooking has declined globally, it remains widespread. 593 million people live in districts where the prevalence of solid-fuel use for cooking exceeds 95%. 66% of people in LMICs live in districts that are not on track to meet the SDG target for universal access to clean energy by 2030. Household air pollution continues to be a major contributor to particulate exposure in LMICs, and rising ambient air pollution is undermining potential gains from reductions in the prevalence of solid-fuel use for cooking in many countries. We estimated that, in 2018, 205000 (95% uncertainty interval 147000-257000) children younger than 5 years died from lower respiratory tract infections that could be attributed to household air pollution.Interpretation Efforts to accelerate the adoption of clean cooking fuels need to be substantially increased and recalibrated to account for subnational inequalities, because there are substantial opportunities to improve air quality and avert child mortality associated with household air pollution. Copyright (C) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.Peer reviewe

Mapping local patterns of childhood overweight and wasting in low- and middle-income countries between 2000 and 2017

A double burden of malnutrition occurs when individuals, household members or communities experience both undernutrition and overweight. Here, we show geospatial estimates of overweight and wasting prevalence among children under 5 years of age in 105 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) from 2000 to 2017 and aggregate these to policy-relevant administrative units. Wasting decreased overall across LMICs between 2000 and 2017, from 8.4% (62.3 (55.1–70.8) million) to 6.4% (58.3 (47.6–70.7) million), but is predicted to remain above the World Health Organization’s Global Nutrition Target of <5% in over half of LMICs by 2025. Prevalence of overweight increased from 5.2% (30 (22.8–38.5) million) in 2000 to 6.0% (55.5 (44.8–67.9) million) children aged under 5 years in 2017. Areas most affected by double burden of malnutrition were located in Indonesia, Thailand, southeastern China, Botswana, Cameroon and central Nigeria. Our estimates provide a new perspective to researchers, policy makers and public health agencies in their efforts to address this global childhood syndemic