Academic Performance and Mental Ability of Students as Determinants in Passing the Licensure Examinations for Teachers

The study aimed to determine predictors of the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET). It examined how students in different fields of specialization performed in the licensure exam and if there is a relationship between academic performance, scholastic intelligence, and licensure exam results in four components, i.e., general, professional, specialization, and overall results. This study utilized descriptive-correlational design. Data were gathered from the records of 65 purposively selected Secondary Education graduates. Academic performance was measured through the respondents’ GPA in General Education, Field Study, Professional Education subjects and their overall rating. Mental ability of the students was measured through Otis-Lennon School Ability Test (OLSAT). The study found out that the students have an average score in their OLSAT and a good academic performance. In the analysis of data, the college have a poor performance in LET but not failing. Both the students’ academic performance and OLSAT correlate positively to the LET result. In terms of specializations, only the program under Language-History and MAPEH-TLE have significant difference in LET performance. The study concluded that only professional education under academic performance and OLSAT can be used as predictor for LET results.&nbsp

MANAGING STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS IN THE MAINSTREAM CLASSROOM

Education is for all so even children with special needs must be given the right education they deserve. This qualitative case study focused on the school practices in terms of managing students with special needs in the  mainstream classroom. Participants were four principals and one guidance counselor from three elementary schools and two secondary schools in Cavite and Laguna. Face-to-face interview was used to gather the data to answer the following research questions: (1) How do the schools manage students with special needs? (2) What important considerations do the schools have for having students with special needs? Results of the study revealed that in terms of schools’ management of students with special needs, schools provide training for teachers for them to be more equipped in handling students with special needs. Having students with special needs in the mainstream, schools promote understanding and acceptance of students with special  needs among the faculty members, staff, administrators, parents, and mainstream students. Assessment and evaluation, diagnosis and placement, collaboration with parents, regular teachers, and other professionals, and education for all are the important considerations of the schools for having students with special needs. Schools particularly pay attention to their management when it comes to students with special needs. Practices in managing students with special needs require a lot of considerations for schools to educate such students. Awareness of the need for special education should be increased in schools in order to promote the welfare of these students as part of the mainstream

Readiness of Faith-Based Community towards Adopting Special Education Program

In the increasing number of students with special needs, it was reported that lessthan 3% of Adventist schools have direct provision of special services and only 6%of Adventist schools reported access to Adventist Special Education Services in theUnited States. In the Philippines, there is no concrete special education program inall Adventist schools. This study focused on the exploration of the readinesstowards adopting special education program that dug into the subject ofadministration, facilities, teaching, funding, the challenges and solutions that mightbe faced in Faith-Based Community (FBC). The researchers employed multimethod and purposive sampling. The respondents were the administrators, teachers,and finance personnel of Faith-Based Community and the participants were chosenbased on the criteria set by the researchers. For the quantitative, the data weregathered through survey questionnaires and checklist which revealed that FBC isnot ready in terms of facilities and personnel who are equipped in handling theprogram. Thematic analysis was utilized in collecting qualitative data through indepth interview. The researchers found out that the challenges towards adoptingspecial education program that the participants mentioned are: lack of qualifiedteachers, community awareness, scarcity of training, classroom management,administrative support, lack of facilities and curriculum. While, the solutions thatpopped out to address these challenges are Individualized Education Program,comprehensive seminars or trainings, provision of facilities, fund allocation,supportive administrators and spirit-filled personnel. Based on the findings, thecommunity is ready to adopt the program but the knowledge about the program islimited. Moreover, the researchers recommend that the community needs moreinvolvement in seminars and trainings related to special education

First Latin American clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus: Latin American Group for the Study of Lupus (GLADEL, Grupo Latino Americano de Estudio del Lupus)-Pan-American League of Associations of Rheumatology (PANLAR)

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), a complex and heterogeneous autoimmune disease, represents a significant challenge for both diagnosis and treatment. Patients with SLE in Latin America face special problems that should be considered when therapeutic guidelines are developed. The objective of the study is to develop clinical practice guidelines for Latin American patients with lupus. Two independent teams (rheumatologists with experience in lupus management and methodologists) had an initial meeting in Panama City, Panama, in April 2016. They selected a list of questions for the clinical problems most commonly seen in Latin American patients with SLE. These were addressed with the best available evidence and summarised in a standardised format following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. All preliminary findings were discussed in a second face-to-face meeting in Washington, DC, in November 2016. As a result, nine organ/system sections are presented with the main findings; an 'overarching' treatment approach was added. Special emphasis was made on regional implementation issues. Best pharmacologic options were examined for musculoskeletal, mucocutaneous, kidney, cardiac, pulmonary, neuropsychiatric, haematological manifestations and the antiphospholipid syndrome. The roles of main therapeutic options (ie, glucocorticoids, antimalarials, immunosuppressant agents, therapeutic plasma exchange, belimumab, rituximab, abatacept, low-dose aspirin and anticoagulants) were summarised in each section. In all cases, benefits and harms, certainty of the evidence, values and preferences, feasibility, acceptability and equity issues were considered to produce a recommendation with special focus on ethnic and socioeconomic aspects. Guidelines for Latin American patients with lupus have been developed and could be used in similar settings.Fil: Pons Estel, Bernardo A.. Centro Regional de Enfermedades Autoinmunes y Reumáticas; ArgentinaFil: Bonfa, Eloisa. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Soriano, Enrique R.. Instituto Universitario Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires. Rectorado.; ArgentinaFil: Cardiel, Mario H.. Centro de Investigación Clínica de Morelia; MéxicoFil: Izcovich, Ariel. Hospital Alemán; ArgentinaFil: Popoff, Federico. Hospital Aleman; ArgentinaFil: Criniti, Juan M.. Hospital Alemán; ArgentinaFil: Vásquez, Gloria. Universidad de Antioquia; ColombiaFil: Massardo, Loreto. Universidad San Sebastián; ChileFil: Duarte, Margarita. Hospital de Clínicas; ParaguayFil: Barile Fabris, Leonor A.. Hospital Angeles del Pedregal; MéxicoFil: García, Mercedes A.. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Medicina. Hospital de Clínicas General San Martín; ArgentinaFil: Amigo, Mary Carmen. Centro Médico Abc; MéxicoFil: Espada, Graciela. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños "Ricardo Gutiérrez"; ArgentinaFil: Catoggio, Luis J.. Hospital Italiano. Instituto Universitario. Escuela de Medicina; ArgentinaFil: Sato, Emilia Inoue. Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Levy, Roger A.. Universidade do Estado de Rio do Janeiro; BrasilFil: Acevedo Vásquez, Eduardo M.. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos; PerúFil: Chacón Díaz, Rosa. Policlínica Méndez Gimón; VenezuelaFil: Galarza Maldonado, Claudio M.. Corporación Médica Monte Sinaí; EcuadorFil: Iglesias Gamarra, Antonio J.. Universidad Nacional de Colombia; ColombiaFil: Molina, José Fernando. Centro Integral de Reumatología; ColombiaFil: Neira, Oscar. Universidad de Chile; ChileFil: Silva, Clóvis A.. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Vargas Peña, Andrea. Hospital Pasteur Montevideo; UruguayFil: Gómez Puerta, José A.. Hospital Clinic Barcelona; EspañaFil: Scolnik, Marina. Instituto Universitario Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires. Rectorado.; ArgentinaFil: Pons Estel, Guillermo J.. Centro Regional de Enfermedades Autoinmunes y Reumáticas; Argentina. Hospital Provincial de Rosario; ArgentinaFil: Ugolini Lopes, Michelle R.. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Savio, Verónica. Instituto Universitario Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires. Rectorado.; ArgentinaFil: Drenkard, Cristina. University of Emory; Estados UnidosFil: Alvarellos, Alejandro J.. Hospital Privado Universitario de Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Ugarte Gil, Manuel F.. Universidad Cientifica del Sur; Perú. Hospital Nacional Guillermo Almenara Irigoyen; PerúFil: Babini, Alejandra. Instituto Universitario Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires. Rectorado.; ArgentinaFil: Cavalcanti, André. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco; BrasilFil: Cardoso Linhares, Fernanda Athayde. Hospital Pasteur Montevideo; UruguayFil: Haye Salinas, Maria Jezabel. Hospital Privado Universitario de Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Fuentes Silva, Yurilis J.. Universidad de Oriente - Núcleo Bolívar; VenezuelaFil: Montandon De Oliveira E Silva, Ana Carolina. Universidade Federal de Goiás; BrasilFil: Eraso Garnica, Ruth M.. Universidad de Antioquia; ColombiaFil: Herrera Uribe, Sebastián. Hospital General de Medellin Luz Castro de Gutiérrez; ColombiaFil: Gómez Martín, DIana. Instituto Nacional de la Nutrición Salvador Zubiran; MéxicoFil: Robaina Sevrini, Ricardo. Universidad de la República; UruguayFil: Quintana, Rosana M.. Hospital Provincial de Rosario; Argentina. Centro Regional de Enfermedades Autoinmunes y Reumáticas; ArgentinaFil: Gordon, Sergio. Hospital Interzonal General de Agudos Dr Oscar Alende. Unidad de Reumatología y Enfermedades Autoinmunes Sistémicas; ArgentinaFil: Fragoso Loyo, Hilda. Instituto Nacional de la Nutrición Salvador Zubiran; MéxicoFil: Rosario, Violeta. Hospital Docente Padre Billini; República DominicanaFil: Saurit, Verónica. Hospital Privado Universitario de Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Appenzeller, Simone. Universidade Estadual de Campinas; BrasilFil: Dos Reis Neto, Edgard Torres. Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Cieza, Jorge. Hospital Nacional Edgardo Rebagliati Martins; PerúFil: González Naranjo, Luis A.. Universidad de Antioquia; ColombiaFil: González Bello, Yelitza C.. Ceibac; MéxicoFil: Collado, María Victoria. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Medicina. Instituto de Investigaciones Médicas; ArgentinaFil: Sarano, Judith. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Medicina. Instituto de Investigaciones Médicas; ArgentinaFil: Retamozo, Maria Soledad. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Salud. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Sattler, María E.. Provincia de Buenos Aires. Ministerio de Salud. Hospital Interzonal de Agudos "Eva Perón"; ArgentinaFil: Gamboa Cárdenas, Rocio V.. Hospital Nacional Guillermo Almenara Irigoyen; PerúFil: Cairoli, Ernesto. Universidad de la República; UruguayFil: Conti, Silvana M.. Hospital Provincial de Rosario; ArgentinaFil: Amezcua Guerra, Luis M.. Instituto Nacional de Cardiologia Ignacio Chavez; MéxicoFil: Silveira, Luis H.. Instituto Nacional de Cardiologia Ignacio Chavez; MéxicoFil: Borba, Eduardo F.. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Pera, Mariana A.. Hospital Interzonal General de Agudos General San Martín; ArgentinaFil: Alba Moreyra, Paula B.. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Medicina; ArgentinaFil: Arturi, Valeria. Hospital Interzonal General de Agudos General San Martín; ArgentinaFil: Berbotto, Guillermo A.. Provincia de Buenos Aires. Ministerio de Salud. Hospital Interzonal de Agudos "Eva Perón"; ArgentinaFil: Gerling, Cristian. Hospital Interzonal General de Agudos Dr Oscar Alende. Unidad de Reumatología y Enfermedades Autoinmunes Sistémicas; ArgentinaFil: Gobbi, Carla Andrea. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Medicina; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Gervasoni, Viviana L.. Hospital Provincial de Rosario; ArgentinaFil: Scherbarth, Hugo R.. Hospital Interzonal General de Agudos Dr Oscar Alende. Unidad de Reumatología y Enfermedades Autoinmunes Sistémicas; ArgentinaFil: Brenol, João C. Tavares. Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre; BrasilFil: Cavalcanti, Fernando. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco; BrasilFil: Costallat, Lilian T. Lavras. Universidade Estadual de Campinas; BrasilFil: Da Silva, Nilzio A.. Universidade Federal de Goiás; BrasilFil: Monticielo, Odirlei A.. Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre; BrasilFil: Seguro, Luciana Parente Costa. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Xavier, Ricardo M.. Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre; BrasilFil: Llanos, Carolina. Universidad Católica de Chile; ChileFil: Montúfar Guardado, Rubén A.. Instituto Salvadoreño de la Seguridad Social; El SalvadorFil: Garcia De La Torre, Ignacio. Hospital General de Occidente; MéxicoFil: Pineda, Carlos. Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación; MéxicoFil: Portela Hernández, Margarita. Umae Hospital de Especialidades Centro Medico Nacional Siglo Xxi; MéxicoFil: Danza, Alvaro. Hospital Pasteur Montevideo; UruguayFil: Guibert Toledano, Marlene. Medical-surgical Research Center; CubaFil: Reyes, Gil Llerena. Medical-surgical Research Center; CubaFil: Acosta Colman, Maria Isabel. Hospital de Clínicas; ParaguayFil: Aquino, Alicia M.. Hospital de Clínicas; ParaguayFil: Mora Trujillo, Claudia S.. Hospital Nacional Edgardo Rebagliati Martins; PerúFil: Muñoz Louis, Roberto. Hospital Docente Padre Billini; República DominicanaFil: García Valladares, Ignacio. Centro de Estudios de Investigación Básica y Clínica; MéxicoFil: Orozco, María Celeste. Instituto de Rehabilitación Psicofísica; ArgentinaFil: Burgos, Paula I.. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile; ChileFil: Betancur, Graciela V.. Instituto de Rehabilitación Psicofísica; ArgentinaFil: Alarcón, Graciela S.. Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia; Perú. University of Alabama at Birmingahm; Estados Unido

Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 354 diseases and injuries for 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017.

The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries and Risk Factors 2017 includes a comprehensive assessment of incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability (YLDs) for 354 causes in 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2017. Previous GBD studies have shown how the decline of mortality rates from 1990 to 2016 has led to an increase in life expectancy, an ageing global population, and an expansion of the non-fatal burden of disease and injury. These studies have also shown how a substantial portion of the world's population experiences non-fatal health loss with considerable heterogeneity among different causes, locations, ages, and sexes. Ongoing objectives of the GBD study include increasing the level of estimation detail, improving analytical strategies, and increasing the amount of high-quality data. METHODS: We estimated incidence and prevalence for 354 diseases and injuries and 3484 sequelae. We used an updated and extensive body of literature studies, survey data, surveillance data, inpatient admission records, outpatient visit records, and health insurance claims, and additionally used results from cause of death models to inform estimates using a total of 68 781 data sources. Newly available clinical data from India, Iran, Japan, Jordan, Nepal, China, Brazil, Norway, and Italy were incorporated, as well as updated claims data from the USA and new claims data from Taiwan (province of China) and Singapore. We used DisMod-MR 2.1, a Bayesian meta-regression tool, as the main method of estimation, ensuring consistency between rates of incidence, prevalence, remission, and cause of death for each condition. YLDs were estimated as the product of a prevalence estimate and a disability weight for health states of each mutually exclusive sequela, adjusted for comorbidity. We updated the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary development indicator of income per capita, years of schooling, and total fertility rate. Additionally, we calculated differences between male and female YLDs to identify divergent trends across sexes. GBD 2017 complies with the Guidelines for Accurate and Transparent Health Estimates Reporting

Population and fertility by age and sex for 195 countries and territories, 1950–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017

Background: Population estimates underpin demographic and epidemiological research and are used to track progress on numerous international indicators of health and development. To date, internationally available estimates of population and fertility, although useful, have not been produced with transparent and replicable methods and do not use standardised estimates of mortality. We present single-calendar year and single-year of age estimates of fertility and population by sex with standardised and replicable methods. Methods: We estimated population in 195 locations by single year of age and single calendar year from 1950 to 2017 with standardised and replicable methods. We based the estimates on the demographic balancing equation, with inputs of fertility, mortality, population, and migration data. Fertility data came from 7817 location-years of vital registration data, 429 surveys reporting complete birth histories, and 977 surveys and censuses reporting summary birth histories. We estimated age-specific fertility rates (ASFRs; the annual number of livebirths to women of a specified age group per 1000 women in that age group) by use of spatiotemporal Gaussian process regression and used the ASFRs to estimate total fertility rates (TFRs; the average number of children a woman would bear if she survived through the end of the reproductive age span [age 10–54 years] and experienced at each age a particular set of ASFRs observed in the year of interest). Because of sparse data, fertility at ages 10–14 years and 50–54 years was estimated from data on fertility in women aged 15–19 years and 45–49 years, through use of linear regression. Age-specific mortality data came from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2017 estimates. Data on population came from 1257 censuses and 761 population registry location-years and were adjusted for underenumeration and age misreporting with standard demographic methods. Migration was estimated with the GBD Bayesian demographic balancing model, after incorporating information about refugee migration into the model prior. Final population estimates used the cohort-component method of population projection, with inputs of fertility, mortality, and migration data. Population uncertainty was estimated by use of out-of-sample predictive validity testing. With these data, we estimated the trends in population by age and sex and in fertility by age between 1950 and 2017 in 195 countries and territories. Findings: From 1950 to 2017, TFRs decreased by 49·4% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 46·4–52·0). The TFR decreased from 4·7 livebirths (4·5–4·9) to 2·4 livebirths (2·2–2·5), and the ASFR of mothers aged 10–19 years decreased from 37 livebirths (34–40) to 22 livebirths (19–24) per 1000 women. Despite reductions in the TFR, the global population has been increasing by an average of 83·8 million people per year since 1985. The global population increased by 197·2% (193·3–200·8) since 1950, from 2·6 billion (2·5–2·6) to 7·6 billion (7·4–7·9) people in 2017; much of this increase was in the proportion of the global population in south Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. The global annual rate of population growth increased between 1950 and 1964, when it peaked at 2·0%; this rate then remained nearly constant until 1970 and then decreased to 1·1% in 2017. Population growth rates in the southeast Asia, east Asia, and Oceania GBD super-region decreased from 2·5% in 1963 to 0·7% in 2017, whereas in sub-Saharan Africa, population growth rates were almost at the highest reported levels ever in 2017, when they were at 2·7%. The global average age increased from 26·6 years in 1950 to 32·1 years in 2017, and the proportion of the population that is of working age (age 15–64 years) increased from 59·9% to 65·3%. At the national level, the TFR decreased in all countries and territories between 1950 and 2017; in 2017, TFRs ranged from a low of 1·0 livebirths (95% UI 0·9–1·2) in Cyprus to a high of 7·1 livebirths (6·8–7·4) in Niger. The TFR under age 25 years (TFU25; number of livebirths expected by age 25 years for a hypothetical woman who survived the age group and was exposed to current ASFRs) in 2017 ranged from 0·08 livebirths (0·07–0·09) in South Korea to 2·4 livebirths (2·2–2·6) in Niger, and the TFR over age 30 years (TFO30; number of livebirths expected for a hypothetical woman ageing from 30 to 54 years who survived the age group and was exposed to current ASFRs) ranged from a low of 0·3 livebirths (0·3–0·4) in Puerto Rico to a high of 3·1 livebirths (3·0–3·2) in Niger. TFO30 was higher than TFU25 in 145 countries and territories in 2017. 33 countries had a negative population growth rate from 2010 to 2017, most of which were located in central, eastern, and western Europe, whereas population growth rates of more than 2·0% were seen in 33 of 46 countries in sub-Saharan Africa. In 2017, less than 65% of the national population was of working age in 12 of 34 high-income countries, and less than 50% of the national population was of working age in Mali, Chad, and Niger. Interpretation: Population trends create demographic dividends and headwinds (ie, economic benefits and detriments) that affect national economies and determine national planning needs. Although TFRs are decreasing, the global population continues to grow as mortality declines, with diverse patterns at the national level and across age groups. To our knowledge, this is the first study to provide transparent and replicable estimates of population and fertility, which can be used to inform decision making and to monitor progress

Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 359 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017.

How long one lives, how many years of life are spent in good and poor health, and how the population's state of health and leading causes of disability change over time all have implications for policy, planning, and provision of services. We comparatively assessed the patterns and trends of healthy life expectancy (HALE), which quantifies the number of years of life expected to be lived in good health, and the complementary measure of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), a composite measure of disease burden capturing both premature mortality and prevalence and severity of ill health, for 359 diseases and injuries for 195 countries and territories over the past 28 years. Methods We used data for age-specific mortality rates, years of life lost (YLLs) due to premature mortality, and years lived with disability (YLDs) from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2017 to calculate HALE and DALYs from 1990 to 2017. We calculated HALE using age-specific mortality rates and YLDs per capita for each location, age, sex, and year. We calculated DALYs for 359 causes as the sum of YLLs and YLDs. We assessed how observed HALE and DALYs differed by country and sex from expected trends based on Socio-demographic Index (SDI). We also analysed HALE by decomposing years of life gained into years spent in good health and in poor health, between 1990 and 2017, and extra years lived by females compared with males. Findings Globally, from 1990 to 2017, life expectancy at birth increased by 7·4 years (95% uncertainty interval 7·1-7·8), from 65·6 years (65·3-65·8) in 1990 to 73·0 years (72·7-73·3) in 2017. The increase in years of life varied from 5·1 years (5·0-5·3) in high SDI countries to 12·0 years (11·3-12·8) in low SDI countries. Of the additional years of life expected at birth, 26·3% (20·1-33·1) were expected to be spent in poor health in high SDI countries compared with 11·7% (8·8-15·1) in low-middle SDI countries. HALE at birth increased by 6·3 years (5·9-6·7), from 57·0 years (54·6-59·1) in 1990 to 63·3 years (60·5-65·7) in 2017. The increase varied from 3·8 years (3·4-4·1) in high SDI countries to 10·5 years (9·8-11·2) in low SDI countries. Even larger variations in HALE than these were observed between countries, ranging from 1·0 year (0·4-1·7) in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (62·4 years [59·9-64·7] in 1990 to 63·5 years [60·9-65·8] in 2017) to 23·7 years (21·9-25·6) in Eritrea (30·7 years [28·9-32·2] in 1990 to 54·4 years [51·5-57·1] in 2017). In most countries, the increase in HALE was smaller than the increase in overall life expectancy, indicating more years lived in poor health. In 180 of 195 countries and territories, females were expected to live longer than males in 2017, with extra years lived varying from 1·4 years (0·6-2·3) in Algeria to 11·9 years (10·9-12·9) in Ukraine. Of the extra years gained, the proportion spent in poor health varied largely across countries, with less than 20% of additional years spent in poor health in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, and Slovakia, whereas in Bahrain all the extra years were spent in poor health. In 2017, the highest estimate of HALE at birth was in Singapore for both females (75·8 years [72·4-78·7]) and males (72·6 years [69·8-75·0]) and the lowest estimates were in Central African Republic (47·0 years [43·7-50·2] for females and 42·8 years [40·1-45·6] for males). Globally, in 2017, the five leading causes of DALYs were neonatal disorders, ischaemic heart disease, stroke, lower respiratory infections, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Between 1990 and 2017, age-standardised DALY rates decreased by 41·3% (38·8-43·5) for communicable diseases and by 49·8% (47·9-51·6) for neonatal disorders. For non-communicable diseases, global DALYs increased by 40·1% (36·8-43·0), although age-standardised DALY rates decreased by 18·1% (16·0-20·2)

Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks for 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017

Background The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2017 comparative risk assessment (CRA) is a comprehensive approach to risk factor quantification that offers a useful tool for synthesising evidence on risks and risk–outcome associations. With each annual GBD study, we update the GBD CRA to incorporate improved methods, new risks and risk–outcome pairs, and new data on risk exposure levels and risk–outcome associations. Methods We used the CRA framework developed for previous iterations of GBD to estimate levels and trends in exposure, attributable deaths, and attributable disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), by age group, sex, year, and location for 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or groups of risks from 1990 to 2017. This study included 476 risk–outcome pairs that met the GBD study criteria for convincing or probable evidence of causation. We extracted relative risk and exposure estimates from 46 749 randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, household surveys, census data, satellite data, and other sources. We used statistical models to pool data, adjust for bias, and incorporate covariates. Using the counterfactual scenario of theoretical minimum risk exposure level (TMREL), we estimated the portion of deaths and DALYs that could be attributed to a given risk. We explored the relationship between development and risk exposure by modelling the relationship between the Socio-demographic Index (SDI) and risk-weighted exposure prevalence and estimated expected levels of exposure and risk-attributable burden by SDI. Finally, we explored temporal changes in risk-attributable DALYs by decomposing those changes into six main component drivers of change as follows: (1) population growth; (2) changes in population age structures; (3) changes in exposure to environmental and occupational risks; (4) changes in exposure to behavioural risks; (5) changes in exposure to metabolic risks; and (6) changes due to all other factors, approximated as the risk-deleted death and DALY rates, where the risk-deleted rate is the rate that would be observed had we reduced the exposure levels to the TMREL for all risk factors included in GBD 2017. Findings In 2017, 34·1 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 33·3–35·0) deaths and 1·21 billion (1·14–1·28) DALYs were attributable to GBD risk factors. Globally, 61·0% (59·6–62·4) of deaths and 48·3% (46·3–50·2) of DALYs were attributed to the GBD 2017 risk factors. When ranked by risk-attributable DALYs, high systolic blood pressure (SBP) was the leading risk factor, accounting for 10·4 million (9·39–11·5) deaths and 218 million (198–237) DALYs, followed by smoking (7·10 million [6·83–7·37] deaths and 182 million [173–193] DALYs), high fasting plasma glucose (6·53 million [5·23–8·23] deaths and 171 million [144–201] DALYs), high body-mass index (BMI; 4·72 million [2·99–6·70] deaths and 148 million [98·6–202] DALYs), and short gestation for birthweight (1·43 million [1·36–1·51] deaths and 139 million [131–147] DALYs). In total, risk-attributable DALYs declined by 4·9% (3·3–6·5) between 2007 and 2017. In the absence of demographic changes (ie, population growth and ageing), changes in risk exposure and risk-deleted DALYs would have led to a 23·5% decline in DALYs during that period. Conversely, in the absence of changes in risk exposure and risk-deleted DALYs, demographic changes would have led to an 18·6% increase in DALYs during that period. The ratios of observed risk exposure levels to exposure levels expected based on SDI (O/E ratios) increased globally for unsafe drinking water and household air pollution between 1990 and 2017. This result suggests that development is occurring more rapidly than are changes in the underlying risk structure in a population. Conversely, nearly universal declines in O/E ratios for smoking and alcohol use indicate that, for a given SDI, exposure to these risks is declining. In 2017, the leading Level 4 risk factor for age-standardised DALY rates was high SBP in four super-regions: central Europe, eastern Europe, and central Asia; north Africa and Middle East; south Asia; and southeast Asia, east Asia, and Oceania. The leading risk factor in the high-income super-region was smoking, in Latin America and Caribbean was high BMI, and in sub-Saharan Africa was unsafe sex. O/E ratios for unsafe sex in sub-Saharan Africa were notably high, and those for alcohol use in north Africa and the Middle East were notably low. Interpretation By quantifying levels and trends in exposures to risk factors and the resulting disease burden, this assessment offers insight into where past policy and programme efforts might have been successful and highlights current priorities for public health action. Decreases in behavioural, environmental, and occupational risks have largely offset the effects of population growth and ageing, in relation to trends in absolute burden. Conversely, the combination of increasing metabolic risks and population ageing will probably continue to drive the increasing trends in non-communicable diseases at the global level, which presents both a public health challenge and opportunity. We see considerable spatiotemporal heterogeneity in levels of risk exposure and risk-attributable burden. Although levels of development underlie some of this heterogeneity, O/E ratios show risks for which countries are overperforming or underperforming relative to their level of development. As such, these ratios provide a benchmarking tool to help to focus local decision making. Our findings reinforce the importance of both risk exposure monitoring and epidemiological research to assess causal connections between risks and health outcomes, and they highlight the usefulness of the GBD study in synthesising data to draw comprehensive and robust conclusions that help to inform good policy and strategic health planning