Prevalence of overweight and obesity among saudi children: A comparison of two widely used international standards and the national growth references

ObjectiveTo compare three body mass index (BMI) classifications that are used to assess the prevalence of overweight and obesity among Saudi children aged 6–13 years: the International Obesity Task Force (IOTF) age and gender cutoffs, the World Health Organization (WHO) growth references for school-aged children, and the Saudi (KSA) national growth references.MethodsThe sample comprised 2,169 children (52.5% girls) derived from two cross-sectional studies conducted in Riyadh and Jeddah during the 2017 and 2019 school years, respectively. Body weight and height were measured, and BMI was calculated.ResultsThe proportions (%) of the participants who were classified as underweight, overweight, and obese varied according to the reference used: IOTF reference (13.8, 18.4, and 12.7), WHO reference (17.2, 19.1, and 18.9), and KSA reference (7.0, 22.4, and 9.3), respectively, indicating higher values for overweight and obesity prevalence when the WHO references were used. Kappa agreement measures between the three references were found to be high, with the coefficients ranging from 0.936 (between the IOTF and KSA references) to 0.849 (between the IOTF and WHO references). In all three classifications, girls exhibited lower overweight or obesity prevalence than boys. Family income, but not paternal or maternal education, was significantly (p = 0.015) associated with overweight/obesity when using the IOTF standards. In addition, having a small family in the house was significantly (p < 0.05) associated with obesity, irrespective of the classification system.ConclusionInconsistency was observed when estimating the prevalence of underweight, overweight, and obesity among Saudi children. However, when defining the overall prevalence of overweight plus obesity among Saudi children, the IOTF classification system performed in a similar way to the KSA references (31.1% versus 31.7%) compared to the WHO references (38.0%)

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination modelling for safe surgery to save lives: data from an international prospective cohort study

Background: Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 vaccination could support safer elective surgery. Vaccine numbers are limited so this study aimed to inform their prioritization by modelling. Methods: The primary outcome was the number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent one COVID-19-related death in 1 year. NNVs were based on postoperative SARS-CoV-2 rates and mortality in an international cohort study (surgical patients), and community SARS-CoV-2 incidence and case fatality data (general population). NNV estimates were stratified by age (18-49, 50-69, 70 or more years) and type of surgery. Best- and worst-case scenarios were used to describe uncertainty. Results: NNVs were more favourable in surgical patients than the general population. The most favourable NNVs were in patients aged 70 years or more needing cancer surgery (351; best case 196, worst case 816) or non-cancer surgery (733; best case 407, worst case 1664). Both exceeded the NNV in the general population (1840; best case 1196, worst case 3066). NNVs for surgical patients remained favourable at a range of SARS-CoV-2 incidence rates in sensitivity analysis modelling. Globally, prioritizing preoperative vaccination of patients needing elective surgery ahead of the general population could prevent an additional 58 687 (best case 115 007, worst case 20 177) COVID-19-related deaths in 1 year. Conclusion: As global roll out of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination proceeds, patients needing elective surgery should be prioritized ahead of the general population