Additional file 1 of Incidence of catastrophic health spending in Indonesia: insights from a Household Panel Study 2018–2019

Supplementary Material

Status and Trends of Physical Activity Surveillance, Policy, and Research in 164 Countries: Findings From the Global Observatory for Physical Activity—GoPA! 2015 and 2020 Surveys

Background: Physical activity (PA) surveillance, policy, and research efforts need to be periodically appraised to gain insight into national and global capacities for PA promotion. The aim of this paper was to assess the status and trends in PA surveillance, policy, and research in 164 countries. Methods: We used data from the Global Observatory for Physical Activity (GoPA!) 2015 and 2020 surveys. Comprehensive searches were performed for each country to determine the level of development of their PA surveillance, policy, and research, and the findings were verified by the GoPA! Country Contacts. Trends were analyzed based on the data available for both survey years. Results: The global 5-year progress in all 3 indicators was modest, with most countries either improving or staying at the same level. PA surveillance, policy, and research improved or remained at a high level in 48.1%, 40.6%, and 42.1% of the countries, respectively. PA surveillance, policy, and research scores decreased or remained at a low level in 8.3%, 15.8%, and 28.6% of the countries, respectively. The highest capacity for PA promotion was found in Europe, the lowest in Africa and low- and lower-middle-income countries. Although a large percentage of the world’s population benefit from at least some PA policy, surveillance, and research efforts in their countries, 49.6 million people are without PA surveillance, 629.4 million people are without PA policy, and 108.7 million live in countries without any PA research output. A total of 6.3 billion people or 88.2% of the world’s population live in countries where PA promotion capacity should be significantly improved. Conclusion: Despite PA is essential for health, there are large inequalities between countries and world regions in their capacity to promote PA. Coordinated efforts are needed to reduce the inequalities and improve the global capacity for PA promotion

Smoking prevalence and attributable disease burden in 195 countries and territories, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015

Background The scale-up of tobacco control, especially after the adoption of the Framework Convention for TobaccoControl, is a major public health success story. Nonetheless, smoking remains a leading risk for early death anddisability worldwide, and therefore continues to require sustained political commitment. The Global Burden ofDiseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) offers a robust platform through which global, regional, andnational progress toward achieving smoking-related targets can be assessed.Methods We synthesised 2818 data sources with spatiotemporal Gaussian process regression and produced estimatesof daily smoking prevalence by sex, age group, and year for 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2015. We analysed38 risk-outcome pairs to generate estimates of smoking-attributable mortality and disease burden, as measured bydisability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). We then performed a cohort analysis of smoking prevalence by birth-year cohortto better understand temporal age patterns in smoking. We also did a decomposition analysis, in which we parsed outchanges in all-cause smoking-attributable DALYs due to changes in population growth, population ageing, smokingprevalence, and risk-deleted DALY rates. Finally, we explored results by level of development using theSocio-demographic Index (SDI).Findings Worldwide, the age-standardised prevalence of daily smoking was 25·0% (95% uncertainty interval [UI]24·2–25·7) for men and 5·4% (5·1–5·7) for women, representing 28·4% (25·8–31·1) and 34·4% (29·4–38·6)reductions, respectively, since 1990. A greater percentage of countries and territories achieved significant annualisedrates of decline in smoking prevalence from 1990 to 2005 than in between 2005 and 2015; however, only four countrieshad significant annualised increases in smoking prevalence between 2005 and 2015 (Congo [Brazzaville] andAzerbaijan for men and Kuwait and Timor-Leste for women). In 2015, 11·5% of global deaths (6·4 million [95% UI5·7–7·0 million]) were attributable to smoking worldwide, of which 52·2% took place in four countries (China, India,the USA, and Russia). Smoking was ranked among the five leading risk factors by DALYs in 109 countries andterritories in 2015, rising from 88 geographies in 1990. In terms of birth cohorts, male smoking prevalence followedsimilar age patterns across levels of SDI, whereas much more heterogeneity was found in age patterns for femalesmokers by level of development. While smoking prevalence and risk-deleted DALY rates mostly decreased by sex andSDI quintile, population growth, population ageing, or a combination of both, drove rises in overall smokingattributableDALYs in low-SDI to middle-SDI geographies between 2005 and 2015.Interpretation The pace of progress in reducing smoking prevalence has been heterogeneous across geographies,development status, and sex, and as highlighted by more recent trends, maintaining past rates of decline should notbe taken for granted, especially in women and in low-SDI to middle-SDI countries. Beyond the effect of the tobaccoindustry and societal mores, a crucial challenge facing tobacco control initiatives is that demographic forces arepoised to heighten smoking’s global toll, unless progress in preventing initiation and promoting cessation can besubstantially accelerated. Greater success in tobacco control is possible but requires effective, comprehensive, andadequately implemented and enforced policies, which might in turn require global and national levels of politicalcommitment beyond what has been achieved during the past 25 years.</p

Predicting the environmental suitability for onchocerciasis in Africa as an aid to elimination planning

Recent evidence suggests that, in some foci, elimination of onchocerciasis from Africa may be feasible with mass drug administration (MDA) of ivermectin. To achieve continental elimination of transmission, mapping surveys will need to be conducted across all implementation units (IUs) for which endemicity status is currently unknown. Using boosted regression tree models with optimised hyperparameter selection, we estimated environmental suitability for onchocerciasis at the 5 × 5-km resolution across Africa. In order to classify IUs that include locations that are environmentally suitable, we used receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to identify an optimal threshold for suitability concordant with locations where onchocerciasis has been previously detected. This threshold value was then used to classify IUs (more suitable or less suitable) based on the location within the IU with the largest mean prediction. Mean estimates of environmental suitability suggest large areas across West and Central Africa, as well as focal areas of East Africa, are suitable for onchocerciasis transmission, consistent with the presence of current control and elimination of transmission efforts. The ROC analysis identified a mean environmental suitability index of 0.71 as a threshold to classify based on the location with the largest mean prediction within the IU. Of the IUs considered for mapping surveys, 50.2% exceed this threshold for suitability in at least one 5×5-km location. The formidable scale of data collection required to map onchocerciasis endemicity across the African continent presents an opportunity to use spatial data to identify areas likely to be suitable for onchocerciasis transmission. National onchocerciasis elimination programmes may wish to consider prioritising these IUs for mapping surveys as human resources, laboratory capacity, and programmatic schedules may constrain survey implementation, and possibly delaying MDA initiation in areas that would ultimately qualify

Mapping child growth failure across low- and middle-income countries

Childhood malnutrition is associated with high morbidity and mortality globally1. Undernourished children are more likely to experience cognitive, physical, and metabolic developmental impairments that can lead to later cardiovascular disease, reduced intellectual ability and school attainment, and reduced economic productivity in adulthood2. Child growth failure (CGF), expressed as stunting, wasting, and underweight in children under five years of age (0–59 months), is a specific subset of undernutrition characterized by insufficient height or weight against age-specific growth reference standards3–5. The prevalence of stunting, wasting, or underweight in children under five is the proportion of children with a height-for-age, weight-for-height, or weight-for-age z-score, respectively, that is more than two standard deviations below the World Health Organization’s median growth reference standards for a healthy population6. Subnational estimates of CGF report substantial heterogeneity within countries, but are available primarily at the first administrative level (for example, states or provinces)7; the uneven geographical distribution of CGF has motivated further calls for assessments that can match the local scale of many public health programmes8. Building from our previous work mapping CGF in Africa9, here we provide the first, to our knowledge, mapped high-spatial-resolution estimates of CGF indicators from 2000 to 2017 across 105 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where 99% of affected children live1, aggregated to policy-relevant first and second (for example, districts or counties) administrative-level units and national levels. Despite remarkable declines over the study period, many LMICs remain far from the ambitious World Health Organization Global Nutrition Targets to reduce stunting by 40% and wasting to less than 5% by 2025. Large disparities in prevalence and progress exist across and within countries; our maps identify high-prevalence areas even within nations otherwise succeeding in reducing overall CGF prevalence. By highlighting where the highest-need populations reside, these geospatial estimates can support policy-makers in planning interventions that are adapted locally and in efficiently directing resources towards reducing CGF and its health implications

Mapping disparities in education across low- and middle-income countries

Educational attainment is an important social determinant of maternal, newborn, and child health1–3. As a tool for promoting gender equity, it has gained increasing traction in popular media, international aid strategies, and global agenda-setting4–6. The global health agenda is increasingly focused on evidence of precision public health, which illustrates the subnational distribution of disease and illness7,8; however, an agenda focused on future equity must integrate comparable evidence on the distribution of social determinants of health9–11. Here we expand on the available precision SDG evidence by estimating the subnational distribution of educational attainment, including the proportions of individuals who have completed key levels of schooling, across all low- and middle-income countries from 2000 to 2017. Previous analyses have focused on geographical disparities in average attainment across Africa or for specific countries, but—to our knowledge—no analysis has examined the subnational proportions of individuals who completed specific levels of education across all low- and middle-income countries12–14. By geolocating subnational data for more than 184 million person-years across 528 data sources, we precisely identify inequalities across geography as well as within populations

Additional file 1 of Mapping age- and sex-specific HIV prevalence in adults in sub-Saharan Africa, 2000–2018

Additional file 1: Supplemental information.1. Compliance with the Guidlines for Accurate and Transparent Health Estimates Reporting (GATHER). 2. HIV data sources and data processing. 3. Covariate and auxiliary data. 4. Statistical model. 5. References

Additional file 3 of Mapping age- and sex-specific HIV prevalence in adults in sub-Saharan Africa, 2000–2018

Additional file 3: Supplemental figures.Figure S1. Prevalence of male circumcision. Figure S2. Prevalence of signs and symptoms of sexually transmitted infections. Figure S3. Prevalence of marriage or living as married. Figure S4. Prevalence of partner living elsewhere among females. Figure S5. Prevalence of condom use during most recent sexual encounter. Figure S6. Prevalence of sexual activity among young females. Figure S7. Prevalence of multiple partners among males in the past year. Figure S8. Prevalence of multiple partners among females in the past year. Figure S9. HIV prevalence predictions from the boosted regression tree model. Figure S10. HIV prevalence predictions from the generalized additive model. Figure S11. HIV prevalence predictions from the lasso regression model. Figure S12. Modeling regions. Figure S13. Age- and sex-specific vs. adult prevalence modeling. Figure S14. Data sensitivity. Figure S15. Model specification validation. Figure S16. Modeled and re-aggregated adult prevalence comparison. Figure S17. HIV prevalence raking factors for males. Figure S18. HIV prevalence raking factors for females. Figure S19. Age-specific HIV prevalence in males, 2000. Figure S20. Age-specific HIV prevalence in females, 2000. Figure S21. Age-specific HIV prevalence in males, 2005. Figure S22. Age-specific HIV prevalence in females, 2005. Figure S23. Age-specific HIV prevalence in males, 2010. Figure S24. Age-specific HIV prevalence in females, 2010. Figure S25. Age-specific HIV prevalence in males, 2018. Figure S26. Age-specific HIV prevalence in females, 2018. Figure S27. Age-specific uncertainty interval range estimates in males, 2000. Figure S28. Age-specific uncertainty interval range estimates in females, 2000. Figure S29. Age-specific uncertainty interval range estimates in males, 2005. Figure S30. Age-specific uncertainty interval range estimates in females, 2005. Figure S31. Age-specific uncertainty interval range estimates in males, 2010. Figure S32. Age-specific uncertainty interval range estimates in females, 2010. Figure S33. Age-specific uncertainty interval range estimates in males, 2018. Figure S34. Age-specific uncertainty interval range estimates in females, 2018. Figure S35. Change in HIV prevalence in males, 2000-2005. Figure S36. Change in HIV prevalence in females, 2000-2005. Figure S37. Change in HIV prevalence in males, 2005-2010. Figure S38. Change in HIV prevalence in females, 2005-2010. Figure S39. Change in HIV prevalence in males, 2010-2018. Figure S40. Change in HIV prevalence in females, 2010-2018. Figure S41. Space mesh for geostatistical models

Additional file 4 of Mapping age- and sex-specific HIV prevalence in adults in sub-Saharan Africa, 2000–2018

Additional file 4: Supplemental results.1. README. 2. Prevalence range across districts. 3. Prevalence range between sexes. 4. Prevalence range between ages. 5. Age-specific district ranges

Additional file 2 of Mapping age- and sex-specific HIV prevalence in adults in sub-Saharan Africa, 2000–2018

Additional file 2: Supplemental tables.Table S1. HIV seroprevalence survey data. Table S2. ANC sentinel surveillance data. Table S3. HIV and covariates surveys excluded from this analysis. Table S4. Sources for pre-existing covariates. Table S5. HIV covariate survey data. Table S6. Fitted model parameters