18 research outputs found

    Cross-linguistic influence in bilingual grammars: Evidence from gender assigment in unilingual Dutch and mixed speech

    Get PDF
    This study reports on grammatical gender assignment in elicited production data from heritage speakers of Turkish, Papiamento, and Spanish in the Netherlands. We selectively target the nominal domain, consisting of a determiner, a noun, and an adjective. Previous studies have demonstrated gender to be vulnerable in bilingual acquisition (e.g., Gathercole & Thomas 2005; Mitrofanova et al. 2018). The presence of grammatical gender in one language may affect gender assignment in the other language, suggesting cross-linguistic influence (Egger, Hulk & Tsimpli 2018; Eichler, Jansen & Müller 2013; Kaltsa, Tsimpli & Argyri 2019). In this chapter, we investigate the role of cross-linguistic influence from the heritage language onto the societal language by comparing three HLs that differ in terms of the properties of the nominal domain, including gender. Determiner phrase (DP) constructions consisting of a determiner, noun, and adjective were elicited by means of a director-matcher task (Gullberg, Indefrey &Muysken 2009), which was performed both in a unilingual Dutch mode, and in a code-switching mode. The results show that all groups tend to overgeneralize the common gender in the Dutch unilingual mode. Strikingly, heritage speakers of Spanish performed more target-like than the Papiamento and Turkish speakers, which is probably related to the fact that Turkish and Papiamento do not have a grammatical gender system, whereas Spanish distinguishes masculine and feminine gender in the DP. As for code-switching from Dutch to the HL, we observe a similar preference for the common gender, such that most speakers tend to assign common gender to nouns that are inserted from their respective HLs into Dutch DPs. Some speakers also apply a gender assignment strategy based on the translation equivalent of the noun in Dutch, or produce a postnominal adjective construction with an uninflected adjective. An analysis of extra-linguistic variables demonstrated that in both the unilingual and the code-switching mode, gender assignment strategies seem to be determined to some extent by the degree of dominance of the societal language

    Monolingual comparative normativity in bilingualism research is out of “control”: Arguments and alternatives

    Get PDF
    Accepted manuscript, to appeared in Applied Psycholinguistics: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/applied-psycholinguistics.Herein, we contextualize, problematize and offer some insights for moving beyond the problem of monolingual comparative normativity in (psycho)linguistic research on bilingualism. We argue that, in the vast majority of cases, juxtaposing (functional) monolinguals to bilinguals fails to offer what the comparison is supposedly intended to do: meet the standards of empirical control in line with the scientific method. Instead, the default nature of monolingual comparative normativity has historically contributed to inequalities in many facets of bilingualism research and continues to impede progress on multiple levels. Beyond framing our views on the matter, we offer some epistemological considerations and methodological alternatives to this standard practice that improve empirical rigor while fostering increased diversity, inclusivity and equity in our field

    Monolingual comparative normativity in bilingualism research is out of “control”: Arguments and alternatives

    Get PDF
    Herein, we contextualize, problematize, and offer some insights for moving beyond the problem of monolingual comparative normativity in (psycho) linguistic research on bilingualism. We argue that, in the vast majority of cases, juxtaposing (functional) monolinguals to bilinguals fails to offer what the comparison is supposedly intended to do: meet the standards of empirical control in line with the scientific method. Instead, the default nature of monolingual comparative normativity has historically contributed to inequalities in many facets of bilingualism research and continues to impede progress on multiple levels. Beyond framing our views on the matter, we offer some epistemological considerations and methodological alternatives to this standard practice that improve empirical rigor while fostering increased diversity, inclusivity, and equity in our field

    Monolingual comparative normativity in bilingualism research is out of “control”: Arguments and alternatives

    Get PDF
    Herein, we contextualize, problematize, and offer some insights for moving beyond the problem of monolingual comparative normativity in (psycho) linguistic research on bilingualism. We argue that, in the vast majority of cases, juxtaposing (functional) monolinguals to bilinguals fails to offer what the comparison is supposedly intended to do: meet the standards of empirical control in line with the scientific method. Instead, the default nature of monolingual comparative normativity has historically contributed to inequalities in many facets of bilingualism research and continues to impede progress on multiple levels. Beyond framing our views on the matter, we offer some epistemological considerations and methodological alternatives to this standard practice that improve empirical rigor while fostering increased diversity, inclusivity, and equity in our field.publishedVersio

    Global, regional, and national burden of colorectal cancer and its risk factors, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

    Get PDF
    Funding: F Carvalho and E Fernandes acknowledge support from Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, I.P. (FCT), 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 through the project UIDB/50006/2020. J Conde acknowledges the European Research Council Starting Grant (ERC-StG-2019-848325). V M Costa acknowledges the grant SFRH/BHD/110001/2015, received by Portuguese national funds through Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT), IP, under the Norma Transitória DL57/2016/CP1334/CT0006.proofepub_ahead_of_prin

    Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

    Get PDF
    Background: In an era of shifting global agendas and expanded emphasis on non-communicable diseases and injuries along with communicable diseases, sound evidence on trends by cause at the national level is essential. The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) provides a systematic scientific assessment of published, publicly available, and contributed data on incidence, prevalence, and mortality for a mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive list of diseases and injuries. Methods: GBD estimates incidence, prevalence, mortality, years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) due to 369 diseases and injuries, for two sexes, and for 204 countries and territories. Input data were extracted from censuses, household surveys, civil registration and vital statistics, disease registries, health service use, air pollution monitors, satellite imaging, disease notifications, and other sources. Cause-specific death rates and cause fractions were calculated using the Cause of Death Ensemble model and spatiotemporal Gaussian process regression. Cause-specific deaths were adjusted to match the total all-cause deaths calculated as part of the GBD population, fertility, and mortality estimates. Deaths were multiplied by standard life expectancy at each age to calculate YLLs. A Bayesian meta-regression modelling tool, DisMod-MR 2.1, was used to ensure consistency between incidence, prevalence, remission, excess mortality, and cause-specific mortality for most causes. Prevalence estimates were multiplied by disability weights for mutually exclusive sequelae of diseases and injuries to calculate YLDs. We considered results in the context of the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a composite indicator of income per capita, years of schooling, and fertility rate in females younger than 25 years. Uncertainty intervals (UIs) were generated for every metric using the 25th and 975th ordered 1000 draw values of the posterior distribution. Findings: Global health has steadily improved over the past 30 years as measured by age-standardised DALY rates. After taking into account population growth and ageing, the absolute number of DALYs has remained stable. Since 2010, the pace of decline in global age-standardised DALY rates has accelerated in age groups younger than 50 years compared with the 1990–2010 time period, with the greatest annualised rate of decline occurring in the 0–9-year age group. Six infectious diseases were among the top ten causes of DALYs in children younger than 10 years in 2019: lower respiratory infections (ranked second), diarrhoeal diseases (third), malaria (fifth), meningitis (sixth), whooping cough (ninth), and sexually transmitted infections (which, in this age group, is fully accounted for by congenital syphilis; ranked tenth). In adolescents aged 10–24 years, three injury causes were among the top causes of DALYs: road injuries (ranked first), self-harm (third), and interpersonal violence (fifth). Five of the causes that were in the top ten for ages 10–24 years were also in the top ten in the 25–49-year age group: road injuries (ranked first), HIV/AIDS (second), low back pain (fourth), headache disorders (fifth), and depressive disorders (sixth). In 2019, ischaemic heart disease and stroke were the top-ranked causes of DALYs in both the 50–74-year and 75-years-and-older age groups. Since 1990, there has been a marked shift towards a greater proportion of burden due to YLDs from non-communicable diseases and injuries. In 2019, there were 11 countries where non-communicable disease and injury YLDs constituted more than half of all disease burden. Decreases in age-standardised DALY rates have accelerated over the past decade in countries at the lower end of the SDI range, while improvements have started to stagnate or even reverse in countries with higher SDI. Interpretation: As disability becomes an increasingly large component of disease burden and a larger component of health expenditure, greater research and developm nt investment is needed to identify new, more effective intervention strategies. With a rapidly ageing global population, the demands on health services to deal with disabling outcomes, which increase with age, will require policy makers to anticipate these changes. The mix of universal and more geographically specific influences on health reinforces the need for regular reporting on population health in detail and by underlying cause to help decision makers to identify success stories of disease control to emulate, as well as opportunities to improve. Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 licens

    Global, regional, and national burden of respiratory tract cancers and associated risk factors from 1990 to 2019 a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

    Get PDF
    Background Prevention, control, and treatment of respiratory tract cancers are important steps towards achieving target 3.4 of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)-a one-third reduction in premature mortality due to non-communicable diseases by 2030. We aimed to provide global, regional, and national estimates of the burden of tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer and larynx cancer and their attributable risks from 1990 to 2019. Methods Based on the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019 methodology, we evaluated the incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) of respiratory tract cancers (ie, tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer and larynx cancer). Deaths from tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer and larynx cancer attributable to each risk factor were estimated on the basis of risk exposure, relative risks, and the theoretical minimum risk exposure level input from 204 countries and territories, stratified by sex and Socio-demographic Index (SDI). Trends were estimated from 1990 to 2019, with an emphasis on the 2010-19 period. Findings Globally, there were 2.26 million (95% uncertainty interval 2.07 to 2.45) new cases of tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer, and 2.04 million (1.88 to 2.19) deaths and 45.9 million (42.3 to 49.3) DALYs due to tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer in 2019. There were 209 000 (194 000 to 225 000) new cases of larynx cancer, and 123 000 (115 000 to 133 000) deaths and 3.26 million (3.03 to 3.51) DALYs due to larynx cancer globally in 2019. From 2010 to 2019, the number of new tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer cases increased by 23.3% (12.9 to 33.6) globally and the number of larynx cancer cases increased by 24.7% (16.0 to 34.1) globally. Global age-standardised incidence rates of tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer decreased by 7.4% (-16.8 to 1.6) and age-standardised incidence rates of larynx cancer decreased by 3.0% (-10.5 to 5.0) in males over the past decade; however, during the same period, age-standardised incidence rates in females increased by 0.9% (-8.2 to 10.2) for tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer and decreased by 0.5% (-8.4 to 8.1) for larynx cancer. Furthermore, although age-standardised incidence and death rates declined in both sexes combined from 2010 to 2019 at the global level for tracheal, bronchus, lung and larynx cancers, some locations had rising rates, particularly those on the lower end of the SDI range. Smoking contributed to an estimated 64.2% (61.9-66.4) of all deaths from tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer and 63.4% (56.3-69.3) of all deaths from larynx cancer in 2019. For males and for both sexes combined, smoking was the leading specific risk factor for age-standardised deaths from tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer per 100 000 in all SDI quintiles and GBD regions in 2019. However, among females, household air pollution from solid fuels was the leading specific risk factor in the low SDI quintile and in three GBD regions (central, eastern, and western sub-Saharan Africa) in 2019. Interpretation The numbers of incident cases and deaths from tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer and larynx cancer increased globally during the past decade. Even more concerning, age-standardised incidence and death rates due to tracheal, bronchus, lung cancer and larynx cancer increased in some populations-namely, in the lower SDI quintiles and among females. Preventive measures such as smoking control interventions, air quality management programmes focused on major air pollution sources, and widespread access to clean energy should be prioritised in these settings. Copyright (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd

    Cancer Incidence, Mortality, Years of Life Lost, Years Lived With Disability, and Disability-Adjusted Life Years for 29 Cancer Groups From 2010 to 2019: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.

    Get PDF
    The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019 (GBD 2019) provided systematic estimates of incidence, morbidity, and mortality to inform local and international efforts toward reducing cancer burden. To estimate cancer burden and trends globally for 204 countries and territories and by Sociodemographic Index (SDI) quintiles from 2010 to 2019. The GBD 2019 estimation methods were used to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in 2019 and over the past decade. Estimates are also provided by quintiles of the SDI, a composite measure of educational attainment, income per capita, and total fertility rate for those younger than 25 years. Estimates include 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). In 2019, there were an estimated 23.6 million (95% UI, 22.2-24.9 million) new cancer cases (17.2 million when excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and 10.0 million (95% UI, 9.36-10.6 million) cancer deaths globally, with an estimated 250 million (235-264 million) DALYs due to cancer. Since 2010, these represented a 26.3% (95% UI, 20.3%-32.3%) increase in new cases, a 20.9% (95% UI, 14.2%-27.6%) increase in deaths, and a 16.0% (95% UI, 9.3%-22.8%) increase in DALYs. Among 22 groups of diseases and injuries in the GBD 2019 study, cancer was second only to cardiovascular diseases for the number of deaths, years of life lost, and DALYs globally in 2019. Cancer burden differed across SDI quintiles. The proportion of years lived with disability that contributed to DALYs increased with SDI, ranging from 1.4% (1.1%-1.8%) in the low SDI quintile to 5.7% (4.2%-7.1%) in the high SDI quintile. While the high SDI quintile had the highest number of new cases in 2019, the middle SDI quintile had the highest number of cancer deaths and DALYs. From 2010 to 2019, the largest percentage increase in the numbers of cases and deaths occurred in the low and low-middle SDI quintiles. The results of this systematic analysis suggest that the global burden of cancer is substantial and growing, with burden differing by SDI. These results provide comprehensive and comparable estimates that can potentially inform efforts toward equitable cancer control around the world.Funding/Support: The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation received funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities. Dr Aljunid acknowledges the Department of Health Policy and Management of Kuwait University and the International Centre for Casemix and Clinical Coding, National University of Malaysia for the approval and support to participate in this research project. Dr Bhaskar acknowledges institutional support from the NSW Ministry of Health and NSW Health Pathology. Dr Bärnighausen was supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation through the Alexander von Humboldt Professor award, which is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research. Dr Braithwaite acknowledges funding from the National Institutes of Health/ National Cancer Institute. Dr Conde acknowledges financial support from the European Research Council ERC Starting Grant agreement No 848325. Dr Costa acknowledges her grant (SFRH/BHD/110001/2015), received by Portuguese national funds through Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, IP under the Norma Transitória grant DL57/2016/CP1334/CT0006. Dr Ghith acknowledges support from a grant from Novo Nordisk Foundation (NNF16OC0021856). Dr Glasbey is supported by a National Institute of Health Research Doctoral Research Fellowship. Dr Vivek Kumar Gupta acknowledges funding support from National Health and Medical Research Council Australia. Dr Haque thanks Jazan University, Saudi Arabia for providing access to the Saudi Digital Library for this research study. Drs Herteliu, Pana, and Ausloos 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. Dr Hugo received support from the Higher Education Improvement Coordination of the Brazilian Ministry of Education for a sabbatical period at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, between September 2019 and August 2020. Dr Sheikh Mohammed Shariful Islam acknowledges funding by a National Heart Foundation of Australia Fellowship and National Health and Medical Research Council Emerging Leadership Fellowship. Dr Jakovljevic acknowledges support through grant OI 175014 of the Ministry of Education Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia. Dr Katikireddi acknowledges funding from a NHS Research Scotland Senior Clinical Fellowship (SCAF/15/02), the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00022/2), and the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office (SPHSU17). Dr Md Nuruzzaman Khan acknowledges the support of Jatiya Kabi Kazi Nazrul Islam University, Bangladesh. Dr Yun Jin Kim was supported by the Research Management Centre, Xiamen University Malaysia (XMUMRF/2020-C6/ITCM/0004). Dr Koulmane Laxminarayana acknowledges institutional support from Manipal Academy of Higher Education. Dr Landires is a member of the Sistema Nacional de Investigación, which is supported by Panama’s Secretaría Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación. Dr Loureiro was supported by national funds through Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia under the Scientific Employment Stimulus–Institutional Call (CEECINST/00049/2018). Dr Molokhia is supported by the National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Center at Guy’s and St Thomas’ National Health Service Foundation Trust and King’s College London. Dr Moosavi appreciates NIGEB's support. Dr Pati acknowledges support from the SIAN Institute, Association for Biodiversity Conservation & Research. Dr Rakovac acknowledges a grant from the government of the Russian Federation in the context of World Health Organization Noncommunicable Diseases Office. Dr Samy was supported by a fellowship from the Egyptian Fulbright Mission Program. Dr Sheikh acknowledges support from Health Data Research UK. Drs Adithi Shetty and Unnikrishnan acknowledge support given by Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education. Dr Pavanchand H. Shetty acknowledges Manipal Academy of Higher Education for their research support. Dr Diego Augusto Santos Silva was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil Finance Code 001 and is supported in part by CNPq (302028/2018-8). Dr Zhu acknowledges the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas grant RP210042

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

    Get PDF
    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
    corecore