12 research outputs found

    Impacts of FDA Approval and Medicare Restriction on Antiamyloid Therapies for Alzheimer’s Disease: Patient Outcomes, Healthcare Costs, and Drug Development

    Get PDF
    In 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted approval to aducanumab, an antiamyloid antibody for early-stage Alzheimer\u27s disease, despite a lack of clear clinical evidence demonstrating the drug\u27s cognitive benefits. The manufacturer initially priced the drug at a staggering 56,000peryear,apricethatwaslaterreducedto56,000 per year, a price that was later reduced to 28,200. Unfortunately, these costs do not include the additional expenses associated with monitoring the treatment. However, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) recently announced that they will only cover individuals enrolled in clinical trials and will limit coverage of future antiamyloid antibodies. This discrepancy between the FDA and CMS positions has caused confusion and concerns for patients who could potentially benefit from antiamyloid therapy. It is important to acknowledge the clinical and economic uncertainties surrounding aducanumab and its potential impacts on future antiamyloid drug development and approval processes. The FDA\u27s approval, despite limited clinical evidence, raises questions about the integrity and rigor of the approval process. The drug\u27s high cost also raises accessibility concerns, especially for those without insurance or sufficient financial resources. Given the CMS\u27s limited coverage policy, it\u27s critical to evaluate the long-term implications of this decision on future antiamyloid drug development. Without adequate support and coverage from insurance providers, the development and approval of future Alzheimer\u27s treatments may be hindered. In summary, the approval and pricing of aducanumab, coupled with the CMS\u27s limited coverage policy, has created a confusing and concerning landscape for Alzheimer\u27s patients. It\u27s important that stakeholders, including patients, clinicians, insurers, and regulatory bodies, work together to address these challenges and ensure that individuals with Alzheimer\u27s have access to effective, affordable treatments

    Estimation of the Global Prevalence of Dementia in 2019 and Forecasted Prevalence in 2050: An Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

    Get PDF
    Background Given the projected trends in population ageing and population growth, the number of people with dementia is expected to increase. In addition, strong evidence has emerged supporting the importance of potentially modifiable risk factors for dementia. Characterising the distribution and magnitude of anticipated growth is crucial for public health planning and resource prioritisation. This study aimed to improve on previous forecasts of dementia prevalence by producing country-level estimates and incorporating information on selected risk factors. Methods We forecasted the prevalence of dementia attributable to the three dementia risk factors included in the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019 (high body-mass index, high fasting plasma glucose, and smoking) from 2019 to 2050, using relative risks and forecasted risk factor prevalence to predict GBD risk-attributable prevalence in 2050 globally and by world region and country. Using linear regression models with education included as an additional predictor, we then forecasted the prevalence of dementia not attributable to GBD risks. To assess the relative contribution of future trends in GBD risk factors, education, population growth, and population ageing, we did a decomposition analysis. Findings We estimated that the number of people with dementia would increase from 57·4 (95% uncertainty interval 50·4–65·1) million cases globally in 2019 to 152·8 (130·8–175·9) million cases in 2050. Despite large increases in the projected number of people living with dementia, age-standardised both-sex prevalence remained stable between 2019 and 2050 (global percentage change of 0·1% [–7·5 to 10·8]). We estimated that there were more women with dementia than men with dementia globally in 2019 (female-to-male ratio of 1·69 [1·64–1·73]), and we expect this pattern to continue to 2050 (female-to-male ratio of 1·67 [1·52–1·85]). There was geographical heterogeneity in the projected increases across countries and regions, with the smallest percentage changes in the number of projected dementia cases in high-income Asia Pacific (53% [41–67]) and western Europe (74% [58–90]), and the largest in north Africa and the Middle East (367% [329–403]) and eastern sub-Saharan Africa (357% [323–395]). Projected increases in cases could largely be attributed to population growth and population ageing, although their relative importance varied by world region, with population growth contributing most to the increases in sub-Saharan Africa and population ageing contributing most to the increases in east Asia. Interpretation Growth in the number of individuals living with dementia underscores the need for public health planning efforts and policy to address the needs of this group. Country-level estimates can be used to inform national planning efforts and decisions. Multifaceted approaches, including scaling up interventions to address modifiable risk factors and investing in research on biological mechanisms, will be key in addressing the expected increases in the number of individuals affected by dementia

    Tracking Development Assistance for Health and for COVID-19: A Review of Development Assistance, Government, Out-Of-Pocket, and Other Private Spending on Health for 204 Countries and Territories, 1990–2050

    Get PDF
    Background The rapid spread of COVID-19 renewed the focus on how health systems across the globe are financed, especially during public health emergencies. Development assistance is an important source of health financing in many low-income countries, yet little is known about how much of this funding was disbursed for COVID-19. We aimed to put development assistance for health for COVID-19 in the context of broader trends in global health financing, and to estimate total health spending from 1995 to 2050 and development assistance for COVID-19 in 2020. Methods We estimated domestic health spending and development assistance for health to generate total health-sector spending estimates for 204 countries and territories. We leveraged data from the WHO Global Health Expenditure Database to produce estimates of domestic health spending. To generate estimates for development assistance for health, we relied on project-level disbursement data from the major international development agencies\u27 online databases and annual financial statements and reports for information on income sources. To adjust our estimates for 2020 to include disbursements related to COVID-19, we extracted project data on commitments and disbursements from a broader set of databases (because not all of the data sources used to estimate the historical series extend to 2020), including the UN Office of Humanitarian Assistance Financial Tracking Service and the International Aid Transparency Initiative. We reported all the historic and future spending estimates in inflation-adjusted 2020 US,2020US, 2020 US per capita, purchasing-power parity-adjusted USpercapita,andasaproportionofgrossdomesticproduct.Weusedvariousmodelstogeneratefuturehealthspendingto2050.FindingsIn2019,healthspendinggloballyreached per capita, and as a proportion of gross domestic product. We used various models to generate future health spending to 2050. Findings In 2019, health spending globally reached 8·8 trillion (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 8·7–8·8) or 1132(1119–1143)perperson.Spendingonhealthvariedwithinandacrossincomegroupsandgeographicalregions.Ofthistotal,1132 (1119–1143) per person. Spending on health varied within and across income groups and geographical regions. Of this total, 40·4 billion (0·5%, 95% UI 0·5–0·5) was development assistance for health provided to low-income and middle-income countries, which made up 24·6% (UI 24·0–25·1) of total spending in low-income countries. We estimate that 54⋅8billionindevelopmentassistanceforhealthwasdisbursedin2020.Ofthis,54·8 billion in development assistance for health was disbursed in 2020. Of this, 13·7 billion was targeted toward the COVID-19 health response. 12⋅3billionwasnewlycommittedand12·3 billion was newly committed and 1·4 billion was repurposed from existing health projects. 3⋅1billion(22⋅43·1 billion (22·4%) of the funds focused on country-level coordination and 2·4 billion (17·9%) was for supply chain and logistics. Only 714⋅4million(7⋅7714·4 million (7·7%) of COVID-19 development assistance for health went to Latin America, despite this region reporting 34·3% of total recorded COVID-19 deaths in low-income or middle-income countries in 2020. Spending on health is expected to rise to 1519 (1448–1591) per person in 2050, although spending across countries is expected to remain varied. Interpretation Global health spending is expected to continue to grow, but remain unequally distributed between countries. We estimate that development organisations substantially increased the amount of development assistance for health provided in 2020. Continued efforts are needed to raise sufficient resources to mitigate the pandemic for the most vulnerable, and to help curtail the pandemic for all

    Assessing Performance of the Healthcare Access and Quality Index, Overall and by Select Age Groups, for 204 Countries and Territories, 1990–2019: A Systematic Analysis From the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

    Get PDF
    Background Health-care needs change throughout the life course. It is thus crucial to assess whether health systems provide access to quality health care for all ages. Drawing from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019 (GBD 2019), we measured the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index overall and for select age groups in 204 locations from 1990 to 2019. Methods We distinguished the overall HAQ Index (ages 0–74 years) from scores for select age groups: the young (ages 0–14 years), working (ages 15–64 years), and post-working (ages 65–74 years) groups. For GBD 2019, HAQ Index construction methods were updated to use the arithmetic mean of scaled mortality-to-incidence ratios (MIRs) and risk-standardised death rates (RSDRs) for 32 causes of death that should not occur in the presence of timely, quality health care. Across locations and years, MIRs and RSDRs were scaled from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) separately, putting the HAQ Index on a different relative scale for each age group. We estimated absolute convergence for each group on the basis of whether the HAQ Index grew faster in absolute terms between 1990 and 2019 in countries with lower 1990 HAQ Index scores than countries with higher 1990 HAQ Index scores and by Socio-demographic Index (SDI) quintile. SDI is a summary metric of overall development. Findings Between 1990 and 2019, the HAQ Index increased overall (by 19·6 points, 95% uncertainty interval 17·9–21·3), as well as among the young (22·5, 19·9–24·7), working (17·2, 15·2–19·1), and post-working (15·1, 13·2–17·0) age groups. Large differences in HAQ Index scores were present across SDI levels in 2019, with the overall index ranging from 30·7 (28·6–33·0) on average in low-SDI countries to 83·4 (82·4–84·3) on average in highSDI countries. Similarly large ranges between low-SDI and high-SDI countries, respectively, were estimated in the HAQ Index for the young (40·4–89·0), working (33·8–82·8), and post-working (30·4–79·1) groups. Absolute convergence in HAQ Index was estimated in the young group only. In contrast, divergence was estimated among the working and post-working groups, driven by slow progress in low-SDI countries. Interpretation Although major gaps remain across levels of social and economic development, convergence in the young group is an encouraging sign of reduced disparities in health-care access and quality. However, divergence in the working and post-working groups indicates that health-care access and quality is lagging at lower levels of social and economic development. To meet the needs of ageing populations, health systems need to improve health-care access and quality for working-age adults and older populations while continuing to realise gains among the young

    Diabetes Mortality and Trends Before 25 Years of Age: An Analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

    Get PDF
    Background Diabetes, particularly type 1 diabetes, at younger ages can be a largely preventable cause of death with the correct health care and services. We aimed to evaluate diabetes mortality and trends at ages younger than 25 years globally using data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019. Methods We used estimates of GBD 2019 to calculate international diabetes mortality at ages younger than 25 years in 1990 and 2019. Data sources for causes of death were obtained from vital registration systems, verbal autopsies, and other surveillance systems for 1990–2019. We estimated death rates for each location using the GBD Cause of Death Ensemble model. We analysed the association of age-standardised death rates per 100 000 population with the Socio-demographic Index (SDI) and a measure of universal health coverage (UHC) and described the variability within SDI quintiles. We present estimates with their 95% uncertainty intervals. Findings In 2019, 16 300 (95% uncertainty interval 14 200 to 18 900) global deaths due to diabetes (type 1 and 2 combined) occurred in people younger than 25 years and 73·7% (68·3 to 77·4) were classified as due to type 1 diabetes. The age-standardised death rate was 0·50 (0·44 to 0·58) per 100 000 population, and 15 900 (97·5%) of these deaths occurred in low to high-middle SDI countries. The rate was 0·13 (0·12 to 0·14) per 100 000 population in the high SDI quintile, 0·60 (0·51 to 0·70) per 100 000 population in the low-middle SDI quintile, and 0·71 (0·60 to 0·86) per 100 000 population in the low SDI quintile. Within SDI quintiles, we observed large variability in rates across countries, in part explained by the extent of UHC (r2=0·62). From 1990 to 2019, age-standardised death rates decreased globally by 17·0% (−28·4 to −2·9) for all diabetes, and by 21·0% (–33·0 to −5·9) when considering only type 1 diabetes. However, the low SDI quintile had the lowest decline for both all diabetes (−13·6% [–28·4 to 3·4]) and for type 1 diabetes (−13·6% [–29·3 to 8·9]). Interpretation Decreasing diabetes mortality at ages younger than 25 years remains an important challenge, especially in low and low-middle SDI countries. Inadequate diagnosis and treatment of diabetes is likely to be major contributor to these early deaths, highlighting the urgent need to provide better access to insulin and basic diabetes education and care. This mortality metric, derived from readily available and frequently updated GBD data, can help to monitor preventable diabetes-related deaths over time globally, aligned with the UN\u27s Sustainable Development Targets, and serve as an indicator of the adequacy of basic diabetes care for type 1 and type 2 diabetes across nations

    The Global Burden of Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer in 2019: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

    Get PDF
    Background In estimating the global burden of cancer, adolescents and young adults with cancer are often overlooked, despite being a distinct subgroup with unique epidemiology, clinical care needs, and societal impact. Comprehensive estimates of the global cancer burden in adolescents and young adults (aged 15–39 years) are lacking. To address this gap, we analysed results from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019, with a focus on the outcome of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), to inform global cancer control measures in adolescents and young adults. Methods Using the GBD 2019 methodology, international mortality data were collected from vital registration systems, verbal autopsies, and population-based cancer registry inputs modelled with mortality-to-incidence ratios (MIRs). Incidence was computed with mortality estimates and corresponding MIRs. Prevalence estimates were calculated using modelled survival and multiplied by disability weights to obtain years lived with disability (YLDs). Years of life lost (YLLs) were calculated as age-specific cancer deaths multiplied by the standard life expectancy at the age of death. The main outcome was DALYs (the sum of YLLs and YLDs). Estimates were presented globally and by Socio-demographic Index (SDI) quintiles (countries ranked and divided into five equal SDI groups), and all estimates were presented with corresponding 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). For this analysis, we used the age range of 15–39 years to define adolescents and young adults. Findings There were 1·19 million (95% UI 1·11–1·28) incident cancer cases and 396 000 (370 000–425 000) deaths due to cancer among people aged 15–39 years worldwide in 2019. The highest age-standardised incidence rates occurred in high SDI (59·6 [54·5–65·7] per 100 000 person-years) and high-middle SDI countries (53·2 [48·8–57·9] per 100 000 person-years), while the highest age-standardised mortality rates were in low-middle SDI (14·2 [12·9–15·6] per 100 000 person-years) and middle SDI (13·6 [12·6–14·8] per 100 000 person-years) countries. In 2019, adolescent and young adult cancers contributed 23·5 million (21·9–25·2) DALYs to the global burden of disease, of which 2·7% (1·9–3·6) came from YLDs and 97·3% (96·4–98·1) from YLLs. Cancer was the fourth leading cause of death and tenth leading cause of DALYs in adolescents and young adults globally. Interpretation Adolescent and young adult cancers contributed substantially to the overall adolescent and young adult disease burden globally in 2019. These results provide new insights into the distribution and magnitude of the adolescent and young adult cancer burden around the world. With notable differences observed across SDI settings, these estimates can inform global and country-level cancer control efforts

    The Global, Regional, and National Burden of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia in 204 Countries and Territories From 2000 to 2019: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

    Get PDF
    Background Benign prostatic hyperplasia is a common urological disease affecting older men worldwide, but comprehensive data about the global, regional, and national burden of benign prostatic hyperplasia and its trends over time are scarce. As part of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019, we estimated global trends in, and prevalence of, benign prostatic hyperplasia and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia, in 21 regions and 204 countries and territories from 2000 to 2019. Methods This study was conducted with GBD 2019 analytical and modelling strategies. Primary prevalence data came from claims from three countries and from hospital inpatient encounters from 45 locations. A Bayesian metaregression modelling tool, DisMod-MR version 2.1, was used to estimate the age-specific, location-specific, and yearspecific prevalence of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Age-standardised prevalence was calculated by the direct method using the GBD reference population. Years lived with disability (YLDs) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia were estimated by multiplying the disability weight by the symptomatic proportion of the prevalence of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Because we did not estimate years of life lost associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia, disabilityadjusted life-years (DALYs) equalled YLDs. The final estimates were compared across Socio-demographic Index (SDI) quintiles. The 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) were estimated as the 25th and 975th of 1000 ordered draws from a bootstrap distribution. Findings Globally, there were 94·0 million (95% UI 73·2 to 118) prevalent cases of benign prostatic hyperplasia in 2019, compared with 51·1 million (43·1 to 69·3) cases in 2000. The age-standardised prevalence of benign prostatic hyperplasia was 2480 (1940 to 3090) per 100 000 people. Although the global number of prevalent cases increased by 70·5% (68·6 to 72·7) between 2000 and 2019, the global age-standardised prevalence remained stable (–0·770% [–1·56 to 0·0912]). The age-standardised prevalence in 2019 ranged from 6480 (5130 to 8080) per 100000 in eastern Europe to 987 (732 to 1320) per 100 000 in north Africa and the Middle East. All five SDI quintiles observed an increase in the absolute DALY burden between 2000 and 2019. The most rapid increases in the absolute DALY burden were seen in the middle SDI quintile (94·7% [91·8 to 97·6]), the low-middle SDI quintile (77·3% [74·1 to 81·2]), and the low SDI quintile (77·7% [72·9 to 83·2]). Between 2000 and 2019, age-standardised DALY rates changed less, but the three lower SDI quintiles (low, low-middle, and middle) saw small increases, and the two higher SDI quintiles (high and high-middle SDI) saw small decreases. Interpretation The absolute burden of benign prostatic hyperplasia is rising at an alarming rate in most of the world, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries that are currently undergoing rapid demographic and epidemiological changes. As more people are living longer worldwide, the absolute burden of benign prostatic hyperplasia is expected to continue to rise in the coming years, highlighting the importance of monitoring and planning for future health system strain

    Global Investments in Pandemic Preparedness and COVID-19: Development Assistance and Domestic Spending on Health Between 1990 and 2026

    Get PDF
    Background The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted gaps in health surveillance systems, disease prevention, and treatment globally. Among the many factors that might have led to these gaps is the issue of the financing of national health systems, especially in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), as well as a robust global system for pandemic preparedness. We aimed to provide a comparative assessment of global health spending at the onset of the pandemic; characterise the amount of development assistance for pandemic preparedness and response disbursed in the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic; and examine expectations for future health spending and put into context the expected need for investment in pandemic preparedness. Methods In this analysis of global health spending between 1990 and 2021, and prediction from 2021 to 2026, we estimated four sources of health spending: development assistance for health (DAH), government spending, out-ofpocket spending, and prepaid private spending across 204 countries and territories. We used the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)’s Creditor Reporting System (CRS) and the WHO Global Health Expenditure Database (GHED) to estimate spending. We estimated development assistance for general health, COVID-19 response, and pandemic preparedness and response using a keyword search. Health spending estimates were combined with estimates of resources needed for pandemic prevention and preparedness to analyse future health spending patterns, relative to need. Findings In 2019, at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, US9⋅2trillion(959·2 trillion (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 9·1–9·3) was spent on health worldwide. We found great disparities in the amount of resources devoted to health, with high-income countries spending 7·3 trillion (95% UI 7·2–7·4) in 2019; 293·7 times the 24⋅8billion(9524·8 billion (95% UI 24·3–25·3) spent by low-income countries in 2019. That same year, 43·1 billion in development assistance was provided to maintain or improve health. The pandemic led to an unprecedented increase in development assistance targeted towards health; in 2020 and 2021, 1⋅8billioninDAHcontributionswasprovidedtowardspandemicpreparednessinLMICs,and1·8 billion in DAH contributions was provided towards pandemic preparedness in LMICs, and 37·8 billion was provided for the health-related COVID-19 response. Although the support for pandemic preparedness is 12·2% of the recommended target by the High-Level Independent Panel (HLIP), the support provided for the healthrelated COVID-19 response is 252·2% of the recommended target. Additionally, projected spending estimates suggest that between 2022 and 2026, governments in 17 (95% UI 11–21) of the 137 LMICs will observe an increase in national government health spending equivalent to an addition of 1% of GDP, as recommended by the HLIP. Interpretation There was an unprecedented scale-up in DAH in 2020 and 2021. We have a unique opportunity at this time to sustain funding for crucial global health functions, including pandemic preparedness. However, historical patterns of underfunding of pandemic preparedness suggest that deliberate effort must be made to ensure funding is maintained

    Spatial, Temporal, and Demographic Patterns in Prevalence of Smoking Tobacco Use and Attributable Disease Burden in 204 Countries and Territories, 1990-2019: A Systematic Analysis From the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

    Get PDF
    Background Ending the global tobacco epidemic is a defining challenge in global health. Timely and comprehensive estimates of the prevalence of smoking tobacco use and attributable disease burden are needed to guide tobacco control efforts nationally and globally. Methods We estimated the prevalence of smoking tobacco use and attributable disease burden for 204 countries and territories, by age and sex, from 1990 to 2019 as part of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study. We modelled multiple smoking-related indicators from 3625 nationally representative surveys. We completed systematic reviews and did Bayesian meta-regressions for 36 causally linked health outcomes to estimate non-linear dose-response risk curves for current and former smokers. We used a direct estimation approach to estimate attributable burden, providing more comprehensive estimates of the health effects of smoking than previously available. Findings Globally in 2019, 1·14 billion (95% uncertainty interval 1·13–1·16) individuals were current smokers, who consumed 7·41 trillion (7·11–7·74) cigarette-equivalents of tobacco in 2019. Although prevalence of smoking had decreased significantly since 1990 among both males (27·5% [26·5–28·5] reduction) and females (37·7% [35·4–39·9] reduction) aged 15 years and older, population growth has led to a significant increase in the total number of smokers from 0·99 billion (0·98–1·00) in 1990. Globally in 2019, smoking tobacco use accounted for 7·69 million (7·16–8·20) deaths and 200 million (185–214) disability-adjusted life-years, and was the leading risk factor for death among males (20·2% [19·3–21·1] of male deaths). 6·68 million [86·9%] of 7·69 million deaths attributable to smoking tobacco use were among current smokers. Interpretation In the absence of intervention, the annual toll of 7·69 million deaths and 200 million disability-adjusted life-years attributable to smoking will increase over the coming decades. Substantial progress in reducing the prevalence of smoking tobacco use has been observed in countries from all regions and at all stages of development, but a large implementation gap remains for tobacco control. Countries have a clear and urgent opportunity to pass strong, evidence-based policies to accelerate reductions in the prevalence of smoking and reap massive health benefits for their citizens

    Fatal Police Violence by Race and State in the USA, 1980–2019: A Network Meta-Regression

    Get PDF
    Background The burden of fatal police violence is an urgent public health crisis in the USA. Mounting evidence shows that deaths at the hands of the police disproportionately impact people of certain races and ethnicities, pointing to systemic racism in policing. Recent high-profile killings by police in the USA have prompted calls for more extensive and public data reporting on police violence. This study examines the presence and extent of under-reporting of police violence in US Government-run vital registration data, offers a method for correcting under-reporting in these datasets, and presents revised estimates of deaths due to police violence in the USA. Methods We compared data from the USA National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) to three non-governmental, open-source databases on police violence: Fatal Encounters, Mapping Police Violence, and The Counted. We extracted and standardised the age, sex, US state of death registration, year of death, and race and ethnicity (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic of other races, and Hispanic of any race) of each decedent for all data sources and used a network meta-regression to quantify the rate of under-reporting within the NVSS. Using these rates to inform correction factors, we provide adjusted estimates of deaths due to police violence for all states, ages, sexes, and racial and ethnic groups from 1980 to 2019 across the USA. Findings Across all races and states in the USA, we estimate 30 800 deaths (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 30 300–31 300) from police violence between 1980 and 2018; this represents 17 100 more deaths (16 600–17 600) than reported by the NVSS. Over this time period, the age-standardised mortality rate due to police violence was highest in non-Hispanic Black people (0·69 [95% UI 0·67–0·71] per 100 000), followed by Hispanic people of any race (0·35 [0·34–0·36]), non-Hispanic White people (0·20 [0·19–0·20]), and non-Hispanic people of other races (0·15 [0·14– 0·16]). This variation is further affected by the decedent\u27s sex and shows large discrepancies between states. Between 1980 and 2018, the NVSS did not report 55·5% (54·8–56·2) of all deaths attributable to police violence. When aggregating all races, the age-standardised mortality rate due to police violence was 0·25 (0·24–0·26) per 100 000 in the 1980s and 0·34 (0·34–0·35) per 100 000 in the 2010s, an increase of 38·4% (32·4–45·1) over the period of study. Interpretation We found that more than half of all deaths due to police violence that we estimated in the USA from 1980 to 2018 were unreported in the NVSS. Compounding this, we found substantial differences in the age-standardised mortality rate due to police violence over time and by racial and ethnic groups within the USA. Proven public health intervention strategies are needed to address these systematic biases. State-level estimates allow for appropriate targeting of these strategies to address police violence and improve its reporting
    corecore