Epidemiological and Economic Evaluation of a Pilot Prostate Cancer Screening Program

Background. Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer, and the sixth most common killer among men worldwide (Aubry et al., 2013). This research was motivated by the fact that PCa screening continues to be a controversial topic in the Kazakh medical community. This study aimed at description of how newly diagnosed PCa patients are managed in Pavlodar region of the Kazakhstan Republic and at presentation of a budget impact analysis (BIA) for PCa screening program. Also, we aimed to provide a comparative analysis of pricing system on medical services applied in both private and public healthcare sectors of the Kazakhstan Republic. Methods. New cases of PCa have been retrospectively analyzed for the period from January 2013 to December 2017 based on the information obtained from information system "Policlinic" maintained by the Pavlodar regional branch of the Republican Center for Electronic Health and from Cancer Registry of Pavlodar Regional Oncology Center. All data were analyzed with the help of SPSS 20.0 software. Results. The mean age of PCa patients was 68.34 years (SD = 8.559). The government of Kazakhstan invested 20,437,000 KZT (Kazakhstani tenge) in 2017 equivalently 61,188 USD - to fund a pilot study for examination of 9638 men. From 2013 to 2017, out of 49,334 men residing in Pavlodar region of Kazakhstan 1,248 men were diagnosed with prostate diseases, including 130 PCa cases. The PCa detection rate was equal to two cases per month. Only 22.8% of all PCa cases identified in the region within specified time period were revealed as a result of the government-funded PCa screening program. The average prostate cancer detection rate among the target group of Pavlodar region within the period of 5 years was equal to 0.23%. Conclusion. Based on the fact that the PCa screening program failed to enable adequate detection of new PCa cases, we would not recommend to continue this type of screening unless it is undergone careful revision and replanning

Lost opportunities in HIV prevention: programmes miss places where exposures are highest

Background: Efforts at HIV prevention that focus on high risk places might be more effective and less stigmatizing than those targeting high risk groups. The objective of the present study was to assess risk behaviour patterns, signs of current preventive interventions and apparent gaps in places where the risk of HIV transmission is high and in communities with high HIV prevalence. Methods: The PLACE method was used to collect data. Inhabitants of selected communities in Lusaka and Livingstone were interviewed about where people met new sexual partners. Signs of HIV preventive activities in these places were recorded. At selected venues, people were interviewed about their sexual behaviour. Peer educators and staff of NGOs were also interviewed. Results: The places identified were mostly bars, restaurants or sherbeens, and fewer than 20% reported any HIV preventive activity such as meetings, pamphlets or posters. In 43% of places in Livingstone and 26% in Lusaka, condoms were never available. There were few active peer educators. Among the 432 persons in Lusaka and 676 in Livingstone who were invited for interview about sexual behaviour, consistent condom use was relatively high in Lusaka (77%) but low in Livingstone (44% of men and 34% of women). Having no condom available was the most common reason for not using one. Condom use in Livingstone was higher among individuals socializing in places where condoms always were available. Conclusion: In the places studied we found a high prevalence of behaviours with a high potential for HIV transmission but few signs of HIV preventive interventions. Covering the gaps in prevention in these high exposure places should be given the highest priority

Repositioning of the global epicentre of non-optimal cholesterol

High blood cholesterol is typically considered a feature of wealthy western countries1,2. However, dietary and behavioural determinants of blood cholesterol are changing rapidly throughout the world3 and countries are using lipid-lowering medications at varying rates. These changes can have distinct effects on the levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and non-HDL cholesterol, which have different effects on human health4,5. However, the trends of HDL and non-HDL cholesterol levels over time have not been previously reported in a global analysis. Here we pooled 1,127 population-based studies that measured blood lipids in 102.6 million individuals aged 18 years and older to estimate trends from 1980 to 2018 in mean total, non-HDL and HDL cholesterol levels for 200 countries. Globally, there was little change in total or non-HDL cholesterol from 1980 to 2018. This was a net effect of increases in low- and middle-income countries, especially in east and southeast Asia, and decreases in high-income western countries, especially those in northwestern Europe, and in central and eastern Europe. As a result, countries with the highest level of non-HDL cholesterol—which is a marker of cardiovascular risk—changed from those in western Europe such as Belgium, Finland, Greenland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and Malta in 1980 to those in Asia and the Pacific, such as Tokelau, Malaysia, The Philippines and Thailand. In 2017, high non-HDL cholesterol was responsible for an estimated 3.9 million (95% credible interval 3.7 million–4.2 million) worldwide deaths, half of which occurred in east, southeast and south Asia. The global repositioning of lipid-related risk, with non-optimal cholesterol shifting from a distinct feature of high-income countries in northwestern Europe, north America and Australasia to one that affects countries in east and southeast Asia and Oceania should motivate the use of population-based policies and personal interventions to improve nutrition and enhance access to treatment throughout the world

Worldwide trends in body-mass index, underweight, overweight, and obesity from 1975 to 2016: a pooled analysis of 2416 population-based measurement studies in 128·9 million children, adolescents, and adults.

BACKGROUND: Underweight, overweight, and obesity in childhood and adolescence are associated with adverse health consequences throughout the life-course. Our aim was to estimate worldwide trends in mean body-mass index (BMI) and a comprehensive set of BMI categories that cover underweight to obesity in children and adolescents, and to compare trends with those of adults. METHODS: We pooled 2416 population-based studies with measurements of height and weight on 128·9 million participants aged 5 years and older, including 31·5 million aged 5-19 years. We used a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate trends from 1975 to 2016 in 200 countries for mean BMI and for prevalence of BMI in the following categories for children and adolescents aged 5-19 years: more than 2 SD below the median of the WHO growth reference for children and adolescents (referred to as moderate and severe underweight hereafter), 2 SD to more than 1 SD below the median (mild underweight), 1 SD below the median to 1 SD above the median (healthy weight), more than 1 SD to 2 SD above the median (overweight but not obese), and more than 2 SD above the median (obesity). FINDINGS: Regional change in age-standardised mean BMI in girls from 1975 to 2016 ranged from virtually no change (-0·01 kg/m2 per decade; 95% credible interval -0·42 to 0·39, posterior probability [PP] of the observed decrease being a true decrease=0·5098) in eastern Europe to an increase of 1·00 kg/m2 per decade (0·69-1·35, PP>0·9999) in central Latin America and an increase of 0·95 kg/m2 per decade (0·64-1·25, PP>0·9999) in Polynesia and Micronesia. The range for boys was from a non-significant increase of 0·09 kg/m2 per decade (-0·33 to 0·49, PP=0·6926) in eastern Europe to an increase of 0·77 kg/m2 per decade (0·50-1·06, PP>0·9999) in Polynesia and Micronesia. Trends in mean BMI have recently flattened in northwestern Europe and the high-income English-speaking and Asia-Pacific regions for both sexes, southwestern Europe for boys, and central and Andean Latin America for girls. By contrast, the rise in BMI has accelerated in east and south Asia for both sexes, and southeast Asia for boys. Global age-standardised prevalence of obesity increased from 0·7% (0·4-1·2) in 1975 to 5·6% (4·8-6·5) in 2016 in girls, and from 0·9% (0·5-1·3) in 1975 to 7·8% (6·7-9·1) in 2016 in boys; the prevalence of moderate and severe underweight decreased from 9·2% (6·0-12·9) in 1975 to 8·4% (6·8-10·1) in 2016 in girls and from 14·8% (10·4-19·5) in 1975 to 12·4% (10·3-14·5) in 2016 in boys. Prevalence of moderate and severe underweight was highest in India, at 22·7% (16·7-29·6) among girls and 30·7% (23·5-38·0) among boys. Prevalence of obesity was more than 30% in girls in Nauru, the Cook Islands, and Palau; and boys in the Cook Islands, Nauru, Palau, Niue, and American Samoa in 2016. Prevalence of obesity was about 20% or more in several countries in Polynesia and Micronesia, the Middle East and north Africa, the Caribbean, and the USA. In 2016, 75 (44-117) million girls and 117 (70-178) million boys worldwide were moderately or severely underweight. In the same year, 50 (24-89) million girls and 74 (39-125) million boys worldwide were obese. INTERPRETATION: The rising trends in children's and adolescents' BMI have plateaued in many high-income countries, albeit at high levels, but have accelerated in parts of Asia, with trends no longer correlated with those of adults. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, AstraZeneca Young Health Programme

FUTURE-AI: International consensus guideline for trustworthy and deployable artificial intelligence in healthcare

Despite major advances in artificial intelligence (AI) for medicine and healthcare, the deployment and adoption of AI technologies remain limited in real-world clinical practice. In recent years, concerns have been raised about the technical, clinical, ethical and legal risks associated with medical AI. To increase real world adoption, it is essential that medical AI tools are trusted and accepted by patients, clinicians, health organisations and authorities. This work describes the FUTURE-AI guideline as the first international consensus framework for guiding the development and deployment of trustworthy AI tools in healthcare. The FUTURE-AI consortium was founded in 2021 and currently comprises 118 inter-disciplinary experts from 51 countries representing all continents, including AI scientists, clinicians, ethicists, and social scientists. Over a two-year period, the consortium defined guiding principles and best practices for trustworthy AI through an iterative process comprising an in-depth literature review, a modified Delphi survey, and online consensus meetings. The FUTURE-AI framework was established based on 6 guiding principles for trustworthy AI in healthcare, i.e. Fairness, Universality, Traceability, Usability, Robustness and Explainability. Through consensus, a set of 28 best practices were defined, addressing technical, clinical, legal and socio-ethical dimensions. The recommendations cover the entire lifecycle of medical AI, from design, development and validation to regulation, deployment, and monitoring. FUTURE-AI is a risk-informed, assumption-free guideline which provides a structured approach for constructing medical AI tools that will be trusted, deployed and adopted in real-world practice. Researchers are encouraged to take the recommendations into account in proof-of-concept stages to facilitate future translation towards clinical practice of medical AI

FUTURE-AI: International consensus guideline for trustworthy and deployable artificial intelligence in healthcare

Despite major advances in artificial intelligence (AI) for medicine and healthcare, the deployment and adoption of AI technologies remain limited in real-world clinical practice. In recent years, concerns have been raised about the technical, clinical, ethical and legal risks associated with medical AI. To increase real world adoption, it is essential that medical AI tools are trusted and accepted by patients, clinicians, health organisations and authorities. This work describes the FUTURE-AI guideline as the first international consensus framework for guiding the development and deployment of trustworthy AI tools in healthcare. The FUTURE-AI consortium was founded in 2021 and currently comprises 118 inter-disciplinary experts from 51 countries representing all continents, including AI scientists, clinicians, ethicists, and social scientists. Over a two-year period, the consortium defined guiding principles and best practices for trustworthy AI through an iterative process comprising an in-depth literature review, a modified Delphi survey, and online consensus meetings. The FUTURE-AI framework was established based on 6 guiding principles for trustworthy AI in healthcare, i.e. Fairness, Universality, Traceability, Usability, Robustness and Explainability. Through consensus, a set of 28 best practices were defined, addressing technical, clinical, legal and socio-ethical dimensions. The recommendations cover the entire lifecycle of medical AI, from design, development and validation to regulation, deployment, and monitoring. FUTURE-AI is a risk-informed, assumption-free guideline which provides a structured approach for constructing medical AI tools that will be trusted, deployed and adopted in real-world practice. Researchers are encouraged to take the recommendations into account in proof-of-concept stages to facilitate future translation towards clinical practice of medical AI

Future-ai:International consensus guideline for trustworthy and deployable artificial intelligence in healthcare

Despite major advances in artificial intelligence (AI) for medicine and healthcare, the deployment and adoption of AI technologies remain limited in real-world clinical practice. In recent years, concerns have been raised about the technical, clinical, ethical and legal risks associated with medical AI. To increase real world adoption, it is essential that medical AI tools are trusted and accepted by patients, clinicians, health organisations and authorities. This work describes the FUTURE-AI guideline as the first international consensus framework for guiding the development and deployment of trustworthy AI tools in healthcare. The FUTURE-AI consortium was founded in 2021 and currently comprises 118 inter-disciplinary experts from 51 countries representing all continents, including AI scientists, clinicians, ethicists, and social scientists. Over a two-year period, the consortium defined guiding principles and best practices for trustworthy AI through an iterative process comprising an in-depth literature review, a modified Delphi survey, and online consensus meetings. The FUTURE-AI framework was established based on 6 guiding principles for trustworthy AI in healthcare, i.e. Fairness, Universality, Traceability, Usability, Robustness and Explainability. Through consensus, a set of 28 best practices were defined, addressing technical, clinical, legal and socio-ethical dimensions. The recommendations cover the entire lifecycle of medical AI, from design, development and validation to regulation, deployment, and monitoring. FUTURE-AI is a risk-informed, assumption-free guideline which provides a structured approach for constructing medical AI tools that will be trusted, deployed and adopted in real-world practice. Researchers are encouraged to take the recommendations into account in proof-of-concept stages to facilitate future translation towards clinical practice of medical AI

FUTURE-AI: International consensus guideline for trustworthy and deployable artificial intelligence in healthcare

Despite major advances in artificial intelligence (AI) for medicine and healthcare, the deployment and adoption of AI technologies remain limited in real-world clinical practice. In recent years, concerns have been raised about the technical, clinical, ethical and legal risks associated with medical AI. To increase real world adoption, it is essential that medical AI tools are trusted and accepted by patients, clinicians, health organisations and authorities. This work describes the FUTURE-AI guideline as the first international consensus framework for guiding the development and deployment of trustworthy AI tools in healthcare. The FUTURE-AI consortium was founded in 2021 and currently comprises 118 inter-disciplinary experts from 51 countries representing all continents, including AI scientists, clinicians, ethicists, and social scientists. Over a two-year period, the consortium defined guiding principles and best practices for trustworthy AI through an iterative process comprising an in-depth literature review, a modified Delphi survey, and online consensus meetings. The FUTURE-AI framework was established based on 6 guiding principles for trustworthy AI in healthcare, i.e. Fairness, Universality, Traceability, Usability, Robustness and Explainability. Through consensus, a set of 28 best practices were defined, addressing technical, clinical, legal and socio-ethical dimensions. The recommendations cover the entire lifecycle of medical AI, from design, development and validation to regulation, deployment, and monitoring. FUTURE-AI is a risk-informed, assumption-free guideline which provides a structured approach for constructing medical AI tools that will be trusted, deployed and adopted in real-world practice. Researchers are encouraged to take the recommendations into account in proof-of-concept stages to facilitate future translation towards clinical practice of medical AI