Are estimates of socioeconomic inequalities in chronic disease artefactually narrowed by self-reported measures of prevalence in low-income and middle-income countries? Findings from the WHO-SAGE survey

Background: The use of self-reported measures of chronic disease may substantially underestimate prevalence in low-income and middle-income country settings, especially in groups with lower socioeconomic status (SES). We sought to determine whether socioeconomic inequalities in the prevalence of non-communicable chronic diseases (NCDs) differ if estimated by using symptom-based or criterion-based measures compared with self-reported physician diagnoses. Methods: Using population-representative data sets of the WHO Study of Global Ageing and Adult Health (SAGE), 2007–2010 (n=42 464), we calculated wealth-related and education-related concentration indices of self-reported diagnoses and symptom-based measures of angina, hypertension, asthma/chronic lung disease, visual impairment and depression in three ‘low-income and lower middle-income countries’—China, Ghana and India—and three ‘upper-middle-income countries’—Mexico, Russia and South Africa. Results: SES gradients in NCD prevalence tended to be positive for self-reported diagnoses compared with symptom-based/criterion-based measures. In China, Ghana and India, SES gradients were positive for hypertension, angina, visual impairment and depression when using self-reported diagnoses, but were attenuated or became negative when using symptom-based/criterion-based measures. In Mexico, Russia and South Africa, this distinction was not observed consistently. For example, concentration index of self-reported versus symptom-based angina were: in China: 0.07 vs −0.11, Ghana: 0.04 vs −0.21, India: 0.02 vs −0.16, Mexico: 0.19 vs −0.22, Russia: −0.01 vs −0.02 and South Africa: 0.37 vs 0.02. Conclusions: Socioeconomic inequalities in NCD prevalence tend to be artefactually positive when using self-report compared with symptom-based or criterion-based diagnostic criteria, with greater bias occurring in low-income countries. Using standardised, symptom-based measures would provide more valid estimates of NCD inequalities

Foreign Currency Debt, Financial Crises and Economic Growth: A Long Run View

Foreign currency debt is widely believed to increase risks of financial crisis, especially after being implicated as a cause of the East Asian crisis in the late 1990s. In this paper, we study the effects of foreign currency debt on currency and debt crises and its indirect short and long run effects on output between 1880-1913 and 1973-2003 for 45 countries. Greater ratios of foreign currency debt to total debt are associated with increased risks of currency and debt crises, although the strength of the association depends crucially on the size of a country’s reserve base and its policy credibility. We find that financial crises, driven by exposure to foreign currency, resulted in significant permanent output losses. We evaluate our findings by looking at the risk posed by high levels of foreign currency liabilities in eastern Europe in late 2008.

Misalignment between perceptions and actual global burden of disease: evidence from the US population

Significant funding of health programs in low-income countries comes from external sources, mainly private donors and national development agencies of high-income countries. How these external funds are allocated remains a subject of ongoing debate, as studies have revealed that external funding may misalign with the underlying disease burden. One determinant of the priorities set by both private donors and development agencies is the perceptions of populations living in high-income countries about which diseases are legitimate for global health intervention. While research has been conducted on the priorities expressed by recipient communities, relatively less has been done to assess those of the donating country. To investigate people's beliefs about the disease burden in high-income countries, we compared publicly available data from U.S. surveys of people's perceptions of the leading causes of death in developing countries against measures of the actual disease burden from the World Health Organization. We found little correlation between the U.S. public's perception and the actual disease burden, measured as either mortality or disability-adjusted life years. While there is potential for reverse causality, so that donor programs drive public perceptions, these findings suggest that increasing the general population's awareness of the true global disease burden could help better align global health funding with population health needs

Overview of research activities associated with the World Health Organization: results of a survey covering 2006/07

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This paper presents the first comprehensive effort to provide an overview of the research associated with the World Health Organization (WHO) headquarters in 2006/07.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Information was obtained by questionnaire and interviews with senior staff operating at WHO headquarters in Geneva. Research type, purpose and resources (both financial and staff) were defined and compared for each of the 37 departments identified and a comparative analysis was made with the global burden of disease as expressed by Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALY).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Research expenditure in 2006/07 was estimated at US$215 million. WHO is involved in more than 60 research networks/partnerships and often WHO itself is the network host.</p> <p>Using the DALY model, 84% of the funding WHO allocates to research goes to DALY Type I diseases (communicable, maternal, perinatal and nutritional diseases) which represents 40% of DALY. 4% is allocated to Daly Type II (non-communicable diseases) which contributes to 48% of DALY.</p> <p>45% of WHO permanent staff are involved with health research and the WHO's approach to research is predominantly focused on policy, advocacy, health systems and population based research. The Organization principally undertakes secondary research using published data and commissions others to conduct this work through contracts or research grants. This approach is broadly in line with the stated strategy of the Organization.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The difficulty in undertaking this survey highlights the complexity of obtaining an Organization-wide assessment of research activity in the absence of common standards for research classification, methods for priority setting and a mechanism across WHO, or within the governance of global health research more generally, for managing a research portfolio.</p> <p>This paper presents a strategic birds-eye view of the WHO research portfolio using methodologies that, with further development, may provide the strategic information required if there is to be balancing of research efforts between communicable disease, non-communicable disease and other pressing public health needs. As the rollout of the WHO strategy on research for health proceeds we would hope to see similar exercises undertaken at the WHO Regional Offices and in support of capacity building of national health research systems within Member States.</p

'First, do no harm': are disability assessments associated with adverse trends in mental health? A longitudinal ecological study.

In England between 2010 and 2013, just over one million recipients of the main out-of-work disability benefit had their eligibility reassessed using a new functional checklist-the Work Capability Assessment. Doctors and disability rights organisations have raised concerns that this has had an adverse effect on the mental health of claimants, but there are no population level studies exploring the health effects of this or similar policies. METHOD: We used multivariable regression to investigate whether variation in the trend in reassessments in each of 149 local authorities in England was associated with differences in local trends in suicides, self-reported mental health problems and antidepressant prescribing rates, while adjusting for baseline conditions and trends in other factors known to influence mental ill-health. RESULTS: Each additional 10 000 people reassessed in each area was associated with an additional 6 suicides (95% CI 2 to 9), 2700 cases of reported mental health problems (95% CI 548 to 4840), and the prescribing of an additional 7020 antidepressant items (95% CI 3930 to 10100). The reassessment process was associated with the greatest increases in these adverse mental health outcomes in the most deprived areas of the country, widening health inequalities. CONCLUSIONS: The programme of reassessing people on disability benefits using the Work Capability Assessment was independently associated with an increase in suicides, self-reported mental health problems and antidepressant prescribing. This policy may have had serious adverse consequences for mental health in England, which could outweigh any benefits that arise from moving people off disability benefits

How will Brexit affect health and health services in the UK? Evaluating three possible scenarios against the WHO health system building blocks

The process of leaving the European Union (EU) will have profound consequences for health and the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK. In this paper, we use the WHO health system building blocks framework to assess the likely effects of three scenarios we term soft Brexit, hard Brexit, and failed Brexit. We conclude that each scenario poses substantial threats. The workforce of the NHS is heavily reliant on EU staff. Financing of health care for UK citizens in the EU and vice versa is threatened, as is access to some capital funds, while Brexit threatens overall economic performance. Access to pharmaceuticals, technology, blood, and organs for transplant is jeopardised. Information used for international comparisons is threatened, as is service delivery, especially in Northern Ireland. Governance concerns relate to public health, competition and trade law, and research. However, we identified a few potential opportunities for improvement in areas such as competition law and flexibility of training, should the UK Government take them. Overall, a soft version of Brexit would minimise health threats whereas failed Brexit would be the riskiest outcome. Effective parliamentary scrutiny of policy and legal changes will be essential, but the scale of the task risks overwhelming parliament and the civil service

Fit-for-work or fit-for-unemployment? Does the reassessment of disability benefit claimants using a tougher work capability assessment help people into work?

Background Many governments have introduced tougher eligibility assessments for out-of-work disability benefits, to reduce rising benefit caseloads. The UK government initiated a programme in 2010 to reassess all existing disability benefit claimants using a new functional checklist. We investigated whether this policy led to more people out-of-work with long-standing health problems entering employment. Method We use longitudinal data from the Labour Force Survey linked to data indicating the proportion of the population experiencing a reassessment in each of 149 upper tier local authorities in England between 2010 and 2013. Regression models were used to investigate whether the proportion of the population undergoing reassessment in each area was independently associated with the chances that people out-of-work with a long-standing health problem entered employment and transitions between inactivity and unemployment. We analysed whether any effects differed between people whose main health problem was mental rather than physical. Results There was no significant association between the reassessment process and the chances that people out-of-work with a long-standing illness entered employment. The process was significantly associated with an increase in the chances that people with mental illnesses moved from inactivity into unemployment (HR=1.22, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.45). Conclusions The reassessment policy appears to have shifted people with mental health problems from inactivity into unemployment, but there was no evidence that it had increased their chances of employment. There is an urgent need for services that can support the increasing number of people with mental health problems on unemployment benefits

How will Brexit affect health services in the UK? An updated evaluation

All forms of Brexit are bad for health, but some are worse than others. This paper builds on our 2017 analysis using the WHO health system building blocks framework to assess the likely effects of Brexit on the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK. We consider four possible scenarios as follows: a No-Deal Brexit under which the UK leaves the EU on March 29, 2019, without any formal agreement on the terms of withdrawal; a Withdrawal Agreement, as negotiated between the UK and EU and awaiting (possible) formal agreement, which provides a transition period until the end of December, 2020; the Northern Ireland Protocol's backstop coming into effect after the end of that period; or the Political Declaration on the Future Relationship between the UK and EU. Our analysis shows that a No-Deal Brexit is substantially worse for the NHS than a future involving the Withdrawal Agreement, which provides certainty and continuity in legal relations while the Political Declaration on the Future Relationship is negotiated and put into legal form. The Northern Ireland backstop has varying effects, with continuity in some areas, such as health products, but no continuity in others. The Political Declaration on the Future Relationship envisages a relationship that is centred around a free-trade agreement, in which wider health-related issues are largely absent. All forms of Brexit, however, involve negative consequences for the UK's leadership and governance of health, in both Europe and globally, with questions about the ability of parliament and other stakeholders to scrutinise and oversee government actions

A systematic review on health resilience to economic crises

Background The health effects of recent economic crises differ markedly by population group. The objective of this systematic review is to examine evidence from longitudinal studies on factors influencing resilience for any health outcome or health behaviour among the general population living in countries exposed to financial crises. Methods We systematically reviewed studies from six electronic databases (EMBASE, Global Health, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science) which used quantitative longitudinal study designs and included: (i) exposure to an economic crisis; (ii) changes in health outcomes/behaviours over time; (iii) statistical tests of associations of health risk and/or protective factors with health outcomes/behaviours. The quality of the selected studies was appraised using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. PRISMA reporting guidelines were followed. Results From 14,584 retrieved records, 22 studies met the eligibility criteria. These studies were conducted across 10 countries in Asia, Europe and North America over the past two decades. Ten socio-demographic factors that increased or protected against health risk were identified: gender, age, education, marital status, household size, employment/occupation, income/ financial constraints, personal beliefs, health status, area of residence, and social relations. These studies addressed physical health, mortality, suicide and suicide attempts, mental health, and health behaviours. Women’s mental health appeared more susceptible to crises than men’s. Lower income levels were associated with greater increases in cardiovascular disease, mortality and worse mental health. Employment status was associated with changes in mental health. Associations with age, marital status, and education were less consistent, although higher education was associated with healthier behaviours. Conclusions Despite widespread rhetoric about the importance of resilience, there was a dearth of studies which operationalised resilience factors. Future conceptual and empirical research is needed to develop the epidemiology of resilience

An Ecological Study of the Determinants of Differences in 2009 Pandemic Influenza Mortality Rates between Countries in Europe

Pandemic A (H1N1) 2009 mortality rates varied widely from one country to another. Our aim was to identify potential socioeconomic determinants of pandemic mortality and explain between-country variation.Based on data from a total of 30 European countries, we applied random-effects Poisson regression models to study the relationship between pandemic mortality rates (May 2009 to May 2010) and a set of representative environmental, health care-associated, economic and demographic country-level parameters. The study was completed by June 2010.Most regression approaches indicated a consistent, statistically significant inverse association between pandemic influenza-related mortality and per capita government expenditure on health. The findings were similar in univariable [coefficient: -0.00028, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): -0.00046, -0.00010, p = 0.002] and multivariable analyses (including all covariates, coefficient: -0.00107, 95% CI: -0.00196, -0.00018, p = 0.018). The estimate was barely insignificant when the multivariable model included only significant covariates from the univariate step (coefficient: -0.00046, 95% CI: -0.00095, 0.00003, p = 0.063).Our findings imply a significant inverse association between public spending on health and pandemic influenza mortality. In an attempt to interpret the estimated coefficient (-0.00028) for the per capita government expenditure on health, we observed that a rise of 100 international dollars was associated with a reduction in the pandemic influenza mortality rate by approximately 2.8%. However, further work needs to be done to unravel the mechanisms by which reduced government spending on health may have affected the 2009 pandemic influenza mortality