Variations in amenable mortality--trends in 16 high-income nations.

BACKGROUND: There has been growing interest in the comparison of health system performance within and between countries, using a range of different indicators. This study examines trends in amenable mortality, as one measure of health system performance, in sixteen high-income countries. METHODS: Amenable mortality was defined as premature death from causes that should not occur in the presence of timely and effective health care. We analysed age-standardised rates of amenable mortality under age 75 in 16 countries for 1997/1998 and 2006/2007. RESULTS: Amenable mortality remains an important contributor to premature mortality in 16 high-income countries, accounting for 24% of deaths under age 75. Between 1997/1998 and 2006/2007, amenable mortality fell by between 20.5% in the US and 42.1% in Ireland (average decline: 31%). In 2007, amenable mortality in the US was almost twice that in France, which had the lowest levels. CONCLUSIONS: Amenable mortality continues to fall across high-income nations although the USA is lagging increasingly behind other high income countries. Despite its many limitations, amenable mortality remains a useful indicator to monitor progress of nations

Six concerns about the data in aid debates: applying an epidemiological perspective to the analysis of aid effectiveness in health and development.

Is aid helping, hindering, or having no effect on development and health? The answer to this question is highly contested, with proponents on all sides adhering strongly to their competing interpretations. We ask how it is possible for those who are often using the same data to hold such divergent views. Here, we employ an epidemiological perspective and find that, in many cases, the arguments are characterised by methodological weaknesses. There may be selective citation of results and failure to account for bias and confounding, such as where an extraneous factor influencing the outcome is correlated with increased aid or, in confounding by indication, where increased aid is a consequence of a country being in an especially adverse situation. Studies may also lack external validity, whereby lack of data (a widespread problem) or similar considerations mean that analyses are undertaken on an unrepresentative subset of countries. Multiple outcome measures can also be problematic, where the main outcome of interest is not specified in advance. Many studies fail to account for differential time lags between changes in aid and the outcomes being studied. Some studies may also be underpowered to detect an association where one exists. Although, ideally, this debate should be informed by large scale randomised controlled trials, this will often be unfeasible. Given this limitation, it is essential that those engaged in it are cognisant of the many methodological issues that face any observational study

The weekend effect: now you see it, now you don't.

New evidence reinforces concerns about the government’s use of evidenc