A comparison of acute phase proteins and traditional risk factors as markers of combined plaque and intima-media thickness and plaque density in carotid and femoral arteries

AbstractObjectives: to test the hypothesis that some acute phase proteins may be better independent predictors of objective measures of arterial wall impairment than traditional risk factors. Design: cross-sectional study. Materials and Methods: C-reactive protein (CRP), fibrinogen, C3 complement and traditional risk factors were measured in 288 men aged 55-64 years, randomly chosen from the local registry lists. By ultrasound assessment of the bifurcations of carotid and femoral arteries, maximum combined plaque/intima-media thickness (CPIMTmax) and mean plaque density (MPD, in a grey scale from 0 to 255) were also measured. Results: in multivariate analysis only traditional risk factors remained associated with the overall CPIMTmax: smoking (r = 0.35, p < 0.0001), cholesterol (r = 0.23, p = 0.0001), age (r = 0.22, p = 0.0002), glucose (r = 0.18, p = 0.002) and systolic blood pressure (r = 0.13, p = 0.02). However, with regard to carotid disease only, fibrinogen was the strongest covariate of CPIMT (r = 0.18, p = 0.002). The overall MPD was independently associated with CRP (r = 0.25, p = 0.0008), physical activity (r = 0.19, p = 0.009), triglycerides (r = −0.18, p = 0.02) and body mass index (r = 0.15, p = 0.04). CRP was mainly associated with femoral MPD, while triglycerides were the major (inverse) covariate of carotid MPD. Conclusions: traditional risk factors are the main determinants of CPIMTmax, although fibrinogen seems to play a role in carotids. CRP was associated with high density femoral plaques. Finally, no acute phase protein was independently associated with low density, potentially vulnerable, plaques.Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 26, 81-87 (2003

From Poverty to Disaster and Back: a Review of the Literature

Poor people are disproportionally affected by natural hazards and disasters. This paper provides a review of the multiple factors that explain why this is the case. It explores the role of exposure (often, but not always, poor people are more likely to be affected by hazards), vulnerability (when they are affected, poor people tend to lose a larger fraction of their wealth), and socio-economic resilience (poor people have a lower ability to cope with and recover from disaster impacts). Finally, the paper highlights the vicious circle between poverty and disaster losses: poverty is a major driver of people’s vulnerability to natural disasters, which in turn increase poverty in a measurable and significant way. The main policy implication is that poverty reduction can be considered as disaster risk management, and disaster risk management can be considered as poverty reduction

The impact of the Lesotho Child Grant Programme in the lives of children and adults with disabilities: Disaggregated analysis of a community randomized controlled trial

Globally, people with disabilities are disproportionally affected by poverty. Social protection policies, including cash transfers, are key strategies to address poverty “in all its forms”, but it is currently unclear how such programmes affect people with disabilities. This study examines differences in the impact of the Lesotho Child Grant Programme (CGP) on food security, health, education and livelihoods between people with and without disabilities using data from a community randomized control trial. Overall, this study finds the CGP had significant and differential impacts for people with disabilities across multiple health indicators (e.g. increased health expenditures, self-rated health, likelihood of seeking healthcare). The CGP also had an impact on food security, decreasing the number of months households with and without members with disabilities faced extreme food shortages. There was also a modest but significant and differential impact of the CGP on the engagement of people with disabilities in paid work. The CGP only had an impact on school enrolment for children without disabilities, however the difference in impact was non-significant and likely due to underpowered sample sizes. Overall, people with disabilities receiving the CGP still experienced high levels of absolute deprivation, and were generally still worse off compared to people without disabilities, indicating a need for adapted or complementary social protection and other poverty alleviation programmes

Does “soft conditionality” increase the impact of cash transfers on desired outcomes? Evidence from a randomized control trial in Lesotho

Cash transfers programs have been shown to have positive effects on a variety of outcomes. While much of the literature focuses on the role of conditionality in achieving desired impact, this paper focuses on the role of ‘soft conditionality’ implemented through both ‘labeling’ and ‘messaging’ in evaluating the impact of the Child Grants Program in Lesotho, an unconditional cash transfer targeting poor households with orphans and vulnerable children. Beneficiary households received a clear message that the transfer should be spent on the interest and needs of children. Our findings are based on a randomized experiment and suggest that ‘soft conditionality’ does play a strong role in increasing expenditure for children, especially on education, clothing and footwear. Results indicate in fact that transfer income is spent differently from general income as it exerts both an income and a substitution effect. This behavioral change is confirmed by comparing the ex-ante expected behaviors with the ex-post actual response to the program. We find that for expenditure categories linked to the wellbeing of children the ex-post response was much higher than the ex-ante expected behavior

Participatory Women's Groups with Cash Transfers Can Increase Dietary Diversity and Micronutrient Adequacy during Pregnancy, whereas Women's Groups with Food Transfers Can Increase Equity in Intrahousehold Energy Allocation.

Background: There is scarce evidence on the impacts of food transfers, cash transfers, or women's groups on food sharing, dietary intakes, or nutrition during pregnancy, when nutritional needs are elevated. Objective: This study measured the effects of 3 pregnancy-focused nutrition interventions on intrahousehold food allocation, dietary adequacy, and maternal nutritional status in Nepal. Methods: Interventions tested in a cluster-randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN 75964374) were "Participatory Learning and Action" (PLA) monthly women's groups, PLA with transfers of 10 kg fortified flour ("Super Cereal"), and PLA plus transfers of 750 Nepalese rupees (∼US$7.5) to pregnant women. Control clusters received usual government services. Primary outcomes were Relative Dietary Energy Adequacy Ratios (RDEARs) between pregnant women and male household heads and pregnant women and their mothers-in-law. Diets were measured by repeated 24-h dietary recalls. Results: Relative to control, RDEARs between pregnant women and their mothers-in-law were 12% higher in the PLA plus food arm (log-RDEAR coefficient = 0.12; 95% CI: 0.02, 0.21; P = 0.014), but 10% lower in the PLA-only arm between pregnant women and male household heads (-0.11; 95% CI: -0.19, -0.02; P = 0.020). In all interventions, pregnant women's energy intakes did not improve, but odds of pregnant women consuming iron-folate supplements were 2.5-4.6 times higher, odds of pregnant women consuming more animal-source foods than the household head were 1.7-2.4 times higher, and midupper arm circumference was higher relative to control. Dietary diversity was 0.4 food groups higher in the PLA plus cash arm than in the control arm. Conclusions: All interventions improved maternal diets and nutritional status in pregnancy. PLA women's groups with food transfers increased equity in energy allocation, whereas PLA with cash improved dietary diversity. PLA alone improved diets, but effects were mixed. Scale-up of these interventions in marginalized populations is a policy option, but researchers should find ways to increase adherence to interventions. This trial was registered at www.controlled-trials.com as ISRCTN 75964374