Global Health and the Global Burden of Disease

2021 ◽  
pp. 85-99
Author(s):  
Joia S. Mukherjee
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
Burden Of Disease ◽  
Disease Burden ◽  
World Health ◽  
Global Burden Of Disease ◽  
Global Burden ◽  
Health Coverage ◽  
New Era ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Key Terms

In this new era of global health in which delivering care has become a reality, it is important to understand the terms used to describe the health of populations, such as incidence, prevalence, morbidity, and mortality. As well as to be able to describe the concepts such as the burden of disease in a population, the quantity and impact of diseases that affect the health of populations, and the epidemiologic shifts within a society. This chapter reviews these key terms and concepts as well as the creation of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) project, launched in 1990 at the World Health Organization. The GBD project measures and estimates the disease burden in countries on a regular basis. These data are critical to built health systems with sufficient inputs to address the entirety of the disease burden and achieve universal health coverage.

Global Health and the Global Burden of Disease

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joia S. Mukherjee
Keyword(s):  
Burden Of Disease ◽  
Disease Burden ◽  
Morbidity And Mortality ◽  
World Health ◽  
Global Burden Of Disease ◽  
Global Burden ◽  
Health Coverage ◽  
The World ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Universal Health

This chapter defines terms used to describe the health of populations, such as incidence, prevalence, morbidity, and mortality. It introduces the concept of the burden of disease: that is, the quantity and impact of diseases and conditions that affect the health of populations. The Global Burden of Disease project, first launched in 1990 by the World Health Organization (WHO) seeks to measure disease burden on a regular basis. This chapter also examines the epidemiological transition, a concept that describes changes in causes of morbidity and mortality associated with economic development. The limitations of this concept and the need to address the entirety of the disease burden and achieve Universal Health Coverage are also discussed.

scholarly journals The comparative risk assessment for alcohol as part of the Global Burden of Disease 2010 Study: What changed from the last study?

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jürgen Rehm ◽  
Guilherme Borges ◽  
Gerhard Gmel ◽  
Kathryn Graham ◽  
Bridget Grant ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Risk Factor ◽  
Burden Of Disease ◽  
World Health ◽  
Global Burden Of Disease ◽  
Global Burden ◽  
Comparative Risk Assessment ◽  
Comparative Risk ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Global Population

Rehm, J., Borges, G., Gmel, G., Graham, K., Grant, B., Parry, C., Poznyak, V. & Room R. (2013). The comparative risk assessment for alcohol as part of the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study: What changed from the last study? International Journal of Alcohol and Drug Research, 2(1), 1-5.  doi: 10.7895/ijadr.v2i1.132 (http://dx.doi.org/10.7895/ijadr.v2i1.132)In December 2012, the new results of the Comparative Risk Assessment (CRA) for alcohol within the Global Burden of Disease and Injury (GBD) Study 2010 were presented at a joint meeting of the GBD Group and the journal Lancet at the Royal Society in London (Lim et al., 2012). At first glance, there do not appear to be many changes to alcohol consumption as a risk factor for death and disability: it is identified as the third most important risk factor, as it was in the last CRA (World Health Organization, 2009). The burden of disease attributable to alcohol had increased, compared to the 2004 estimate (Rehm, Mathers et al., 2009), but this could be due to an increase in global population, or to variations in the methodologies behind the 2004 and 2010 estimates.

scholarly journals An estimation of the global burden of disease due to skin lesions caused by arsenic in drinking water

2005 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorna Fewtrell ◽  
Ron Fuge ◽  
David Kay
Keyword(s):  
Drinking Water ◽  
Burden Of Disease ◽  
Large Degree ◽  
Skin Lesions ◽  
World Health ◽  
Global Burden Of Disease ◽  
Global Burden ◽  
Life Years ◽  
D Region ◽  
Health Organization

The global burden of disease due to skin lesions caused by arsenic in drinking water was estimated by combining country-based exposure data with selected exposure–response relationships derived from the literature. Populations were considered to be exposed to elevated arsenic levels if their drinking water contained arsenic concentrations of 50 μg l−1 or greater. Elevated arsenic concentrations in drinking water result in a significant global burden of disease, even when confining the health outcome to skin lesions. The burden of disease was particularly marked in the World Health Organization (WHO) comparative risk assessment (CRA) ‘Sear D' region, which includes Bangladesh, India and Nepal. Unsurprisingly, Bangladesh was the worst affected country with 143 disability adjusted life years (DALYs) per 1,000 population. Although this initial estimate is subject to a large degree of uncertainty, it does represent an important first step in allowing the comparison of the problem relating to elevated arsenic in drinking water to other environmental health outcomes.

scholarly journals Metric partnerships: global burden of disease estimates within the World Bank, the World Health Organisation and the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 35
Author(s):  
Marlee Tichenor ◽  
Devi Sridhar
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
World Bank ◽  
Burden Of Disease ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
World Health Organisation ◽  
World Health ◽  
Global Burden Of Disease ◽  
Global Burden ◽  
The World Bank ◽  
The World

The global burden of disease study—which has been affiliated with the World Bank and the World Health Organisation (WHO) and is now housed in the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME)—has become a very important tool to global health governance since it was first published in the 1993 World Development Report. In this article, based on literature review of primary and secondary sources as well as field notes from public events, we present first a summary of the origins and evolution of the GBD over the past 25 years. We then analyse two illustrative examples of estimates and the ways in which they gloss over the assumptions and knowledge gaps in their production, highlighting the importance of historical context by country and by disease in the quality of health data. Finally, we delve into the question of the end users of these estimates and the tensions that lie at the heart of producing estimates of local, national, and global burdens of disease. These tensions bring to light the different institutional ethics and motivations of IHME, WHO, and the World Bank, and they draw our attention to the importance of estimate methodologies in representing problems and their solutions in global health. With the rise in the investment in and the power of global health estimates, the question of representing global health problems becomes ever more entangled in decisions made about how to adjust reported numbers and to evolving statistical science. Ultimately, more work needs to be done to create evidence that is relevant and meaningful on country and district levels, which means shifting resources and support for quantitative—and qualitative—data production, analysis, and synthesis to countries that are the targeted beneficiaries of such global health estimates.

scholarly journals Mortality from snakebite envenomation: an analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Roberts ◽  
Emily Johnson ◽  
Scott Zeng ◽  
Erin Hamilton ◽  
Amir Abdoli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Burden Of Disease ◽  
World Health ◽  
Global Burden Of Disease ◽  
Global Burden ◽  
Uncertainty Interval ◽  
Registration Data ◽  
Venomous Animal ◽  
Animal Contact ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Disease Study

Abstract Venomous snakebite is an important cause of preventable death. The World Health Organization (WHO) set a goal to halve snakebite mortality by 2030. We used verbal autopsy and vital registration data to model the proportion of venomous animal deaths due to snakes by location, age, year, and sex, and applied these proportions to venomous animal contact mortality estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2019 study. In 2019, 63,400 people (95% uncertainty interval 38,900–78,600) died globally from snakebites, which was equal to an age-standardized mortality rate (ASMR) of 0.8 deaths (0.5–1.0) per 100,000 and represents a 36% (2–49) decrease in ASMR since 1990. India had the greatest number of deaths in 2019, equal to an ASMR of 4.0 per 100,000 (2.3-5.0). We forecast mortality will continue to decline, but not sufficiently to meet the WHO’s goals. Improved data collection should be prioritized to help target interventions, improve burden estimation, and monitor progress.

scholarly journals Metric partnerships: global burden of disease estimates within the World Bank, the World Health Organisation and the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marlee Tichenor ◽  
Devi Sridhar
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
World Bank ◽  
Burden Of Disease ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
World Health Organisation ◽  
World Health ◽  
Global Burden Of Disease ◽  
Global Burden ◽  
The World Bank ◽  
The World

The global burden of disease study—which has been affiliated with the World Bank and the World Health Organisation (WHO) and is now housed in the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME)—has become a very important tool to global health governance since it was first published in the 1993 World Development Report. In this article, based on literature review of primary and secondary sources as well as field notes from public events, we present first a summary of the origins and evolution of the GBD over the past 25 years. We then analyse two illustrative examples of estimates and the ways in which they gloss over the assumptions and knowledge gaps in their production, highlighting the importance of historical context by country and by disease in the quality of health data. Finally, we delve into the question of the end users of these estimates and the tensions that lie at the heart of producing estimates of local, national, and global burdens of disease. These tensions bring to light the different institutional ethics and motivations of IHME, WHO, and the World Bank, and they draw our attention to the importance of estimate methodologies in representing problems and their solutions in global health. With the rise in the investment in and the power of global health estimates, the question of representing global health problems becomes ever more entangled in decisions made about how to adjust reported numbers and to evolving statistical science. Ultimately, more work needs to be done to create evidence that is relevant and meaningful on country and district levels, which means shifting resources and support for quantitative—and qualitative—data production, analysis, and synthesis to countries that are the targeted beneficiaries of such global health estimates.

scholarly journals The comparative risk assessment for alcohol as part of the Global Burden of Disease 2010 Study: What changed from the last study?

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jürgen Rehm ◽  
Guilherme Borges ◽  
Gerhard Gmel ◽  
Kathryn Graham ◽  
Bridget Grant ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Risk Factor ◽  
Burden Of Disease ◽  
World Health ◽  
Global Burden Of Disease ◽  
Global Burden ◽  
Comparative Risk Assessment ◽  
Comparative Risk ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Global Population

Rehm, J., Borges, G., Gmel, G., Graham, K., Grant, B., Parry, C., Poznyak, V. & Room R. (2013). The comparative risk assessment for alcohol as part of the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study: What changed from the last study? International Journal of Alcohol and Drug Research, 2(1), 1-5.  doi: 10.7895/ijadr.v2i1.132 (http://dx.doi.org/10.7895/ijadr.v2i1.132)In December 2012, the new results of the Comparative Risk Assessment (CRA) for alcohol within the Global Burden of Disease and Injury (GBD) Study 2010 were presented at a joint meeting of the GBD Group and the journal Lancet at the Royal Society in London (Lim et al., 2012). At first glance, there do not appear to be many changes to alcohol consumption as a risk factor for death and disability: it is identified as the third most important risk factor, as it was in the last CRA (World Health Organization, 2009). The burden of disease attributable to alcohol had increased, compared to the 2004 estimate (Rehm, Mathers et al., 2009), but this could be due to an increase in global population, or to variations in the methodologies behind the 2004 and 2010 estimates.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document