scholarly journals Using Risk Factor Weighting to Target and Create Effective Public Health Policy for Campylobacteriosis Prevention in Ontario, Canada

2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Papadopoulos ◽  
Emily Vellekoop ◽  
Mai Pham ◽  
Ian Young ◽  
Nicole Britten
2006 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Hammond ◽  
Geoffrey T. Fong ◽  
Paul W. Mcdonald ◽  
K. Stephen Brown ◽  
Roy Cameron

2013 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 771-788 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sally M. Gainsbury ◽  
Matthijs Blankers ◽  
Claire Wilkinson ◽  
Karen Schelleman-Offermans ◽  
Janna Cousijn

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement 2) ◽  
pp. 25s-25s
Author(s):  
K. Brown ◽  
H. Rumgay ◽  
C. Dunlop ◽  
M. Ryan ◽  
F. Quartly ◽  
...  

Background: Understanding population-level exposure to cancer risk factors is vital when devising risk-reduction policies. By reducing exposure to cancer risk factors, many cancers could be prevented. But what impact on cancer incidence do these risk factors have? And what proportion of cancers could be prevented if these risk factors are avoided? Aim: The aim of this analysis was to update the estimates of the number and proportion of theoretically preventable cancers in the UK to reflect the changing behavior as assessed in representative national surveys, and new epidemiologic evidence. Separate estimates were also calculated for England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland because prevalence of risk factor exposure varies between them. Methods: Population attributable fractions (PAFs) were calculated for combinations of risk factor and cancer type with sufficient/convincing evidence of a causal association. Relative risks (RRs) were drawn from meta-analyses of cohort studies where possible. Prevalence of exposure to risk factors was obtained from nationally representative population surveys. Cancer incidence data for 2015 were sourced from national data releases and, where needed, personal communications. Results: Around four in ten (38%) cancer cases in 2015 in the UK were attributable to known risk factors. The proportion was around two percentage points higher in UK males (39%) than UK females (37%). Comparing UK countries, the attributable proportion for persons was highest in Scotland (41%) and lowest in England (37%). Tobacco smoking contributed by far the largest proportion of attributable cancer cases, followed by overweight and obesity, accounting for 15% and 6%, respectively, of all cases in the UK in 2015. Conclusion: Around four in ten (38%) cancer cases in the UK could be prevented. Tobacco and obesity remain the top contributors of attributable cancer cases. Tobacco smoking has the highest PAF because it greatly increases cancer risk and has a large number of cancer types associated with it. Obesity has the second-highest PAF because it affects a high proportion of the UK population and is also linked with many cancer types. Public health policy may seek to reduce the level of harm associated with exposure or reduce exposure levels - both approaches may be effective in preventing cancer. The variation in PAFs between UK countries is affected by sociodemographic differences which drive differences in exposure to theoretically avoidable 'lifestyle' factors. PAFs at UK country level have not been available previously and they should be used by policymakers in the devolved nations to develop more targeted public health measures. This analysis demonstrates the importance of nationally representative exposure prevalence data and cancer registration in informing evidence-based public health policy.


2005 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 133-144 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOHN D. H. PORTER

Academic disciplines like anthropology and epidemiology provide a niche for researchers to speak the same language, and to interrogate the assumptions that they use to investigate problems. How anthropological and epidemiological methods communicate and relate to each other affects the way public health policy is created but the philosophical underpinnings of each discipline makes this difficult. Anthropology is reflective, subjective and investigates complexity and the individual; epidemiology, in contrast, is objective and studies populations. Within epidemiological methods there is the utilitarian concept of potentially sacrificing the interests of the individual for the benefits of maximizing population welfare, whereas in anthropology the individual is always included. Other strengths of anthropology in the creation of public health policy include: its attention to complexity, questioning the familiar; helping with language and translation; reconfiguring boundaries to create novel frameworks; and being reflective. Public health requires research that is multi-, inter- and trans-disciplinary. To do this, there is a need for each discipline to respect the ‘dignity of difference’ between disciplines in order to help create appropriate and effective public health policy.


2001 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 507-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rob Baggott ◽  
David J Hunter

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document