Adverse health outcome of cosmetologists and hairdressers : a systematic review

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Menghan Deng
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Outcome ◽  
Adverse Health Outcome ◽  
Adverse Health

Do health benefits explain the price premiums for organic foods?

2000 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred Kuchler ◽  
Katherine Ralston ◽  
J. Robert Tomerlin
Keyword(s):  
Health Outcome ◽  
Consumer Preferences ◽  
Health Benefits ◽  
Organic Food ◽  
Adverse Health Outcome ◽  
Price Premiums ◽  
Adverse Health ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Typical Consumer ◽  
Value Of Health

AbstractThis paper examines whether the dollar value of health benefits that consumers derive from organic food could account for the price premiums they pay. Price and sales data from realized transactions are inadequate to reveal consumer preferences for health benefits. Our exploratory alternative method estimates the value of health benefits to a hypothetical consumer who assesses risks as risk assessors do and values a unit reduction in all fatal risks equally, regardless of the source of any risk. Under these assumptions, our estimates of the value of health benefits derived from substituting an organic diet for a conventionally produced diet approach zero. For a common organic product, apple juice, we estimated the cost of reducing risks by buying the organic characteristic. The cost of averting each adverse health outcome is 27 to 461 times as large as the value of benefits. If the characteristics of our hypothetical consumer match those of the typical consumer, two inferences follow from our estimates of benefits and costs. First, the typical consumer is unlikely to purchase organic food for health reasons. Second, consumers who choose organic food could differ from typical consumers in several dimensions: perceptions of the level of risk from dietary intake of pesticides, perceptions of the nature of adverse health outcomes from pesticides, or in the importance attached to other attributes of organic food. Our analysis is exploratory partially because there are several behavioral assumptions implicit in the values we calculate. Also, we focus on risks that can be quantitatively estimated, measuring the probability of an adverse health outcome with readily accessible data. Currently, only cancer risks can be measured in terms of probabilities from readily accessible data.

scholarly journals A Method for Partitioning the Attributable Fraction of Multiple Time-Dependent Coexisting Risk Factors for an Adverse Health Outcome

2013 ◽  
Vol 103 (1) ◽  
pp. 177-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haiqun Lin ◽  
Heather G. Allore ◽  
Gail McAvay ◽  
Mary E. Tinetti ◽  
Thomas M. Gill ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Health Outcome ◽  
Attributable Fraction ◽  
Time Dependent ◽  
Multiple Time ◽  
Adverse Health Outcome ◽  
Adverse Health

Adverse Outcomes Associated with Inappropriate Drug Use in Nursing Homes

2005 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 405-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Perri ◽  
Ajit M Menon ◽  
Aparna D Deshpande ◽  
Shashank B Shinde ◽  
Rong Jiang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Outcome ◽  
Drug Use ◽  
Nursing Homes ◽  
Inappropriate Medication ◽  
Medication Use ◽  
Inappropriate Drug ◽  
Adverse Health Outcome ◽  
Adverse Health ◽  
Inappropriate Medication Use ◽  
Inappropriate Drug Use

BACKGROUND: Little empirical evidence exists regarding the influence and outcomes of inappropriate medication use among elderly nursing home residents. OBJECTIVE: To identify the prevalence of inappropriate medication use among elderly patients in Georgia nursing homes using the Beers criteria and identify the relationship between inappropriate drug use and the likelihood of an adverse health outcome. METHODS: A cohort design was used to review 1117 patient medical records in 15 Georgia nursing homes with a high risk of polypharmacy. Prevalence of inappropriate medication use among elderly patients, as defined by the Beers criteria, was estimated. The adverse health outcomes of hospitalizations, emergency department visits, or deaths were identified from Medicaid claims data. RESULTS: A total of 519 (46.5%) patients received at least one inappropriate medication and 143 (12.8%) patients experienced at least one adverse health outcome. Logistic regression revealed that the total number of medications taken (OR 1.139, 95% CI 1.105 to 1.173) significantly increased the likelihood of receiving an inappropriate drug, while having a diagnosis of “dementia” (OR 0.748, 95% CI 0.565 to 0.991) decreased the likelihood. Inappropriate medication use increased the likelihood of experiencing at least one adverse health outcome more than twofold (OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.61 to 3.40). Propoxyphene use alone was significantly associated with the occurrence of an adverse health outcome (OR 2.39, 95% CI 1.54 to 3.71). CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate drug use was common in our study cohort. Inappropriate use of medication in the elderly, particularly propoxyphene, is associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes.

P.3.c.049 Risk of adverse health outcome and metabolic syndrome in adolescents treated with antipsychotics: preliminary results

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. S496-S497
Author(s):  
J. Merchán-Naranjo ◽  
M. Giráldez-Quiroga ◽  
C. Moreno ◽  
L. Pina ◽  
M. Parellada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Metabolic Syndrome ◽  
Health Outcome ◽  
Adverse Health Outcome ◽  
Preliminary Results ◽  
Adverse Health

scholarly journals Understanding the influence of socioeconomic status on the association between combinations of lifestyle factors and adverse health outcomes: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. e042212
Author(s):  
Hamish Foster ◽  
Peter Polz ◽  
Frances Mair ◽  
Jason Gill ◽  
Catherine A O'Donnell
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Socioeconomic Status ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Lifestyle Factors ◽  
Lifestyle Factor ◽  
Unhealthy Lifestyle ◽  
Adverse Health ◽  
Adverse Health Outcomes ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionCombinations of unhealthy lifestyle factors are strongly associated with mortality, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer. It is unclear how socioeconomic status (SES) affects those associations. Lower SES groups may be disproportionately vulnerable to the effects of unhealthy lifestyle factors compared with higher SES groups via interactions with other factors associated with low SES (eg, stress) or via accelerated biological ageing. This systematic review aims to synthesise studies that examine how SES moderates the association between lifestyle factor combinations and adverse health outcomes. Greater understanding of how lifestyle risk varies across socioeconomic spectra could reduce adverse health by (1) identifying novel high-risk groups or targets for future interventions and (2) informing research, policy and interventions that aim to support healthy lifestyles in socioeconomically deprived communities.Methods and analysisThree databases will be searched (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL) from inception to March 2020. Reference lists, citations and grey literature will also be searched. Inclusion criteria are: (1) prospective cohort studies; (2) investigations of two key exposures: (a) lifestyle factor combinations of at least three lifestyle factors (eg, smoking, physical activity and diet) and (b) SES (eg, income, education or poverty index); (3) an assessment of the impact of SES on the association between combinations of unhealthy lifestyle factors and health outcomes; (4) at least one outcome from—mortality (all cause, CVD and cancer), CVD or cancer incidence. Two independent reviewers will screen titles, abstracts and full texts of included studies. Data extraction will focus on cohort characteristics, exposures, direction and magnitude of SES effects, methods and quality (via Newcastle-Ottawa Scale). If appropriate, a meta-analysis, pooling the effects of SES, will be performed. Alternatively, a synthesis without meta-analysis will be conducted.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication, professional networks, social media and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020172588.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document