Entity

Time filter

Source Type


Lhachimi S.K.,Erasmus Medical Center | Lhachimi S.K.,Heinrich Heine University Dusseldorf | Nusselder W.J.,Erasmus Medical Center | Lobstein T.J.,International Association for the Study of Obesity | And 7 more authors.
Obesity Reviews | Year: 2013

Summary: A common policy response to the rise in obesity prevalence is to undertake interventions in childhood, but it is an open question whether this is more effective than reducing the risk of becoming obese during adulthood. In this paper, we model the effect on health outcomes of (i) reducing the prevalence of obesity when entering adulthood; (ii) reducing the risk of becoming obese throughout adult life; and (iii) combinations of both approaches. We found that, while all approaches reduce the prevalence of chronic diseases and improve life expectancy, a given percentage reduction in obesity prevalence achieved during childhood had a smaller effect than the same percentage reduction in the risk of becoming obese applied throughout adulthood. A small increase in the probability of becoming obese during adulthood offsets a substantial reduction in prevalence of overweight/obesity achieved during childhood, with the gains from a 50% reduction in child obesity prevalence offset by a 10% increase in the probability of becoming obese in adulthood. We conclude that both policy approaches can improve the health profile throughout the life course of a cohort, but they are not equivalent, and a large reduction in child obesity prevalence may be reversed by a small increase in the risk of becoming overweight or obese in adulthood. © 2013 International Association for the Study of Obesity. Source


Lhachimi S.K.,Rotterdam University | Lhachimi S.K.,National Institute for Public Health and the Environment RIVM | Lhachimi S.K.,Heinrich Heine University Dusseldorf | Cole K.J.,London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine | And 11 more authors.
Preventive Medicine | Year: 2012

Objective: Western Europe has high levels of alcohol consumption, with corresponding adverse health effects. Currently, a major revision of the EU excise tax regime is under discussion. We quantify the health impact of alcohol price increases across the EU. Data and method: We use alcohol consumption data for 11 member states, covering 80% of the EU-27 population, and corresponding country-specific disease data (incidence, prevalence, and case-fatality rate of alcohol related diseases) taken from the 2010 published Dynamic Modelling for Health Impact Assessment (DYNAMO-HIA) database to dynamically project the changes in population health that might arise from changes in alcohol price. Results: Increasing alcohol prices towards those of Finland (the highest in the EU) would postpone approximately 54,000 male and approximately 26,100 female deaths over 10. years. Moreover, the prevalence of a number of chronic diseases would be reduced: in men by approximately 97,800 individuals with diabetes, 65,800 with stroke and 62,200 with selected cancers, and in women by about 19,100, 23,500, and 27,100, respectively. Conclusion: Curbing excessive drinking throughout the EU completely would lead to substantial gains in population health. Harmonisiation of prices to the Finnish level would, for selected diseases, achieve more than 40% of those gains. © 2012 Elsevier Inc. Source


Kivistik A.,National Institute for Health Development | Lang K.,University of Tartu | Baili P.,Descriptive Studies and Health Planning Unit | Anttila A.,Institute for Statistical and Epidemiological Cancer Research | Veerus P.,National Institute for Health Development
BMC Women's Health | Year: 2011

Background: The attendance rate in Estonian cervical cancer screening programme is too low therefore the programme is hardly effective. A cross-sectional population based survey was performed to identify awareness of cervical cancer risk factors, reasons why women do not want to participate in cervical screening programme and wishes for better organisation of the programme.Method: An anonymous questionnaire with a covering letter and a prepaid envelope was sent together with the screening invitation to 2942 randomly selected women. Results are based on the analysis of 1054 (36%) returned questionnaires.Results: Main reasons for non-participation in the national screening programme were a recent visit to a gynaecologist (42.3%), fear to give a Pap-smear (14.3%), long appointment queues (12.9%) and unsuitable reception hours (11.8%). Fear to give a Pap-smear was higher among women aged 30 and 35 than 50 and 55 (RR 1.46; 95% CI: 0.82-2.59) and women with one or no deliveries (RR 1.56, 95% CI: 0.94-2.58). In general, awareness of cervical cancer risk factors is poor and it does not depend on socio-demographic factors. Awareness of screening was higher among Estonians than Russians (RR 1.64, 95% CI: 1.46-1.86). Most women prefer to receive information about screening from personally mailed invitation letters (74.8%).Conclusions: Women need more information about cervical cancer risk factors and the screening programme. They prefer personally addressed information sharing. Minority groups should be addressed in their own language. A better collaboration with service providers and discouraging smears outside the programme are also required. © 2011 Kivistik et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. Source


Siesling S.,Center the Netherlands | Siesling S.,University of Twente | Kwast A.,Center the Netherlands | Gavin A.,Queens University of Belfast | And 2 more authors.
International Journal of Cancer | Year: 2013

EUROCHIP (European Cancer Health Indicators Project) focuses on understanding inequalities in the cancer burden, care and survival by the indicators "stage at diagnosis," "cancer treatment delay" and "compliance with cancer guidelines" as the most important indicators. Our study aims at providing insight in whether cancer registries collect well-defined variables to determine these indicators in a comparative way. Eighty-six general European population-based cancer registries (PBCR) from 32 countries responded to the questionnaire, which was developed by EUROCHIP in collaboration with ENCR (European Network of Cancer Registries) and EUROCOURSE. Only 15% of all the PBCR in EU had all three indicators available. The indicator "stage at diagnosis" was gathered for at least one cancer site by 81% (using TNM in 39%). Variables for the indicator "cancer treatment delay" were collected by 37%. Availability of type of treatment (30%), surgery date (36%), starting date of radiotherapy (26%) and starting date of chemotherapy (23%) resulted in 15% of the PBCRs to be able to gather the indicator "compliance to guidelines". Lack of data source access and qualified staff were the major reasons for not collecting all the variables. In conclusion, based on self-reporting, a few of the participating PBCRs had data available which could be used for clinical audits, evaluation of cancer care projects, survival and for monitoring national cancer control strategies. Extra efforts should be made to improve this very efficient tool to compare cancer burden and the effects of the national cancer plans over Europe and to learn from each other. Copyright © 2012 UICC. Source


Micheli A.,Descriptive Studies and Health Planning Unit | Di Salvo F.,Descriptive Studies and Health Planning Unit | Lombardo C.,Italian National Cancer Institute | Ugolini D.,University of Genoa | And 2 more authors.
Tumori | Year: 2011

Aims and background. Although several studies have assessed cancer research performance in individual European countries, comparisons of European Union (EU27) performance with countries of similar population size are not available. Methods. We compared cancer research performance in 2000-2008 between EU27 and 11 countries with over 100 million inhabitants. Performance should not have been affected by the 2007-2009 recession. We examined 143 journals considered oncology journals by Journal Citation Reports, accessing them via Scopus. Publications were attributed to countries using a published counting procedure. Results. For number of publications, the USA held a clear lead in 2006-2008 (yearly averages: 10,293 USA vs 9,962 EU27), whereas the EU27 held the lead previously. EU27 was also second to the USA for total impact factor. China markedly improved its cancer publications record over the period. Compared to the USA, EU27 and Japan, the other countries (all developing) had a poor publications record. Conclusions. Comparative cancer research spending data are not available. However from 2002 to 2007, gross domestic expenditure on research and development (UNESCO data) increased by 34% in North America, 161% in China and only 28% in EU27. Thus the European Union is lagging behind North America and may well be eclipsed by China in research and development spending in the near future. We suggest that these new findings should be considered by policymakers in Europe and other countries when developing policies for cancer control. Source

Discover hidden collaborations