Search

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of an HPV vaccination programme in reducing the risk of cervical abnormalities identified at subsequent screening. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using administrative health data. SETTING: General population of Ferrara Province, Italy. POPULATION: Female residents born in 1986-1993 and participating in the organized cervical screening programme in 2011-2018, who were eligible for HPV vaccination in catch-up cohorts. METHODS: Logistic regression to evaluate the potential association between abnormal cervical cytology and one, two, three or at least one dose of HPV vaccine. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cervical abnormalities, as predicted by low-grade or high-grade cytology, by number of vaccine doses, stratified by age. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 7785 women (mean age 27.5 years, SD 2.3). Overall, 391 (5.0%) were vaccinated with ≥1 dose and 893 (11.5%) had abnormal cytology. Women receiving at least one vaccine dose were significantly less likely to have an abnormal cytology (adjusted odds ratio 0.52; 95% confidence interval 0.34-0.79). Similar results were observed for women receiving a single dose, for both bivalent and quadrivalent vaccines, and applying buffer periods (excluding cytological outcomes within 1 month, 6 months and 1 year of the first dose). CONCLUSIONS: In the context of an organised cervical screening programme in Italy, catch-up HPV vaccination almost halved the risk of cytological abnormalities. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Among Ferrara women, vaccination against human papillomavirus halved the risk of screening cervical abnormalities.

Modeling suggests that climate change mitigation actions can have substantial human health benefits that accrue quickly and locally. Documenting the benefits can help drive more ambitious and health-protective climate change mitigation actions; however, documenting the adverse health effects can help to avoid them. Estimating the health effects of mitigation (HEM) actions can help policy makers prioritize investments based not only on mitigation potential but also on expected health benefits. To date, however, the wide range of incompatible approaches taken to developing and reporting HEM estimates has limited their comparability and usefulness to policymakers.

Background: Various retrospective studies have reported on the increase of mortality risk due to higher diurnal temperature range (DTR). This study projects the effect of DTR on future mortality across 445 communities in 20 countries and regions. Methods: DTR-related mortality risk was estimated on the basis of the historical daily time-series of mortality and weather factors from Jan 1, 1985, to Dec 31, 2015, with data for 445 communities across 20 countries and regions, from the Multi-Country Multi-City Collaborative Research Network. We obtained daily projected temperature series associated with four climate change scenarios, using the four representative concentration pathways (RCPs) described by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, from the lowest to the highest emission scenarios (RCP 2.6, RCP 4.5, RCP 6.0, and RCP 8.5). Excess deaths attributable to the DTR during the current (1985–2015) and future (2020–99) periods were projected using daily DTR series under the four scenarios. Future excess deaths were calculated on the basis of assumptions that warmer long-term average temperatures affect or do not affect the DTR-related mortality risk. Findings: The time-series analyses results showed that DTR was associated with excess mortality. Under the unmitigated climate change scenario (RCP 8.5), the future average DTR is projected to increase in most countries and regions (by −0·4 to 1·6°C), particularly in the USA, south-central Europe, Mexico, and South Africa. The excess deaths currently attributable to DTR were estimated to be 0·2–7·4%. Furthermore, the DTR-related mortality risk increased as the long-term average temperature increased; in the linear mixed model with the assumption of an interactive effect with long-term average temperature, we estimated 0·05% additional DTR mortality risk per 1°C increase in average temperature. Based on the interaction with long-term average temperature, the DTR-related excess deaths are projected to incre

BACKGROUND: Modeling suggests that climate change mitigation actions can have substantial human health benefits that accrue quickly and locally. Documenting the benefits can help drive more ambitious and health-protective climate change mitigation actions; however, documenting the adverse health effects can help to avoid them. Estimating the health effects of mitigation (HEM) actions can help policy makers prioritize investments based not only on mitigation potential but also on expected health benefits. To date, however, the wide range of incompatible approaches taken to developing and reporting HEM estimates has limited their comparability and usefulness to policymakers. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this effort was to generate guidance for modeling studies on scoping, estimating, and reporting population health effects from climate change mitigation actions. METHODS: An expert panel of HEM researchers was recruited to participate in developing guidance for conducting HEM studies. The primary literature and a synthesis of HEM studies were provided to the panel. Panel members then participated in a modified Delphi exercise to identify areas of consensus regarding HEM estimation. Finally, the panel met to review and discuss consensus findings, resolve remaining differences, and generate guidance regarding conducting HEM studies. RESULTS: The panel generated a checklist of recommendations regarding stakeholder engagement: HEM modeling, including model structure, scope and scale, demographics, time horizons, counterfactuals, health response functions, and metrics; parameterization and reporting; approaches to uncertainty and sensitivity analysis; accounting for policy uptake; and discounting. DISCUSSION: This checklist provides guidance for conducting and reporting HEM estimates to make them more comparable and useful for policymakers. Harmonization of HEM estimates has the potential to lead to advances in and improved synthesis of policy-relevant research that can info

Background: Modeling suggests that climate change mitigation actions can have substantial human health benefits that accrue quickly and locally. Documenting the benefits can help drive more ambitious and health-protective climate change mitigation actions; however, documenting the adverse health effects can help to avoid them. Estimating the health effects of mitigation (HEM) actions can help policy makers prioritize investments based not only on mitigation potential but also on expected health benefits. To date, however, the wide range of incompatible approaches taken to developing and reporting HEM estimates has limited their comparability and usefulness to policymakers. Objective: The objective of this effort was to generate guidance for modeling studies on scoping, estimating, and reporting population health effects from climate change mitigation actions. Methods: An expert panel of HEM researchers was recruited to participate in developing guidance for conducting HEM studies. The primary literature and a synthesis of HEM studies were provided to the panel. Panel members then participated in a modified Delphi exercise to identify areas of consensus regarding HEM estimation. Finally, the panel met to review and discuss consensus findings, resolve remaining differences, and generate guidance regarding conducting HEM studies. Results: The panel generated a checklist of recommendations regarding stakeholder engagement: HEM modeling, including model structure, scope and scale, demographics, time horizons, counterfactuals, health response functions, and metrics; parameterization and reporting; approaches to uncertainty and sensitivity analysis; accounting for policy uptake; and discounting. Discussion: This checklist provides guidance for conducting and reporting HEM estimates to make them more comparable and useful for policymakers. Harmonization of HEM estimates has the potential to lead to advances in and improved synthesis of policy-relevant research that can info

An increase in the global health burden of temperature was projected for 459 locations in 28 countries worldwide under four representative concentration pathway scenarios until 2099. We determined that the amount of temperature increase for each 100 ppm increase in global CO2 concentrations is nearly constant, regardless of climate scenarios. The overall average temperature increase during 2010–2099 is largest in Canada (1.16 °C/100 ppm) and Finland (1.14 °C/100 ppm), while it is smallest in Ireland (0.62 °C/100 ppm) and Argentina (0.63 °C/100 ppm). In addition, for each 1 °C temperature increase, the amount of excess mortality is increased largely in tropical countries such as Vietnam (10.34%p/°C) and the Philippines (8.18%p/°C), while it is decreased in Ireland (−0.92%p/°C) and Australia (−0.32%p/°C). To understand the regional variability in temperature increase and mortality, we performed a regression-based modeling. We observed that the projected temperature increase is highly correlated with daily temperature range at the location and vulnerability to temperature increase is affected by health expenditure, and proportions of obese and elderly population.

The Paris Agreement binds all nations to undertake ambitious efforts to combat climate change, with the commitment to “hold warming well below 2 °C in global mean temperature (GMT), relative to pre-industrial levels, and to pursue efforts to limit warming to 1.5 °C”. The 1.5 °C limit constitutes an ambitious goal for which greater evidence on its benefits for health would help guide policy and potentially increase the motivation for action. Here we contribute to this gap with an assessment on the potential health benefits, in terms of reductions in temperature-related mortality, derived from the compliance to the agreed temperature targets, compared to more extreme warming scenarios. We performed a multi-region analysis in 451 locations in 23 countries with different climate zones, and evaluated changes in heat and cold-related mortality under scenarios consistent with the Paris Agreement targets (1.5 and 2 °C) and more extreme GMT increases (3 and 4 °C), and under the assumption of no changes in demographic distribution and vulnerability. Our results suggest that limiting warming below 2 °C could prevent large increases in temperature-related mortality in most regions worldwide. The comparison between 1.5 and 2 °C is more complex and characterized by higher uncertainty, with geographical differences that indicate potential benefits limited to areas located in warmer climates, where direct climate change impacts will be more discernible.

© 2018 Guo et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. Background: Heatwaves are a critical public health problem. There will be an increase in the frequency and severity of heatwaves under changing climate. However, evidence about the impacts of climate change on heatwave-related mortality at a global scale is limited. Methods and findings: We collected historical daily time series of mean temperature and mortality for all causes or nonexternal causes, in periods ranging from January 1, 1984, to December 31, 2015, in 412 communities within 20 countries/regions. We estimated heatwave–mortality associations through a two-stage time series design. Current and future daily mean temperature series were projected under four scenarios of greenhouse gas emissions from 1971–2099, with five general circulation models. We projected excess mortality in relation to heatwaves in the future under each scenario of greenhouse gas emissions, with two assumptions for adaptation (no adaptation and hypothetical adaptation) and three scenarios of population change (high variant, median variant, and low variant). Results show that, if there is no adaptation, heatwave-related excess mortality is expected to increase the most in tropical and subtropical countries/regions (close to the equator), while European countries and the United States will have smaller percent increases in heatwave-related excess mortality. The higher the population variant and the greenhouse gas emissions, the higher the increase of heatwave-related excess mortality in the future. The changes in 2031–2080 compared with 1971–2020 range from approximately 2,000% in Colombia to 150% in Moldova under the highest emission scenario and high-variant population scenario, without any adaptation. If we considered hypothetical adaptation to future climate, under high-variant population scenario and all scenarios of greenhouse gas emissions, the heatwave-related excess mortality is expected to still increase across all

Background: Climate change can directly affect human health by varying exposure to non-optimal outdoor temperature. However, evidence on this direct impact at a global scale is limited, mainly due to issues in modelling and projecting complex and highly heterogeneous epidemiological relationships across different populations and climates. Methods: We collected observed daily time series of mean temperature and mortality counts for all causes or non-external causes only, in periods ranging from Jan 1, 1984, to Dec 31, 2015, from various locations across the globe through the Multi-Country Multi-City Collaborative Research Network. We estimated temperature–mortality relationships through a two-stage time series design. We generated current and future daily mean temperature series under four scenarios of climate change, determined by varying trajectories of greenhouse gas emissions, using five general circulation models. We projected excess mortality for cold and heat and their net change in 1990–2099 under each scenario of climate change, assuming no adaptation or population changes. Findings: Our dataset comprised 451 locations in 23 countries across nine regions of the world, including 85 879 895 deaths. Results indicate, on average, a net increase in temperature-related excess mortality under high-emission scenarios, although with important geographical differences. In temperate areas such as northern Europe, east Asia, and Australia, the less intense warming and large decrease in cold-related excess would induce a null or marginally negative net effect, with the net change in 2090–99 compared with 2010–19 ranging from −1·2% (empirical 95% CI −3·6 to 1·4) in Australia to −0·1% (−2·1 to 1·6) in east Asia under the highest emission scenario, although the decreasing trends would reverse during the course of the century. Conversely, warmer regions, such as the central and southern parts of America or Europe, and especially southeast Asia, would experience a sh