Explore the vast range of titles available.

Child labor is one of the oldest problems in our society and still an ongoing issue. During the time, child labor evolved from working in agriculture or small handicraft workshops to being forced into work in factories in the urban setting as a result of the industrial revolution. Children were very profitable assets since their pay was very low, were less likely to strike, and were easy to be manipulated. Socioeconomic disparities and lack of access to education are among others contributing to the child labor. Religious and cultural beliefs can be misguiding and concealing in delineating the limits of child labor. Child labor prevents physical, intellectual, and emotional development of children. To date, there is no international agreement to fully enforced child labor. This public health issue demands a multidisciplinary approach from the education of children and their families to development of comprehensive child labor laws and regulations.

Brain and CNS cancers (collectively referred to as CNS cancers) are a source of mortality and morbidity for which diagnosis and treatment require extensive resource allocation and sophisticated diagnostic and therapeutic technology. Previous epidemiological studies are limited to specific geographical regions or time periods, making them difficult to compare on a global scale. In this analysis, we aimed to provide a comparable and comprehensive estimation of the global burden of brain cancer between 1990 and 2016. We report means and 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) for incidence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) estimates for CNS cancers (according to the International Classification of Diseases tenth revision: malignant neoplasm of meninges, malignant neoplasm of brain, and malignant neoplasm of spinal cord, cranial nerves, and other parts of CNS) from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016. Data sources include vital registration and cancer registry data. Mortality was modelled using an ensemble model approach. Incidence was estimated by dividing the final mortality estimates by mortality to incidence ratios. DALYs were estimated by summing years of life lost and years lived with disability. Locations were grouped into quintiles based on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary indicator of income per capita, years of schooling, and total fertility rate. In 2016, there were 330 000 (95% UI 299 000 to 349 000) incident cases of CNS cancer and 227 000 (205 000 to 241 000) deaths globally, and age-standardised incidence rates of CNS cancer increased globally by 17·3% (95% UI 11·4 to 26·9) between 1990 and 2016 (2016 age-standardised incidence rate 4·63 per 100 000 person-years [4·17 to 4·90]). The highest age-standardised incidence rate was in the highest quintile of SDI (6·91 [5·71 to 7·53]). Age-standardised incidence rates increased with each SDI quintile. East Asia was the region with the most incident cases of CNS cancer for both sexes in 2016 (108 000 [95% UI 98 000 to 122 000]), followed by western Europe (49 000 [37 000 to 54 000]), and south Asia (31 000 [29 000 to 37 000]). The top three countries with the highest number of incident cases were China, the USA, and India. CNS cancer was responsible for 7·7 million (95% UI 6·9 to 8·3) DALYs globally, a non-significant change in age-standardised DALY rate of −10·0% (−16·4 to 2·6) between 1990 and 2016. The age-standardised DALY rate decreased in the high SDI quintile (−10·0% [–27·1 to −0·1]) and high-middle SDI quintile (−10·5% [–18·4 to −1·4]) over time but increased in the low SDI quintile (22·5% [11·2 to 50·5]). CNS cancer is responsible for substantial morbidity and mortality worldwide, and incidence increased between 1990 and 2016. Significant geographical and regional variation in the incidence of CNS cancer might be reflective of differences in diagnoses and reporting practices or unknown environmental and genetic risk factors. Future efforts are needed to analyse CNS cancer burden by subtype. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

BackgroundPast research has shown how fires, heat and hot substances are important causes of health loss globally. Detailed estimates of the morbidity and mortality from these injuries could help drive preventative measures and improved access to care.MethodsWe used the Global Burden of Disease 2017 framework to produce three main results. First, we produced results on incidence, prevalence, years lived with disability, deaths, years of life lost and disability-adjusted life years from 1990 to 2017 for 195 countries and territories. Second, we analysed these results to measure mortality-to-incidence ratios by location. Third, we reported the measures above in terms of the cause of fire, heat and hot substances and the types of bodily injuries that result.ResultsGlobally, there were 8 991 468 (7 481 218 to 10 740 897) new fire, heat and hot substance injuries in 2017 with 120 632 (101 630 to 129 383) deaths. At the global level, the age-standardised mortality caused by fire, heat and hot substances significantly declined from 1990 to 2017, but regionally there was variability in age-standardised incidence with some regions experiencing an increase (eg, Southern Latin America) and others experiencing a significant decrease (eg, High-income North America).ConclusionsThe incidence and mortality of injuries that result from fire, heat and hot substances affect every region of the world but are most concentrated in middle and lower income areas. More resources should be invested in measuring these injuries as well as in improving infrastructure, advancing safety measures and ensuring access to care.

It is necessary to investigate, develop and promote architecture and built environment education in order to increase the civic responsibility towards the built environment and to create a functional, sustainable and aesthetic environment. This type of education can and should lay the foundation for social responsibility but for this, we need to make children and young people understand what being responsible mean and that the city is the result of the involvement of all its inhabitants. Forming such citizens that are able to understand the idea that active involvement and prospective thinking is the first step towards a sustainable transformation of society is a complex and lasting process, which is why it has to start from an early age.

IntroductionFalls in older aged adults are an important public health problem. Insight into differences in fall-related injury rates between countries can serve as important input for identifying and evaluating prevention strategies. The objectives of this study were to compare Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 estimates on incidence, mortality and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) due to fall-related injury in older adults across 22 countries in the Western European region and to examine changes over a 28-year period.MethodsWe performed a secondary database descriptive study using the GBD 2017 results on age-standardised fall-related injury in older adults aged 70 years and older in 22 countries from 1990 to 2017.ResultsIn 2017, in the Western European region, 13 840 per 100 000 (uncertainty interval (UI) 11 837–16 113) older adults sought medical treatment for fall-related injury, ranging from 7594 per 100 000 (UI 6326–9032) in Greece to 19 796 per 100 000 (UI 15 536–24 233) in Norway. Since 1990, fall-related injury DALY rates showed little change for the whole region, but patterns varied widely between countries. Some countries (eg, Belgium and Netherlands) have lost their favourable positions due to an increasing fall-related injury burden of disease since 1990.ConclusionsFrom 1990 to 2017, there was considerable variation in fall-related injury incidence, mortality, DALY rates and its composites in the 22 countries in the Western European region. It may be useful to assess which fall prevention measures have been taken in countries that showed continuous low or decreasing incidence, death and DALY rates despite ageing of the population.

Introduction Dementia is currently one of the leading causes of mortality globally, and mortality due to dementia will likely increase in the future along with corresponding increases in population growth and population aging. However, large inconsistencies in coding practices in vital registration systems over time and between countries complicate the estimation of global dementia mortality. Methods We meta‐analyzed the excess risk of death in those with dementia and multiplied these estimates by the proportion of dementia deaths occurring in those with severe, end‐stage disease to calculate the total number of deaths that could be attributed to dementia. Results We estimated that there were 1.62 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI]: 0.41–4.21) deaths globally due to dementia in 2019. More dementia deaths occurred in women (1.06 million [0.27–2.71]) than men (0.56 million [0.14–1.51]), largely but not entirely due to the higher life expectancy in women (age‐standardized female‐to‐male ratio 1.19 [1.10–1.26]). Due to population aging, there was a large increase in all‐age mortality rates from dementia between 1990 and 2019 (100.1% [89.1–117.5]). In 2019, deaths due to dementia ranked seventh globally in all ages and fourth among individuals 70 and older compared to deaths from other diseases estimated in the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study. Discussion Mortality due to dementia represents a substantial global burden, and is expected to continue to grow into the future as an older, aging population expands globally.

Study Objective(s)The impact of pandemic events such as the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic led to an economic crisis worldwide as well as an increase of mental health problems. In the United States, the gaps in the mental health care system struggle to meet the needs of vulnerable populations and have caused a major public health problem. We aim to increase the awareness of health care professionals, psychiatrists, and policy makers regarding failures and gaps in the mental health care system and suggest new ideas to overcome the growing burden of mental disorders.MethodWe utilized data from PubMed, Science Direct, Cochrane, Embase and Clinicaltrials.gov databases to analyze available information on the US mental health system. We included any relevant articles addressing the prevalence of mental diseases, disparities and the gaps for an accessible and affordable mental health system, as well as the psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic.Keywords‘COVID-19’, ‘Coronavirus’, ‘SARS-CoV-2’, ‘mental health’, ‘Health, Mental’ were used.ResultsFollowing scoping review of several studies we noticed that while prevalence of mental health problems in the US varies between states and socio-demographic groups, it is among the top 10 causes of premature death and disability in adults. We noticed that mental health problems are currently one of the costliest public health issues in the healthcare system. Tracking Poll from one of the studies in our scoping review suggested that financial inequities are magnified by the COVID-19 pandemic and that psychological distress was substantially larger among respondents with lower income (33%), Hispanics (28%) and Blacks (26%). Furthermore, in another poll 62% of US population are shown to be anxious due to COVID-19. We observed that the prevalence of reported symptoms of psychological distress among US adults increased when compared to 2018. Common barriers such as failure of accessibility, insufficient funding, insufficient psychiatric beds, limited insurance access and economic burden, clinician shortages, fragmented care, insufficient mental health care policies and insufficient education and awareness about mental illness become more prominent during the COVID-19 pandemic era.ConclusionsThe impact of COVID-19 on mental health is alarming, which affects public health and has made the health care system more vulnerable. Pandemic events not only cause acute negative impact, they also result in long-lasting health problems, isolation and stigma. The COVID-19 pandemic threatens the mental health of the population and its long-term consequences can lead to a secondary pandemic. The outcomes of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health emphasize the need for policies and strategies to support and strengthen a concerted effort to address its burden on the US mental health care system. In addition, it magnifies the need for high quality and well-funded research for future pandemics.

Background Sleep is a naturally reversible process that plays an essential role in human wellbeing. Sleep enables optimal functioning of physical and mental health and contributes to quality of life and safety. There are many individuals among the general public who do not realize they are sleep deficient and are not aware of the effects of sleep deprivation on their health and on the safety of their peers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that drowsy drivers cause between 10 and 30% of all traffic accidents. Purpose Many believe that sleep is a luxury and that by decreasing sleep they can maximize their productivity. In this article, we emphasize that sleep is a necessity and the only way to pay the sleep debt is to sleep. This review article aims to increase awareness of early signs of sleep deficiency, consequences of poor sleep, and proper sleep hygiene for healthcare professionals to influence practice in educating patients about needed changes in sleep behaviors. Conclusions Sleep deficiency not only has side effects on the personal level, but also can cause harm on a larger scale through chronic disease, motor vehicle accidents, and workplace accidents. A better understanding of sleep and its effects encourages a better quality of life and fewer hazardous behaviors. Clinical implications Sleep is an active state of recovery during which the optimal function of all body systems is reinstated. Sleep repairs and prevents occurrence of chronic diseases such as cancer, diabetes, and obesity.

Background Data sparsity is a major limitation to estimating national and global dementia burden. Surveys with full diagnostic evaluations of dementia prevalence are prohibitively resource-intensive in many settings. However, validation samples from nationally representative surveys allow for the development of algorithms for the prediction of dementia prevalence nationally. Methods Using cognitive testing data and data on functional limitations from Wave A (2001–2003) of the ADAMS study ( n  = 744) and the 2000 wave of the HRS study ( n  = 6358) we estimated a two-dimensional item response theory model to calculate cognition and function scores for all individuals over 70. Based on diagnostic information from the formal clinical adjudication in ADAMS, we fit a logistic regression model for the classification of dementia status using cognition and function scores and applied this algorithm to the full HRS sample to calculate dementia prevalence by age and sex. Results Our algorithm had a cross-validated predictive accuracy of 88% (86–90), and an area under the curve of 0.97 (0.97–0.98) in ADAMS. Prevalence was higher in females than males and increased over age, with a prevalence of 4% (3–4) in individuals 70–79, 11% (9–12) in individuals 80–89 years old, and 28% (22–35) in those 90 and older. Conclusions Our model had similar or better accuracy as compared to previously reviewed algorithms for the prediction of dementia prevalence in HRS, while utilizing more flexible methods. These methods could be more easily generalized and utilized to estimate dementia prevalence in other national surveys.

Life can present complex choices that are often in unpredictable situations. Our decisions are subject to multiple factors, some of which are uncontrollable. Preferences are influenced by education, culture, psychosocial environment, and genetic predisposing factors. Morality is a societal balance gained through popular consensus on how individuals should behave. The ethical decisions driven by the behavior should be morally and legally acceptable to the larger community. Discussion on morality raises various challenging questions. What is appropriate and what is inappropriate in the drive of one's actions and behavior? Are there any normative rules to be followed, and, if yes, how can one assess their rightness? This article attempts to explore three philosophical positions on morality: utilitarianism, deontology, and virtues-based ethics in the context of human behavior.