Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background To provide evidence on the global epidemiological situation of neonatal hypothermia and to provide recommendations for future policy and research directions. Methods Using PubMed as our principal electronic reference library, we searched studies for prevalence and risk factor data on neonatal hypothermia in resource-limited environments globally. Studies specifying study location, setting (hospital or community based), sample size, case definition of body temperature for hypothermia, temperature measurement method, and point estimates for hypothermia prevalence were eligible for inclusion. Results Hypothermia is common in infants born at hospitals (prevalence range, 32% to 85%) and homes (prevalence range, 11% to 92%), even in tropical environments. The lack of thermal protection is still an underappreciated major challenge for newborn survival in developing countries. Although hypothermia is rarely a direct cause of death, it contributes to a substantial proportion of neonatal mortality globally, mostly as a comorbidity of severe neonatal infections, preterm birth, and asphyxia. Thresholds for the definition of hypothermia vary, and data on its prevalence in neonates is scarce, particularly on a community level in Africa. Conclusions A standardized approach to the collection and analysis of hypothermia data in existing newborn programs and studies is needed to inform policy and program planners on optimal thermal protection interventions. Thermoprotective behavior changes such as skin-to-skin care or the use of appropriate devices have not yet been scaled up globally. The introduction of simple hypothermia prevention messages and interventions into evidence-based, cost-effective packages for maternal and newborn care has promising potential to decrease the heavy global burden of newborn deaths attributable to severe infections, prematurity, and asphyxia. Because preventing and treating newborn hypothermia in health institutions and communities is relatively easy, addressing this widespread challenge might play a substantial role in reaching Millennium Development Goal 4, a reduction of child mortality.

Our aim was to calculate the global burden of disease and risk factors for 2001, to examine regional trends from 1990 to 2001, and to provide a starting point for the analysis of the Disease Control Priorities Project (DCPP). We calculated mortality, incidence, prevalence, and disability adjusted life years (DALYs) for 136 diseases and injuries, for seven income/geographic country groups. To assess trends, we re-estimated all-cause mortality for 1990 with the same methods as for 2001. We estimated mortality and disease burden attributable to 19 risk factors. About 56 million people died in 2001. Of these, 10·6 million were children, 99% of whom lived in low-and-middle-income countries. More than half of child deaths in 2001 were attributable to acute respiratory infections, measles, diarrhoea, malaria, and HIV/AIDS. The ten leading diseases for global disease burden were perinatal conditions, lower respiratory infections, ischaemic heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, HIV/AIDS, diarrhoeal diseases, unipolar major depression, malaria, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and tuberculosis. There was a 20% reduction in global disease burden per head due to communicable, maternal, perinatal, and nutritional conditions between 1990 and 2001. Almost half the disease burden in low-and-middle-income countries is now from non-communicable diseases (disease burden per head in Sub-Saharan Africa and the low-and-middle-income countries of Europe and Central Asia increased between 1990 and 2001). Undernutrition remains the leading risk factor for health loss. An estimated 45% of global mortality and 36% of global disease burden are attributable to the joint hazardous effects of the 19 risk factors studied. Uncertainty in all-cause mortality estimates ranged from around 1% in high-income countries to 15–20% in Sub-Saharan Africa. Uncertainty was larger for mortality from specific diseases, and for incidence and prevalence of non-fatal outcomes. Despite uncertainties about mortality and burden of disease estimates, our findings suggest that substantial gains in health have been achieved in most populations, countered by the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Sub-Saharan Africa and setbacks in adult mortality in countries of the former Soviet Union. Our results on major disease, injury, and risk factor causes of loss of health, together with information on the cost-effectiveness of interventions, can assist in accelerating progress towards better health and reducing the persistent differentials in health between poor and rich countries.

The UN will formulate ambitious Sustainable Development Goals for 2030, including one for health. Feasible goals with some quantifiable, measurable targets can influence governments. We propose, as a quantitative health target, “Avoid in each country 40% of premature deaths (under-70 deaths that would be seen in the 2030 population at 2010 death rates), and improve health care at all ages”. Targeting overall mortality and improved health care ignores no modifiable cause of death, nor any cause of disability that is treatable (or also causes many deaths). 40% fewer premature deaths would be important in all countries, but implies very different priorities in different populations. Reinforcing this target for overall mortality in each country are four global subtargets for 2030: avoid two-thirds of child and maternal deaths; two-thirds of tuberculosis, HIV, and malaria deaths; a third of premature deaths from non-communicable diseases (NCDs); and a third of those from other causes (other communicable diseases, undernutrition, and injuries). These challenging subtargets would halve under-50 deaths, avoid a third of the (mainly NCD) deaths at ages 50–69 years, and so avoid 40% of under-70 deaths. To help assess feasibility, we review mortality rates and trends in the 25 most populous countries, in four country income groupings, and worldwide. UN sources yielded overall 1970–2010 mortality trends. WHO sources yielded cause-specific 2000–10 trends, standardised to country-specific 2030 populations; decreases per decade of 42% or 18% would yield 20-year reductions of two-thirds or a third. Throughout the world, except in countries where the effects of HIV or political disturbances predominated, mortality decreased substantially from 1970–2010, particularly in childhood. From 2000–10, under-70 age-standardised mortality rates decreased 19% (with the low-income and lower-middle-income countries having the greatest absolute gains). The proportional decreases per decade (2000–10) were: 34% at ages 0–4 years; 17% at ages 5–49 years; 15% at ages 50–69 years; 30% for communicable, perinatal, maternal, or nutritional causes; 14% for NCDs; and 13% for injuries (accident, suicide, or homicide). Moderate acceleration of the 2000–10 proportional decreases in mortality could be feasible, achieving the targeted 2030 disease-specific reductions of two-thirds or a third. If achieved, these reductions avoid about 10 million of the 20 million deaths at ages 0–49 years that would be seen in 2030 at 2010 death rates, and about 17 million of the 41 million such deaths at ages 0–69 years. Such changes could be achievable by 2030, or soon afterwards, at least in areas free of war, other major effects of political disruption, or a major new epidemic. UK Medical Research Council, Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation, Centre for Global Health Research, and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Systematic analyses of global health trends can provide an accurate narrative of progress and challenges. We analysed the impact of changing age-specific mortality (epidemiology) and age structure (demography) on crude death rates (CDRs) and causes of death with large or rising mortality to inform the third Lancet Commission on Investing in Health. Data from the World Population Prospects 2024 and Global Health Estimates 2021 were used to assess epidemiological and demographic trends, including CDR (defined as the total number of deaths divided by the total mid-year population, reported per 1000 population), all-cause age-specific mortality rates for 1970–2050, and selected cause-specific mortality rates from 2000–19. We excluded data for 2020–23 to avoid effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. For estimating decadal changes in cause-specific mortality rates, we combined the estimates into the following age groups: 0–14, 15–49, 50–69, and 70 years and older. Mortality rates declined substantially across age groups in most regions, with rapid improvements observed in recent decades. Between the 2000s (ie, 2000–10) and 2010s (ie, 2010–19), the mortality decline accelerated in China, central and eastern Europe, India, and Latin America and the Caribbean in ages 0–14 years and 15–49 years, but decelerated in the north Atlantic, the USA, and western Pacific and southeast Asia. For ages 50–69 years, mortality decline decelerated in all regions except sub-Saharan Africa. The USA experienced not only deceleration but increase in mortality rates in those aged 15–49 years and 50–69 years. Globally, the lowest CDR was reported in 2019. In the past, CDR has declined primarily because of decreasing age-specific mortality rates. Future trends suggest that changing population age structure will drive a large increase in CDR. Age-specific mortality rates from major diseases declined once population changes were accounted for. The exception was diabetes, with accelerating increase in age-specific death rates in all regions, with especially high rates in central and eastern Europe and India. There is reason for optimism regarding global health progress, but disparities and emerging challenges persist. Falling age-specific mortality rates show progress; however, rapid ageing brings new challenges. Slowing mortality declines in some regions require enhanced efforts. Rising mortality among middle-aged Americans emphasises that continuous improvements require concerted efforts. Key recommendations include prioritising interventions to address specific health challenges and adapting health-care systems to demographic transitions. The Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

The need for timely and reliable information about global health resource flows to low-income and middle-income countries is widely recognised. We aimed to provide a comprehensive assessment of development assistance for health (DAH) from 1990 to 2007. We defined DAH as all flows for health from public and private institutions whose primary purpose is to provide development assistance to low-income and middle-income countries. We used several data sources to measure the yearly volume of DAH in 2007 US$, and created an integrated project database to examine the composition of this assistance by recipient country. DAH grew from $5·6 billion in 1990 to $21·8 billion in 2007. The proportion of DAH channelled via UN agencies and development banks decreased from 1990 to 2007, whereas the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI), and non-governmental organisations became the conduit for an increasing share of DAH. DAH has risen sharply since 2002 because of increases in public funding, especially from the USA, and on the private side, from increased philanthropic donations and in-kind contributions from corporate donors. Of the $14·5 billion DAH in 2007 for which project-level information was available, $5·1 billion was for HIV/AIDS, compared with $0·7 billion for tuberculosis, $0·8 billion for malaria, and $0·9 billion for health-sector support. Total DAH received by low-income and middle-income countries was positively correlated with burden of disease, whereas per head DAH was negatively correlated with per head gross domestic product. This study documents the substantial rise of resources for global health in recent years. Although the rise in DAH has resulted in increased funds for HIV/AIDS, other areas of global health have also expanded. The influx of funds has been accompanied by major changes in the institutional landscape of global health, with global health initiatives such as the Global Fund and GAVI having a central role in mobilising and channelling global health funds. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Although death in old age is unavoidable, premature death—defined here as death before age 70 years—is not. To assess whether halving premature mortality by 2050 is feasible, we examined the large variation in premature death rates before age 70 years and trends over the past 50 years (1970–2019), covering ten world regions and the 30 most-populous nations. This analysis was undertaken in conjunction with the third report of The Lancet Commission on Investing in Health: Global Health 2050: the path to halving premature death by mid-century. In this cross-country analysis of past mortality trends and future directions, all analyses on the probability of premature death (PPD) were conducted using life tables from the UN World Population Prospects 2024. For each sex, country, and year, probability of death was calculated from these life tables with 1-year age-specific mortality rates. Globally, PPD decreased from 56% in 1970 to 31% in 2019, although some countries saw reversals because of conflict, social instability, or HIV and AIDS. Child mortality has decreased faster than adult mortality. Among all countries, 34 halved their PPD over three decades between 1970 and 2019. Among the 30 most-populous countries, seven countries, with varying levels of baseline PPD and income, halved their PPD in the past half century. Seven of the most-populous countries had average annual rates of improvement in the period 2010–19 that, if sustained, could lead to a halving of PPD by 2050, including Korea (3·9%), Bangladesh (2·8%), Russia (2·7%), Ethiopia (2·4%), Iran (2·4%), South Africa (2·4%), and Türkiye (2·3%). Halving premature death by 2050 is feasible, although substantial investments in child and adult health are needed to sustain or accelerate the rate of improvement for high-performing and medium-performing countries. Particular attention must be paid to countries with very low or a worsening rate of improvement in PPD. By reducing premature mortality, more people will live longer and more healthy lives. However, as people live longer, the absolute number of years lived with chronic disease will increase and investments in services reducing chronic disease morbidity are needed. The Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and a Norwegian Research Council Centre of Excellence grant.

Both CIH reports called for a reorientation of health aid toward “global functions”—activities with cross-national benefits, such as product development for neglected diseases and pandemic preparedness. [...]human and budgetary resources intended for managing conditions such as TB and HIV were redirected to COVID-19 testing and treatment [14]. [...]international travel restrictions and regional COVID-19 outbreaks led to temporary interruptions in supply chains for drugs, vaccines, and other health commodities [15]. [...]specific experiences at country and regional levels will vary from the global average, depending on the local impact of (1) the level of disruption to health services; (2) COVID-19 containment policies; (3) the application of new technologies (e.g., COVID-19 vaccines); (4) the country’s economic recovery; and (5) the political commitment to public sector spending on health, which could allow many countries to get back on track or even exceed pre-pandemic progress [20].

Pneumonia and pneumococcal disease cause a large disease burden in resource-constrained settings. We pursue an extended cost-effectiveness analysis (ECEA) of two fully publicly financed interventions in Ethiopia: pneumococcal vaccination for newborns and pneumonia treatment for under-five children in Ethiopia. We apply ECEA methods and estimate the program impact on: (1) government program costs; (2) pneumonia and pneumococcal deaths averted; (3) household expenses related to pneumonia/pneumococcal disease treatment averted; (4) prevention of household medical impoverishment measured by an imputed money-metric value of financial risk protection; and (5) distributional consequences across the wealth strata of the country population. Available epidemiological and cost data from Ethiopia are applied and the two interventions are assessed separately at various incremental coverage levels. Scaling-up pneumococcal vaccines at around 40% coverage would cost about $11.5 million and avert about 2090 child deaths annually, while a 10% increase of pneumonia treatment to all children under 5 years of age would cost about $13.9 million and avert 2610 deaths annually. Health benefits of the two interventions publicly financed would be concentrated among the bottom income quintile, where 30-40% of all deaths averted would be expected to occur in the poorest quintile. In sum, the two interventions would eliminate a total of $2.4 million of private household expenditures annually, where the richest quintile benefits from around 30% of the total private expenditures averted. The financial risk protection benefits would be largely concentrated among the bottom income quintile. The results are most sensitive to variations in vaccine price, population size, number of deaths due to pneumonia, efficacy of interventions and out-of-pocket copayment share. Vaccine and treatment interventions for children, as shown with the illustrative examples of pneumococcal vaccine and pneumonia treatment, can bring large health and financial benefits to households in Ethiopia, most particularly among the poorest socio-economic groups.

The slow global response to the Ebola crisis in west Africa suggests that important gaps exist in donor financing for key global functions, such as support for health research and development for diseases of poverty and strengthening of outbreak preparedness. In this Health Policy, we use the International Development Statistics databases to quantify donor support for such functions. We classify donor funding for health into aid for global functions (provision of global public goods, management of cross-border externalities, and fostering of leadership and stewardship) versus country-specific aid. We use a new measure of donor funding that combines official development assistance (ODA) for health with additional donor spending on research and development (R&D) for diseases of poverty. Much R&D spending falls outside ODA—ie, the assistance that is conventionally reported through ODA databases of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. This expanded definition, which we term health ODA plus, provides a more comprehensive picture of donor support for health that could reshape how policy makers will approach their support for global health.