Explore the vast range of titles available.

In the past 15 years, Brazil has undergone notable social and public health changes, including a large reduction in child mortality. The Bolsa Familia Programme (BFP) is a widespread conditional cash transfer programme, launched in 2003, which transfers cash to poor households (maximum income US$70 per person a month) when they comply with conditions related to health and education. Transfers range from $18 to $175 per month, depending on the income and composition of the family. We aimed to assess the effect of the BFP on deaths of children younger than 5 years (under-5), overall and resulting from specific causes associated with poverty: malnutrition, diarrhoea, and lower respiratory infections. The study had a mixed ecological design. It covered the period from 2004–09 and included 2853 (of 5565) municipalities with death and livebirth statistics of adequate quality. We used government sources to calculate all-cause under-5 mortality rates and under-5 mortality rates for selected causes. BFP coverage was classified as low (0·0–17·1%), intermediate (17·2–32·0%), high (>32·0%), or consolidated (>32·0% and target population coverage ≥100% for at least 4 years). We did multivariable regression analyses of panel data with fixed-effects negative binomial models, adjusted for relevant social and economic covariates, and for the effect of the largest primary health-care scheme in the country (Family Health Programme). Under-5 mortality rate, overall and resulting from poverty-related causes, decreased as BFP coverage increased. The rate ratios (RR) for the effect of the BFP on overall under-5 mortality rate were 0·94 (95% CI 0·92–0·96) for intermediate coverage, 0·88 (0·85–0·91) for high coverage, and 0·83 (0·79–0·88) for consolidated coverage. The effect of consolidated BFP coverage was highest on under-5 mortality resulting from malnutrition (RR 0·35; 95% CI 0·24–0·50) and diarrhoea (0·47; 0·37–0·61). A conditional cash transfer programme can greatly contribute to a decrease in childhood mortality overall, and in particular for deaths attributable to poverty-related causes such as malnutrition and diarrhoea, in a large middle-income country such as Brazil. National Institutes of Science and Technology Programme, Ministry of Science and Technology, and Council for Scientific and Technological Development Programme (CNPq), Brazil.

This study delves into the global evolution of 43 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) indicators, spanning 7 major health themes across 185 countries to evaluate the potential progress loss due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Both the cross-country and temporal variability of the dataset are employed to estimate an empirical model based on an extended version of the Preston curve, which links well-being to income levels and other key socioeconomic health determinants. The approach reveals significant global evolution trends operating in each SDG indicator assessed. We extrapolate the model yearly between 2020 and 2030 using the IMF’s pre-COVID-19 economic growth projections to show how each country in the dataset are expected to evolve in these health topics throughout the decade, assuming no other external shocks. The results of this baseline scenario are contrasted with a post-COVID-19 scenario, where most of the pandemic costs were already known. The study reveals that economic growth losses are, on average, estimated as 42% and 28% for low- and lower middle-income countries, and of 15% and 7% in high- and upper middle-income countries, respectively, according to the IMF’s projections. These disproportional figures are shown to exacerbate global health inequalities revealed by the curves. The expected progress loss in infectious diseases in low-income countries, for instance, is an average of 34%, against a mean of 6% in high-income countries. The theme of Infectious diseases is followed by injuries and violence; maternal and reproductive health; health systems coverage; and neonatal and infant health as those with worse performance. Low-income countries can expect an average progress loss of 16% across all health indicators assessed, whereas in high-income countries the estimated loss is as low as 3%. The disparity across countries is even more pronounced, with cases where the estimated progress loss is as high as nine times worse than the average loss of 8%. Conversely, countries with greater fiscal capacity are likely to fare much better under the circumstances, despite their worse death count, in many cases. Overall, these findings support the critical importance of integrating the fight against inequalities into the global development agendas.

Background This study aims to assess the interactive effects of Brazilian public interventions, environmental health programs (access to water, sanitation and solid waste collection) and a Conditional Cash Transfer Program (PBF), on the mortality reduction due to diarrhea and malnutrition among children under 5 years old. Methods The study design is ecological, with longitudinal analysis in a balanced panel. The period covered is 2006 to 2016, including 3467 municipalities from all regions of the country, which resulted in 38,137 observations. The generalized linear models were adjusted considering the Negative Binomial (NB) distribution for the number of deaths due to malnutrition and diarrhea, with fixed effects. NB models with and without zero-inflation were assessed. Subsequent interaction models were applied to assess the combined effects of the two public policies. Results In relation to the decline of mortality rates due to diarrhea in the municipalities, positive effect modification were observed in the presence of: high coverage of the target population by the PBF and access to water, 0.54 (0.28–1.04) / 0.55 (0.29–1.04); high coverage by the total population by the PBF and access to water, 0.97 (0.95–1.00) and high coverage by the total population by the PBF and access to sanitation, 0.98 (0.97–1.00). Decline on diarrhea mortality was also observed in the joint presence of high coverage of solid waste collection and access to water, categories 1 (> 60% ≤85%): 0.98 (0.96–1.00), 0.98 (0.97–1, 00) and 2 (> 85% ≤ 100%): 0.97 (0.95–0.98), 0.97 (0.95–0.99). Negative effect modification were observed for mortality due to malnutrition in the presence of simultaneous high coverage of the total population by the PBF and access to sanitation categories 1 (≥ 20 < 50%): 1.0061 (0.9991–1.0132) and 2 (≥ 50 < 100%): 1.0073 (1.0002–1.0145) and high coverage of the total population by the PBF and solid waste collection, 1.0004 (1.0002–1.0005), resulting in malnutrition mortality rates increase. Conclusion Implementation of environmental health services and the coverage expansion by the PBF may enhance the prevention of early deaths in children under 5 years old due to diarrhea, a poverty related disease.

Background This study delves into the States’ accountability for health-related Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicators from 2016 to 2020. An analysis of Voluntary National Reviews (VNR) is employed as an instrument to scrutinize the alignment of States’ indicators with the global indicator framework, shedding light on global health governance within the context of the 2030 Agenda and States’ strategic prioritization. A curation of 60 health-related indicators from 195 VNRs, produced during the aforementioned period, is organized into thematic groups. Results Our results highlight a concerning discrepancy in the reporting frequency of various health-related themes. The findings reveal a paradoxical coexistence characterized by the concurrent strengthening and diminution of the global health governance articulated in the Agenda’s global health governance. This manifests in the increased utilization and consistency of health-related indicators over the study years, coupled with an emphasis on infectious diseases and child and maternal health indicators. Conversely, a discernible governance decline is evidenced by the inadequate representation of health-related indicators in VNRs, notably within the domains of universal health coverage and health system indicators. Furthermore, High-Income States exhibit diminished accountability. Conclusions The VNRs unveil a paradox wherein burgeoning technical capacity coexists with governance deficits, a phenomenon attributable to both statistical capabilities and political preferences. The prevalent use of proxy indicators in VNRs oversimplifies the presentation of official indicators, thereby compromising the aspirational goal of pioneering statistical innovations for measuring intricate issues in the SDGs. In light of our conceptualization of the 2030 Agenda’s global health as a regime complex governance, we advocate for comprehensive investigations into each health regime cluster. This approach aims to unravel disputes, discern patterns, and elucidate States’ preferences concerning specific thematic areas. Functioning as an accountability mechanism for the Agenda’s governance, VNRs underscore States’ adaptability and short-term learning capabilities, offering valuable insights for identifying harmful goal prioritization. The discretionary nature of indicator selection by States in the VNRs, enabled by the Agenda’s proposition of a contextual adaptation of the SDGs and a blind eye to the guideline’s request to review all SDG indicators, highlights a critical flaw in the VNR as an accountability mechanism.

Governmental measures aiming at social protection, with components of disease control, have potential positive impacts in the nutritional and health outcomes of the beneficiaries. The concomitant presence of these measures with environmental sanitation interventions may increase their positive effect. The context of simultaneous improvement of social protection and environmental sanitation is found in Brazil since 2007 and an assessment of the combined effects of both programs has not been performed so far. To evaluate whether interaction effects between improvement of access to water, sanitation and solid waste collection with the Bolsa Família Program [PBF] were related to better responses in the reduction of morbidity due to diarrhea and malnutrition in children less than five years of age, acknowledging the positive results of these improved conditions and the PBF separately in coping with these diseases. Descriptive and inferential analyses were performed through Generalized Linear Models of the Negative Binomial type of fixed effects, with and without addition of zeros. Interaction models were inserted in order to evaluate the outcomes when the two public policies of interest in the current study were present simultaneously in the municipalities. Interaction with negative effect when a concomitantly high municipal coverage of the Bolsa Família Program and adequate access to sanitation and solid waste collection were present. In contrast, regardless of municipal coverage by the PBF, the simultaneous presence of water and sanitation (0.028% / 0.019%); water and solid waste collection (0.033% / 0.014%); sanitation and solid waste collection (0.018% / 0.021%), all resulted in a positive effect, with a decrease in the average morbidity rates for both diseases. Investments aimed at universalizing water, sanitation and solid waste collection services should be priorities, aiming at reducing the incidence of morbidity due to malnutrition and diarrhea and preventing deaths from these poverty-related diseases.

The preliminary assessments of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic have recently rekindled worries about the feasibility of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Notwithstanding the concern voiced by key academic and political actors, the actual evidence on the current gaps and distance from the goals is still very much unknown. This study estimates the global evolution curves for each health-related SDGs indicator in the World Health Organization’s SDGs platform. These curves synthesize the transnational trends at play in the evolution of each health-related topic, offering an average global counterfactual to compare with the actual information for each country. The empirical investigation focuses on the American continent, highlighting the health gaps before the COVID-19 outbreak in 33 countries of the region. The study also extrapolates these trends to predict the evolution of the health-related SDGs in each of these countries over the next decade using as the baseline scenario the International Monetary Fund’s economic forecasts. The results show a widening gap in the region, associated with the differential economic capacity of these countries. Some bottlenecks are shared by most countries in the continent, especially in the themes of violence and infectious diseases. The latter is likely to improve faster than other health themes in the next decade, whereas improvements in the theme non-communicable diseases can be more challenging. The findings provide much needed comparative evidence to guide the countries in the region to set priorities and concentrate efforts to accelerate progress in the health-related SDGs.

Background The Municipal Sustainable Development Health Index (MSDHI) was developed to monitor achieving health-related targets outlined in the 2030 Agenda. This study aims to support effective, comprehensive, and context-sensitive policy formulation at the local level by developing a local index that accounts for regional health inequalities. The study addresses critical gaps in existing health equity assessments at the municipal level, where disparities exist in health outcomes due to regional inequalities. Methods This article presents a methodological framework for calculating the index, based on secondary administrative data from various public information systems in Brazil. The MSDHI was estimated for all 5,570 Brazilian municipalities for the period from 2018 to 2022. Its construction followed a systematic eight-step procedure, ensuring consistency and reliability of the results. The municipal index combines multiple health-related indicators: values equal to 1 indicate the best national results, whereas values close to 0 indicate a greater distance from the best outcomes. The same interpretation applies to the thematic indexes: (1) Reproductive and maternal health, (2) Newborn and child health, (3) Infectious diseases, (4) non-communicable diseases, (5) Injuries and violence, (6) Environmental risks, and (7) Universal health coverage and health systems. The results of the MSDHI and its thematic indexes were classified in three tiers: Tier 1 (0 to 0.40) - insufficient; Tier 2 (0.41 to 0.69) - moderated; and Tier 3 (0.70 to 1.00) - adequate. Results The construct evaluation indicated positive correlations with life expectancy, HDI-M, IDB, and GDP, and a negative correlation with mortality rate. However, the magnitude of the correlations was low, suggesting that the MSDHI may be capturing additional dimensions beyond those reflected in the selected indicators. An applicability assessment was performed for the municipalities of the State of Minas Gerais, Brazil, indicating that the municipal index and the thematic indexes can identify sustainable health scenarios and highlight areas of inequality. Conclusions The MSDHI is a valuable tool for local governments and policymakers to effectively implement the 2030 Agenda. Future studies should focus on developing an annual index and integrating the MSDHI into policy prioritization methods.

To examine the association between Brazil's Bolsa Familia programme (BFP), which is the world's largest conditional cash transfer programme, and the anthropometric indicators of nutritional status in children. Using the opportunity provided by vaccination campaigns, the Brazilian government promotes Health and Nutrition Days to estimate the prevalence of anthropometric deficits in children. Data collected in 2005-2006 for 22 375 impoverished children under 5 years of age were employed to estimate nutritional outcomes among recipients of Bolsa Família. All variables under study, namely child birth weight, lack of birth certificate, educational level and gender of family head, access to piped water and electricity, height for age, weight for age and weight for height, were converted into binary variables for regression analysis. Children from families exposed to the BFP were 26% more likely to have normal height for age than those from non-exposed families; this difference also applied to weight for age. No statistically significant deficit in weight for height was found. Stratification by age group revealed 19% and 41% higher odds of having normal height for age at 12-35 and 36-59 months of age, respectively, in children receiving Bolsa Familia, and no difference at 0-11 months of age. The BFP can lead to better nutritional outcomes in children 12 to 59 months of age. Longitudinal studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Background Measuring the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) has been the key to verifying the evolution of health indicators worldwide. We analyse subnational GBD data for Brazil in order to monitor the performance of the Brazilian states in the last 28 years on their progress towards meeting the health-related SDGs. Methods As part of the GBD study, we assessed the 41 health-related indicators from the SDGs in Brazil at the subnational level for all the 26 Brazilian states and the Federal District from 1990 to 2017. The GBD group has rescaled all worldwide indicators from 0 to 100, assuming that for each one of them, the worst value among all countries and overtime is 0, and the best is 100. They also estimate the overall health-related SDG index as a function of all previously estimated health indicators and the SDI index (Socio-Demographic Index) as a function of per capita income, average schooling in the population aged 15 years or over, and total fertility rate under the age of 25 (TFU25). Results From 1990 to 2017, most subnational health-related SDGs, the SDG and SDI indexes improved considerable in most Brazilian states. The observed differences in SDG indicators within Brazilian states, including HIV incidence and health worker density, increased over time. In 2017, health-related indicators that achieved good results globally included the prevalence of child wasting, NTD, household air pollution, conflict mortality, skilled birth attendance, use of modern contraceptive methods, vaccine coverage, and health worker density, but poor results were observed for child overweight and homicide rates. The high rates of overweight, alcohol consumption, and smoking prevalence found in the historically richest regions (i.e., the South and Southeast), contrast with the high rates of tuberculosis, maternal, neonatal, and under-5 mortality and WASH-related mortality found in the poorer regions (i.e., the North and Northeast). Conclusions The majority of Brazil’s health-related SDG indicators have substantially improved over the past 28 years. However, inequalities in health among the Brazilian states and regions remain noticeable negatively affecting the Brazilian population, which can contribute to Brazil not achieving the SDG 2030 targets.

Background Litigation for health care, also known as health judicialization, is frequent in Brazil. It involves recourse to the court system to access health services. The study aimed to evaluate whether cancer patients in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil, increased their overall survival by increasing access to certain drugs or treatments through litigation, controlling for the effect of demographic and disease-related variables. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients with breast, prostate, brain, lung, or colon cancers from 2014 to 2019 were included. Survival analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Results In the multivariate analysis, litigation was significantly associated with increased survival in cancers of breast (HR = 0.51, 95%CI 0.33–0.80), prostate (HR = 0.50, 95%CI 0.30–0.85), colon (HR = 0.59, 95%CI 0.38–0.93), and lung (HR = 0.36, 95%CI 0.22–0.60). Five-year survival rates of patients who sued for treatment were 97.8%, 88.7%, 59.3%, and 26.0%, compared to median survival of 95.7%, 78.7%, 41.2%, and 2.4%, respectively, among patient that did not resort to court action. The study suggests that litigation for access to cancer treatment may represent a step forward in obtaining more effective treatment. This study´s main limitations are the lack of patients´ clinical information for use as control variables and the lack of variables to assess patients´ quality of life. The study also found that many cases involved claims that could have been solved by administrative rather than legal action. Some claims thus reflect the lack of adequate administrative procedures. Conclusion When based on scientific evidence, access to new therapies, combined with other technologies already available, can favor patient survival. Access to new therapies through litigation may increase health inequalities since low-income patients have limited access to legal recourse against the State to meet their needs. The timely approval of new effective therapies can mitigate the judicialization of cancer treatment.