MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052335716 · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(14)61591-9

Avoiding 40% of the premature deaths in each country, 2010–30: review of national mortality trends to help quantify the UN Sustainable Development Goal for health

2014· article· en· W2052335716 on OpenAlexafffund
Ole Frithjof Norheim, Prabhat Jha, Kesetebirhan Admasu, Tore Godal, Ryan J Hum, Margaret E. Kruk, Octavio Gómez‐Dantés, Colin Mathers, Hongchao Pan, Jaime Sepúlveda, Wilson Suraweera, Stéphane Verguet, Addis Tamire Woldemariam, Gavin Yamey, Dean T. Jamison, Richard Peto

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Global Health ResearchSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersMedical Research CouncilDirektoratet for UtviklingssamarbeidUniversity of OxfordBritish Heart FoundationCancer Research UKUniversitetet i BergenLi Ka Shing FoundationUniversity of TorontoWorld Health OrganizationUniversity of WashingtonBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsMedicineMalnutritionEnvironmental healthPopulationMortality rateMalariaCause of deathGlobal healthHealth careChild mortalityDemographyPublic healthEconomic growthDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: 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 quatitative 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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). INTERPRETATION: 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. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council, Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation, Centre for Global Health Research, and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0120.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations292
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe LancetSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207