Background In 2010, overweight and obesity were estimated to cause 3.4 million deaths, 3.9% of years of life lost, and 3.8% of DALYs globally. The rise in obesity has led to widespread calls for regular monitoring of changes in overweight and obesity prevalence in all populations. Comparative, up-to-date information on levels and trends is essential both to quantify population health effects and to prompt decision-makers to prioritize action. Methods We systematically identified surveys, reports, and published studies (n = 1,769) that included information on height and weight, both through physical measurements and self-reports. Mixed effects linear regression was used to correct for the bias in self-reports. Age-sex-country-year observations (n = 19,244) on prevalence of obesity and overweight were synthesized using a spatio-temporal Gaussian Process Regression model to estimate prevalence with 95% uncertainty intervals. Findings Globally, the proportion of adults with a body mass index (BMI) of 25 or greater increased from 28.8% (95% UI: 28.4-29.3) in 1980 to 36.9% (36.3-37.4) in 2013 for men and from 29.8% (29.3-30.2) to 38.0% (37.5-38.5) for women. Increases were observed in both developed and developing countries. There have been substantial increases in prevalence among children and adolescents in developed countries, with 23.8% (22.9-24.7) of boys and 22.6% (21.7-23.6) of girls being either overweight or obese in 2013. The prevalence of overweight and obesity is also rising among children and adolescents in developing countries as well, rising from 8.1% (7.7-8.6) to 12.9% (12.3-13.5) in 2013 for boys and from 8.4% (8.1-8.8) to 13.4% (13.0-13.9) in girls. Among adults, estimated prevalence of obesity exceeds 50% among men in Tonga and women in Kuwait, Kiribati, Federated States of Micronesia, Libya, Qatar, Tonga, and Samoa. Since 2006, the increase in adult obesity in developed countries has stabilized. Interpretation Because of the established health risks and substantial increases in prevalence, obesity has become a major global health challenge. Contrary to other major global risks, there is little evidence of successful population-level intervention strategies to reduce exposure. Not only is obesity increasing, but there are no national success stories over the past 33 years. Urgent global action and leadership is required to assist countries to more effectively intervene.

SummaryBackgroundA key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016.MethodsDrawing from established methods and updated estimates from GBD 2016, we used 32 causes from which death should not occur in the presence of effective care to approximate personal health-care access and quality by location and over time. To better isolate potential effects of personal health-care access and quality from underlying risk factor patterns, we risk-standardised cause-specific deaths due to non-cancers by location-year, replacing the local joint exposure of environmental and behavioural risks with the global level of exposure. Supported by the expansion of cancer registry data in GBD 2016, we used mortality-to-incidence ratios for cancers instead of risk-standardised death rates to provide a stronger signal of the effects of personal health care and access on cancer survival. We transformed each cause to a scale of 0–100, with 0 as the first percentile (worst) observed between 1990 and 2016, and 100 as the 99th percentile (best); we set these thresholds at the country level, and then applied them to subnational locations. We applied a principal components analysis to construct the HAQ Index using all scaled cause values, providing an overall score of 0–100 of personal health-care access and quality by location over time. We then compared HAQ Index levels and trends by quintiles on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary measure of overall development. As derived from the broader GBD study and other data sources, we examined relationships between national HAQ Index scores and potential correlates of performance, such as total health spending per capita.FindingsIn 2016, HAQ Index performance spanned from a high of 97·1 (95% UI 95·8–98·1) in Iceland, followed by 96·6 (94·9–97·9) in Norway and 96·1 (94·5–97·3) in the Netherlands, to values as low as 18·6 (13·1–24·4) in the Central African Republic, 19·0 (14·3–23·7) in Somalia, and 23·4 (20·2–26·8) in Guinea-Bissau. The pace of progress achieved between 1990 and 2016 varied, with markedly faster improvements occurring between 2000 and 2016 for many countries in sub-Saharan Africa and southeast Asia, whereas several countries in Latin America and elsewhere saw progress stagnate after experiencing considerable advances in the HAQ Index between 1990 and 2000. Striking subnational disparities emerged in personal health-care access and quality, with China and India having particularly large gaps between locations with the highest and lowest scores in 2016. In China,...

Background Small island developing states (SIDS) have limited absolute resources for responding to national disasters, including health emergencies. Since the first confirmed case of COVID-19 in the Caribbean on 1st March 2020, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) have been widely used to control the resulting COVID-19 outbreak. We document the variety of government measures introduced across the Caribbean and explore their impact on aspects of outbreak control. Methods Drawing on publically available information, we present confirmed cases and confirmed deaths to describe the extent of the Caribbean outbreak. We document the range of outbreak containment measures implemented by national Governments, focussing on measures to control movement and gatherings. We explore the temporal association of containment measures with the start of the outbreak in each country, and with aggregated information on human movement, using smartphone positioning data. We include a set of comparator countries to provide an international context. Results As of 25th May, the Caribbean reported 18,755 confirmed cases and 631 deaths. There have been broad similarities but also variation in the number, the type, the intensity, and particularly the timing of the NPIs introduced across the Caribbean. On average, Caribbean governments began controlling movement into countries 27 days before their first confirmed case and 23 days before comparator countries. Controls on movement within country were introduced 9 days after the first case and 36 days before comparators. Controls on gatherings were implemented 1 day before the first confirmed case and 30 days before comparators. Confirmed case growth rates and numbers of deaths have remained low across much the Caribbean. Stringent Caribbean curfews and stay-at-home orders coincided with large reductions in community mobility, regularly above 60%, and higher than most international comparator countries. Conclusion Stringent controls to limit movement, and specifically the early timing of those controls has had an important impact on containing the spread of COVID-19 across much of the Caribbean. Very early controls to limit movement into countries may well be particularly effective for small island developing states. With much of the region economically reliant on international tourism, and with steps to open borders now being implemented, it is critical that the region draws on a solid evidence-base to balance the competing demands of economic wellbeing and public health.

Background The Barbados Diabetes Remission Study-2 reported that a low-calorie diet for weight loss and diabetes remission implemented within the community and supported by trained community health advocates was both an acceptable implementation strategy and a clinically effective intervention. This study aimed to examine the adaptability of the face-to-face protocol into an online modality. Methods The Iterative Decision-making for Evaluation of Adaptations (IDEA) framework guides researchers in examining the necessity of the adaptation and the preservation of core intervention elements during the adaptation process. Adaptation outcomes were documented using the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-Based Implementation Strategies (FRAME-IS). Implementation outcome was determined by fidelity to core elements. Intervention effectiveness was determined from the analysis of clinical data. Results We decided that an adaptation was needed as COVID-19 control measures prohibited in-person interactions. The core elements—i.e. 12-week intervention duration, daily 840-kcal allowance, and weekly monitoring of weight and blood glucose—could be preserved during the adaptation process. Adaptations were made to the following: (1) the context in which data were collected—participants self-measured at home instead of following the original implementation strategy which involved being measured by community health advocates (CHA) at a community site; (2) the context in which data were entered—participants posted their measurements to a mobile application site which was accessible by CHAs. As with the original protocol, CHAs then entered the measurements into an online database; (3) the formulation of the low-calorie diet—participants substituted the liquid formulation for a solid meal plan of equivalent caloric content. There was non-inferiority in fidelity to attendance with the online format (97.5% visit rate), as compared to the face-to-face modality (95% visit rate). One participant deviated from the calorie allowances citing difficulty in estimating non-exact portion sizes and financial difficulty in procuring meals. Weight change ranged from − 14.3 to 0.4 kg over the 12-week period, and all group members achieved induction of diabetes remission as determined by a FBG of < 7mmol/l and an A1C of < 6.5%. Conclusion The results suggest that this adapted online protocol—which includes changes to both the implementation strategy and the evidence-based practice—is clinically effective whilst maintaining fidelity to key elements. Utilization of the IDEA and FRAME-IS adaptation frameworks add scientific rigour to the research. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.govNCT03536377. Registered on 24 May 2018

Background. Small island developing states (SIDS) have limited absolute resources for responding to national disasters, including health emergencies. Since the first confirmed case of COVID-19 in the Caribbean on 1st March 2020, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) have been widely used to control the resulting COVID-19 outbreak. We document the variety of government measures introduced across the Caribbean and explore their impact on aspects of outbreak control. Methods. Drawing on publically available information, we present confirmed cases and confirmed deaths to describe the extent of the Caribbean outbreak. We document the range of outbreak containment measures implemented by national Governments, focussing on measures to control movement and gatherings. We explore the temporal association of containment measures with the start of the outbreak in each country, and with aggregated information on human movement, using smartphone positioning data. We include a set of comparator countries to provide an international context. Results. As of 25th May, the Caribbean reported 18,755 confirmed cases and 631 deaths. There have been broad similarities but also variation in the number, the type, the intensity, and particularly the timing of the NPIs introduced across the Caribbean. On average, Caribbean governments began controlling movement into countries 27 days before their first confirmed case and 23 days before comparator countries. Controls on movement within country were introduced 9 days after the first case and 36 days before comparators. Controls on gatherings were implemented 1 day before the first confirmed case and 30 days before comparators. Confirmed case growth rates and numbers of deaths have remained low across much the Caribbean. Stringent Caribbean curfews and stay-at-home orders coincided with large reductions in community mobility, regularly above 60%, and higher than most international comparator countries. Conclusion. Stringent controls to limit movement, and specifically the early timing of those controls has had an important impact on containing the spread of COVID-19 across much of the Caribbean. Very early controls to limit movement into countries may well be particularly effective for small island developing states. With much of the region economically reliant on international tourism, and with steps to open borders now being considered, it is critical that the region draws on a solid evidence-base to balance the competing demands of economics and public health.