ArticleBMC public health2024
Global trends and partial forecast of adverse effects of medical treatment from 1990 to 2019: an epidemiological analysis based on the global burden of disease study 2019.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The epidemiology and socioeconomic associates of adverse effects of medical treatment in the Eastern Mediterranean Region from 1990 to 2021.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Analysis and prediction of subarachnoid hemorrhage burden in global, China, and Japan.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Global trends in smoking-attributable rheumatoid arthritis burden: Insights from GBD 2021.PloS one · 2025Article
- Global burden and trends of adverse effects of medical treatment, 1990-2021: an analysis from the global burden of disease study 2021.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Medical Professionals' Responses to a Patient Safety Incident in Healthcare.International journal of public health · 2024Article
- Exploring the need and potential of ambulatory pharmacy practice for empowering patient and care delivery in India.Frontiers in health services · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe possibility of adverse effects of medical treatment (AEMT) is increasing worldwide, but little is known about AEMT in China. This study analyzed the health burden of AEMT in China in recent years through the Global Burden of Disease Study (GBD) 2019 and compared it with the worldwide average level and those in different sociodemographic index (SDI) regions.
methodsWe calculated the age-standardized rate (ASR) of deaths, disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs), incidence and prevalence attributed to AEMT in China, worldwide and countries with different sociodemographic indices during 1990-2019 using the latest data and methods from the GBD 2019.
resultsFrom 1990 to 2019, the global age-standardized death rate (ASDR), DALYs, and YLLs for AEMT showed a significant downward trend and were negatively associated with the SDI. By 2040, the ASDR is expected to reach approximately 1.58 (95% UI: 1.33-1.80). From 1990 to 2019, there was no significant change in the global incidence of AEMT. The occurrence of AEMT was related to sex, and the incidence of AEMT was greater among females. In addition, the incidence of AEMT-related injuries and burdens, such as ASR of DALYs, ASR of YLLs and ASR of YLDs, was greater among women than among men. Very old and very young people were more likely to be exposed to AEMT.
conclusionsFrom 1990 to 2019, progress was made worldwide in reducing the harm caused by AEMT. However, the incidence and prevalence of AEMT did not change significantly overall during this period. Therefore, the health sector should pay more attention to AEMT and take effective measures to reduce AEMT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.