refs.bib

@article{Barber2017,
abstract = {Background National levels of personal health-care access and quality can be approximated by measuring mortality rates from causes that should not be fatal in the presence of effective medical care (ie, amenable mortality). Previous analyses of mortality amenable to health care only focused on high-income countries and faced several methodological challenges. In the present analysis, we use the highly standardised cause of death and risk factor estimates generated through the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) to improve and expand the quantification of personal health-care access and quality for 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2015. Methods We mapped the most widely used list of causes amenable to personal health care developed by Nolte and McKee to 32 GBD causes. We accounted for variations in cause of death certification and misclassifications through the extensive data standardisation processes and redistribution algorithms developed for GBD. To isolate the effects of personal health-care access and quality, we risk-standardised cause-specific mortality rates for each geography-year by removing the joint effects of local environmental and behavioural risks, and adding back the global levels of risk exposure as estimated for GBD 2015. We employed principal component analysis to create a single, interpretable summary measure–the Healthcare Quality and Access (HAQ) Index–on a scale of 0 to 100. The HAQ Index showed strong convergence validity as compared with other health-system indicators, including health expenditure per capita (r=0{\textperiodcentered}88), an index of 11 universal health coverage interventions (r=0{\textperiodcentered}83), and human resources for health per 1000 (r=0{\textperiodcentered}77). We used free disposal hull analysis with bootstrapping to produce a frontier based on the relationship between the HAQ Index and the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a measure of overall development consisting of income per capita, average years of education, and total fertility rates. This frontier allowed us to better quantify the maximum levels of personal health-care access and quality achieved across the development spectrum, and pinpoint geographies where gaps between observed and potential levels have narrowed or widened over time. Findings Between 1990 and 2015, nearly all countries and territories saw their HAQ Index values improve; nonetheless, the difference between the highest and lowest observed HAQ Index was larger in 2015 than in 1990, ranging from 28{\textperiodcentered}6 to 94{\textperiodcentered}6. Of 195 geographies, 167 had statistically significant increases in HAQ Index levels since 1990, with South Korea, Turkey, Peru, China, and the Maldives recording among the largest gains by 2015. Performance on the HAQ Index and individual causes showed distinct patterns by region and level of development, yet substantial heterogeneities emerged for several causes, including cancers in highest-SDI countries; chronic kidney disease, diabetes, diarrhoeal diseases, and lower respiratory infections among middle-SDI countries; and measles and tetanus among lowest-SDI countries. While the global HAQ Index average rose from 40{\textperiodcentered}7 (95{\%} uncertainty interval, 39{\textperiodcentered}0–42{\textperiodcentered}8) in 1990 to 53{\textperiodcentered}7 (52{\textperiodcentered}2–55{\textperiodcentered}4) in 2015, far less progress occurred in narrowing the gap between observed HAQ Index values and maximum levels achieved; at the global level, the difference between the observed and frontier HAQ Index only decreased from 21{\textperiodcentered}2 in 1990 to 20{\textperiodcentered}1 in 2015. If every country and territory had achieved the highest observed HAQ Index by their corresponding level of SDI, the global average would have been 73{\textperiodcentered}8 in 2015. Several countries, particularly in eastern and western sub-Saharan Africa, reached HAQ Index values similar to or beyond their development levels, whereas others, namely in southern sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, and south Asia, lagged behind what geographies of similar development attained between 1990 and 2015. Interpretation This novel extension of the GBD Study shows the untapped potential for personal health-care access and quality improvement across the development spectrum. Amid substantive advances in personal health care at the national level, heterogeneous patterns for individual causes in given countries or territories suggest that few places have consistently achieved optimal health-care access and quality across health-system functions and therapeutic areas. This is especially evident in middle-SDI countries, many of which have recently undergone or are currently experiencing epidemiological transitions. The HAQ Index, if paired with other measures of health-system},
author = {Barber, Ryan M and Fullman, Nancy and Sorensen, Reed J D and Bollyky, Thomas and McKee, Martin and Nolte, Ellen and Abajobir, Amanuel Alemu and Abate, Kalkidan Hassen and Abbafati, Cristiana and Abbas, Kaja M and Abd-Allah, Foad and Abdulle, Abdishakur M and Abdurahman, Ahmed Abdulahi and Abera, Semaw Ferede and Abraham, Biju and Abreha, Girmatsion Fisseha and Adane, Kelemework and Adelekan, Ademola Lukman and Adetifa, Ifedayo Morayo O and Afshin, Ashkan and Agarwal, Arnav and Agarwal, Sanjay Kumar and Agarwal, Sunilkumar and Agrawal, Anurag and Kiadaliri, Aliasghar Ahmad and Ahmadi, Alireza and Ahmed, Kedir Yimam and Ahmed, Muktar Beshir and Akinyemi, Rufus Olusola and Akinyemiju, Tomi F and Akseer, Nadia and Al-Aly, Ziyad and Alam, Khurshid and Alam, Noore and Alam, Sayed Saidul and Alemu, Zewdie Aderaw and Alene, Kefyalew Addis and Alexander, Lily and Ali, Raghib and Ali, Syed Danish and Alizadeh-Navaei, Reza and Alkerwi, Ala'a and Alla, Fran{\c{c}}ois and Allebeck, Peter and Allen, Christine and Al-Raddadi, Rajaa and Alsharif, Ubai and Altirkawi, Khalid A and Martin, Elena Alvarez and Alvis-Guzman, Nelson and Amare, Azmeraw T and Amini, Erfan and Ammar, Walid and Amo-Adjei, Joshu and Amoako, Yaw Ampem and Anderson, Benjamin O and Androudi, Sofia and Ansari, Hossein and Ansha, Mustafa Geleto and Antonio, Carl Abelardo T and {\"{A}}rnl{\"{o}}v, Johan and Artaman, Al and Asayesh, Hamid and Assadi, Reza and Astatkie, Ayalew and Atey, Tesfay Mehari and Atique, Suleman and Atnafu, Niguse Tadele and Atre, Sachin R and Avila-Burgos, Leticia and Avokpaho, Euripide Frinel G Arthur and Quintanilla, Beatriz Paulina Ayala and Awasthi, Ashish and Ayele, Nebiyu Negussu and Azzopardi, Peter and Saleem, Huda Omer Ba and B{\"{a}}rnighausen, Till and Bacha, Umar and Badawi, Alaa and Banerjee, Amitava and Barac, Aleksandra and Barboza, Miguel A and Barker-Collo, Suzanne L and Barrero, Lope H and Basu, Sanjay and Baune, Bernhard T and Baye, Kaleab and Bayou, Yibeltal Tebekaw and Bazargan-Hejazi, Shahrzad and Bedi, Neeraj and Beghi, Ettore and B{\'{e}}jot, Yannick and Bello, Aminu K and Bennett, Derrick A and Bensenor, Isabela M and Berhane, Adugnaw and Bernab{\'{e}}, Eduardo and Bernal, Oscar Alberto and Beyene, Addisu Shunu and Beyene, Tariku Jibat and Bhutta, Zulfiqar A and Biadgilign, Sibhatu and Bikbov, Boris and Birlik, Sait Mentes and Birungi, Charles and Biryukov, Stan and Bisanzio, Donal and Bizuayehu, Habtamu Mellie and Bose, Dipan and Brainin, Michael and Brauer, Michael and Brazinova, Alexandra and Breitborde, Nicholas J K and Brenner, Hermann and Butt, Zahid A and C{\'{a}}rdenas, Rosario and Cahuana-Hurtado, Lucero and Campos-Nonato, Ismael Ricardo and Car, Josip and Carrero, Juan Jesus and Casey, Daniel and Caso, Valeria and Casta{\~{n}}eda-Orjuela, Carlos A and Rivas, Jacqueline Castillo and Catal{\'{a}}-L{\'{o}}pez, Ferr{\'{a}}n and Cecilio, Pedro and Cercy, Kelly and Charlson, Fiona J and Chen, Alan Z and Chew, Adrienne and Chibalabala, Mirriam and Chibueze, Chioma Ezinne and Chisumpa, Vesper Hichilombwe and Chitheer, Abdulaal A and Chowdhury, Rajiv and Christensen, Hanne and Christopher, Devasahayam Jesudas and Ciobanu, Liliana G and Cirillo, Massimo and Coggeshall, Megan S and Cooper, Leslie Trumbull and Cortinovis, Monica and Crump, John A and Dalal, Koustuv and Danawi, Hadi and Dandona, Lalit and Dandona, Rakhi and Dargan, Paul I and das Neves, Jose and Davey, Gail and Davitoiu, Dragos V and Davletov, Kairat and {De Leo}, Diego and {Del Gobbo}, Liana C and del Pozo-Cruz, Borja and Dellavalle, Robert P and Deribe, Kebede and Deribew, Amare and {Des Jarlais}, Don C and Dey, Subhojit and Dharmaratne, Samath D and Dicker, Daniel and Ding, Eric L and Dokova, Klara and Dorsey, E Ray and Doyle, Kerrie E and Dubey, Manisha and Ehrenkranz, Rebecca and Ellingsen, Christian Lycke and Elyazar, Iqbal and Enayati, Ahmadali and Ermakov, Sergey Petrovich and Eshrati, Babak and Esteghamati, Alireza and Estep, Kara and F{\"{u}}rst, Thomas and Faghmous, Imad D A and Fanuel, Fanuel Belayneh Bekele and Faraon, Emerito Jose Aquino and Farid, Talha A and Farinha, Carla Sofia e Sa and Faro, Andre and Farvid, Maryam S and Farzadfar, Farshad and Feigin, Valery L and Feigl, Andrea B and Fereshtehnejad, Seyed-Mohammad and Fernandes, Jefferson G and Fernandes, Jo{\~{a}}o C and Feyissa, Tesfaye Regassa and Fischer, Florian and Fitzmaurice, Christina and Fleming, Thomas D and Foigt, Nataliya and Foreman, Kyle J and Forouzanfar, Mohammad H and Franklin, Richard C and Frostad, Joseph and G/hiwot, Tsegaye Tewelde and Gakidou, Emmanuela and Gambashidze, Ketevan and Gamkrelidze, Amiran and Gao, Wayne and Garcia-Basteiro, Alberto L and Gebre, Teshome and Gebremedhin, Amanuel Tesfay and Gebremichael, Mengistu Welday and Gebru, Alemseged Aregay and Gelaye, Amha Admasie and Geleijnse, Johanna M and Genova-Maleras, Ricard and Gibney, Katherine B and Giref, Ababi Zergaw and Gishu, Melkamu Dedefo and Giussani, Giorgia and Godwin, William W and Gold, Audra and Goldberg, Ellen M and Gona, Philimon N and Goodridge, Amador and Gopalani, Sameer Vali and Goto, Atsushi and Graetz, Nicholas and Greaves, Felix and Griswold, Max and Guban, Peter Imre and Gugnani, Harish Chander and Gupta, Prakash C and Gupta, Rahul and Gupta, Rajeev and Gupta, Tanush and Gupta, Vipin and Habtewold, Tesfa Dejenie and Hafezi-Nejad, Nima and Haile, Demewoz and Hailu, Alemayehu Desalegne and Hailu, Gessessew Bugssa and Hakuzimana, Alex and Hamadeh, Randah Ribhi and Hambisa, Mitiku Teshome and Hamidi, Samer and Hammami, Mouhanad and Hankey, Graeme J and Hao, Yuantao and Harb, Hilda L and Hareri, Habtamu Abera and Haro, Josep Maria and Hassanvand, Mohammad Sadegh and Havmoeller, Rasmus and Hay, Roderick J and Hay, Simon I and Hendrie, Delia and Heredia-Pi, Ileana Beatriz and Hoek, Hans W and Horino, Masako and Horita, Nobuyuki and Hosgood, H Dean and Htet, Aung Soe and Hu, Guoqing and Huang, Hsiang and Huang, John J and Huntley, Bethany M and Huynh, Chantal and Iburg, Kim Moesgaard and Ileanu, Bogdan Vasile and Innos, Kaire and Irenso, Asnake Ararsa and Jahanmehr, Nader and Jakovljevic, Mihajlo B and James, Peter and James, Spencer Lewis and Javanbakht, Mehdi and Jayaraman, Sudha P and Jayatilleke, Achala Upendra and Jeemon, Panniyammakal and Jha, Vivekanand and John, Denny and Johnson, Catherine and Johnson, Sarah C and Jonas, Jost B and Juel, Knud and Kabir, Zubair and Kalkonde, Yogeshwar and Kamal, Ritul and Kan, Haidong and Karch, Andre and Karema, Corine Kakizi and Karimi, Seyed M and Kasaeian, Amir and Kassebaum, Nicholas J and Kastor, Anshul and Katikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal and Kazanjan, Konstantin and Keiyoro, Peter Njenga and Kemmer, Laura and Kemp, Andrew Haddon and Kengne, Andre Pascal and Kerbo, Amene Abebe and Kereselidze, Maia and Kesavachandran, Chandrasekharan Nair and Khader, Yousef Saleh and Khalil, Ibrahim and Khan, Abdur Rahman and Khan, Ejaz Ahmad and Khan, Gulfaraz and Khang, Young-Ho and Khoja, Abdullah Tawfih Abdullah and Khonelidze, Irma and Khubchandani, Jagdish and Kibret, Getiye Dejenu and Kim, Daniel and Kim, Pauline and Kim, Yun Jin and Kimokoti, Ruth W and Kinfu, Yohannes and Kissoon, Niranjan and Kivipelto, Miia and Kokubo, Yoshihiro and Kolk, Anneli and Kolte, Dhaval and Kopec, Jacek A and Kosen, Soewarta and Koul, Parvaiz A and Koyanagi, Ai and Kravchenko, Michael and Krishnaswami, Sanjay and Krohn, Kristopher J and Defo, Barthelemy Kuate and Bicer, Burcu Kucuk and Kuipers, Ernst J and Kulkarni, Veena S and Kumar, G Anil and Kumsa, Fekede Asefa and Kutz, Michael and Kyu, Hmwe H and Lager, Anton Carl Jonas and Lal, Aparna and Lal, Dharmesh Kumar and Lalloo, Ratilal and Lallukka, Tea and Lan, Qing and Langan, Sinead M and Lansingh, Van C and Larson, Heidi J and Larsson, Anders and Laryea, Dennis Odai and Latif, Asma Abdul and Lawrynowicz, Alicia Elena Beatriz and Leasher, Janet L and Leigh, James and Leinsalu, Mall and Leshargie, Cheru Tesema and Leung, Janni and Leung, Ricky and Levi, Miriam and Liang, Xiaofeng and Lim, Stephen S and Lind, Margaret and Linn, Shai and Lipshultz, Steven E and Liu, Patrick and Liu, Yang and Lo, Loon-Tzian and Logroscino, Giancarlo and Lopez, Alan D and Lorch, Scott A and Lotufo, Paulo A and Lozano, Rafael and Lunevicius, Raimundas and Lyons, Ronan A and Macarayan, Erlyn Rachelle King and Mackay, Mark T and {El Razek}, Hassan Magdy Abd and {El Razek}, Mohammed Magdy Abd and Mahdavi, Mahdi and Majeed, Azeem and Malekzadeh, Reza and Malta, Deborah Carvalho and Mantovani, Lorenzo G and Manyazewal, Tsegahun and Mapoma, Chabila C and Marcenes, Wagner and Marks, Guy B and Marquez, Neal and Martinez-Raga, Jose and Marzan, Melvin Barrientos and Massano, Jo{\~{a}}o and Mathur, Manu Raj and Maulik, Pallab K and Mazidi, Mohsen and McAlinden, Colm and McGrath, John J and McNellan, Claire and Meaney, Peter A and Mehari, Alem and Mehndiratta, Man Mohan and Meier, Toni and Mekonnen, Alemayehu B and Meles, Kidanu Gebremariam and Memish, Ziad A and Mengesha, Melkamu Merid and Mengiste, Desalegn Tadese and Mengistie, Mubarek Abera and Menota, Bereket Gebremichael and Mensah, George A and Mereta, Seid Tiku and Meretoja, Atte and Meretoja, Tuomo J and Mezgebe, Haftay Berhane and Micha, Renata and Millear, Anoushka and Mills, Edward J and Minnig, Shawn and Mirarefin, Mojde and Mirrakhimov, Erkin M and Mock, Charles N and Mohammad, Karzan Abdulmuhsin and Mohammed, Shafiu and Mohanty, Sanjay K and Mokdad, Ali H and Mola, Glen Liddell D and Molokhia, Mariam and Monasta, Lorenzo and Montico, Marcella and Moradi-Lakeh, Maziar and Moraga, Paula and Morawska, Lidia and Mori, Rintaro and Moses, Mark and Mueller, Ulrich O and Murthy, Srinivas and Musa, Kamarul Imran and Nachega, Jean B and Nagata, Chie and Nagel, Gabriele and Naghavi, Mohsen and Naheed, Aliya and Naldi, Luigi and Nangia, Vinay and Nascimento, Bruno Ramos and Negoi, Ionut and Neupane, Sudan Prasad and Newton, Charles R and Ng, Marie and Ngalesoni, Frida Namnyak and Ngunjiri, Josephine Wanjiku and Nguyen, Grant and Ningrum, Dina Nur Anggraini and Nolte, Sandra and Nomura, Marika and Norheim, Ole F and Norrving, Bo and Noubiap, Jean Jacques N and Obermeyer, Carla Makhlouf and Ogbo, Felix Akpojene and Oh, In-Hwan and Okoro, Anselm and Oladimeji, Olanrewaju and Olagunju, Andrew Toyin and Olivares, Pedro R and Olsen, Helen E and Olusanya, Bolajoko Olubukunola and Olusanya, Jacob Olusegun and Opio, John Nelson and Oren, Eyal and Ortiz, Alberto and Osborne, Richard H and Osman, Majdi and Owolabi, Mayowa O and PA, Mahesh and Pain, Amanda W and Pakhale, Smita and Castillo, Elizabeth Palomares and Pana, Adrian and Papachristou, Christina and Parsaeian, Mahboubeh and Patel, Tejas and Patton, George C and Paudel, Deepak and Paul, Vinod K and Pearce, Neil and Pereira, David M and Perez-Padilla, Rogelio and Perez-Ruiz, Fernando and Perico, Norberto and Pesudovs, Konrad and Petzold, Max and Phillips, Michael Robert and Pigott, David M and Pillay, Julian David and Pinho, Christine and Polinder, Suzanne and Pond, Constance D and Prakash, V and Purwar, Manorama and Qorbani, Mostafa and Quistberg, D Alex and Radfar, Amir and Rafay, Anwar and Rahimi, Kazem and Rahimi-Movaghar, Vafa and Rahman, Mahfuzar and Rahman, Mohammad Hifz Ur and Rai, Rajesh Kumar and Ram, Usha and Rana, Saleem M and Rankin, Zane and Rao, Paturi Vishnupriya and Rao, Puja C and Rawaf, Salman and Rego, Maria Albertina Santiago and Reitsma, Marissa and Remuzzi, Giuseppe and Renzaho, Andre M N N and Resnikoff, Serge and Rezaei, Satar and Rezai, Mohammad Sadegh and Ribeiro, Antonio L and Roba, Hirbo Shore and Rokni, Mohammad Bagher and Ronfani, Luca and Roshandel, Gholamreza and Roth, Gregory A and Rothenbacher, Dietrich and Roy, Nawal K and Sachdev, Perminder S and Sackey, Ben Benasco and Saeedi, Mohammad Yahya and Safiri, Saeid and Sagar, Rajesh and Sahraian, Mohammad Ali and Saleh, Muhammad Muhammad and Salomon, Joshua A and Samy, Abdallah M and Sanabria, Juan Ramon and Sanchez-Ni{\~{n}}o, Maria Dolores and Sandar, Logan and Santos, Itamar S and Santos, Jo{\~{a}}o Vasco and Milicevic, Milena M Santric and Sarmiento-Suarez, Rodrigo and Sartorius, Benn and Satpathy, Maheswar and Savic, Miloje and Sawhney, Monika and Saylan, Mete I and Sch{\"{o}}ttker, Ben and Schutte, Aletta E and Schwebel, David C and Seedat, Soraya and Seid, Abdulbasit Musa and Seifu, Canaan Negash and Sepanlou, Sadaf G and Serdar, Berrin and Servan-Mori, Edson E and Setegn, Tesfaye and Shackelford, Katya Anne and Shaheen, Amira and Shahraz, Saeid and Shaikh, Masood Ali and Shakh-Nazarova, Marina and Shamsipour, Mansour and Islam, Sheikh Mohammed Shariful and Sharma, Jayendra and Sharma, Rajesh and She, Jun and Sheikhbahaei, Sara and Shen, Jiabin and Shi, Peilin and Shigematsu, Mika and Shin, Min-Jeong and Shiri, Rahman and Shoman, Haitham and Shrime, Mark G and Sibamo, Ephrem Lejore Sibamo and Sigfusdottir, Inga Dora and Silva, Diego Augusto Santos and Silveira, Dayane Gabriele Alves and Sindi, Shireen and Singh, Abhishek and Singh, Jasvinder A and Singh, Om Prakash and Singh, Prashant Kumar and Singh, Virendra and Sinke, Abiy Hiruye and Sinshaw, Aklilu Endalamaw and Skirbekk, Vegard and Sliwa, Karen and Smith, Alison and Sobngwi, Eugene and Soneji, Samir and Soriano, Joan B and Sousa, Tatiane Cristina Moraes and Sposato, Luciano A and Sreeramareddy, Chandrashekhar T and Stathopoulou, Vasiliki and Steel, Nicholas and Steiner, Caitlyn and Steinke, Sabine and Stokes, Mark Andrew and Stranges, Saverio and Strong, Mark and Stroumpoulis, Konstantinos and Sturua, Lela and Sufiyan, Muawiyyah Babale and Suliankatchi, Rizwan Abdulkader and Sun, Jiandong and Sur, Patrick and Swaminathan, Soumya and Sykes, Bryan L and Tabar{\'{e}}s-Seisdedos, Rafael and Tabb, Karen M and Taffere, Getachew Redae and Talongwa, Roberto Tchio and Tarajia, Musharaf and Tavakkoli, Mohammad and Taveira, Nuno and Teeple, Stephanie and Tegegne, Teketo Kassaw and Tehrani-Banihashemi, Arash and Tekelab, Tesfalidet and Tekle, Dejen Yemane and Shifa, Girma Temam and Terkawi, Abdullah Sulieman and Tesema, Azeb Gebresilassie and Thakur, JS and Thomson, Alan J and Tillmann, Taavi and Tiruye, Tenaw Yimer and Tobe-Gai, Ruoyan and Tonelli, Marcello and Topor-Madry, Roman and Tortajada, Miguel and Troeger, Christopher and Truelsen, Thomas and Tura, Abera Kenay and Uchendu, Uche S and Ukwaja, Kingsley N and Undurraga, Eduardo A and Uneke, Chigozie Jesse and Uthman, Olalekan A and van Boven, Job F M and {Van Dingenen}, Rita and Varughese, Santosh and Vasankari, Tommi and Venketasubramanian, Narayanaswamy and Violante, Francesco S and Vladimirov, Sergey K and Vlassov, Vasiliy Victorovich and Vollset, Stein Emil and Vos, Theo and Wagner, Joseph A and Wakayo, Tolassa and Waller, Stephen G and Walson, Judd L and Wang, Haidong and Wang, Yuan-Pang and Watkins, David A and Weiderpass, Elisabete and Weintraub, Robert G and Wen, Chi-Pang and Werdecker, Andrea and Wesana, Joshua and Westerman, Ronny and Whiteford, Harvey A and Wilkinson, James D and Wiysonge, Charles Shey and Woldeyes, Belete Getahun and Wolfe, Charles D A and Won, Sungho and Workicho, Abdulhalik and Workie, Shimelash Bitew and Wubshet, Mamo and Xavier, Denis and Xu, Gelin and Yadav, Ajit Kumar and Yaghoubi, Mohsen and Yakob, Bereket and Yan, Lijing L and Yano, Yuichiro and Yaseri, Mehdi and Yimam, Hassen Hamid and Yip, Paul and Yonemoto, Naohiro and Yoon, Seok-Jun and Younis, Mustafa Z and Yu, Chuanhua and Zaidi, Zoubida and {El Sayed Zaki}, Maysaa and Zambrana-Torrelio, Carlos and Zapata, Tomas and Zenebe, Zerihun Menlkalew and Zodpey, Sanjay and Zoeckler, Leo and Zuhlke, Liesl Joanna and Murray, Christopher J L},
doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30818-8},
file = {:Users/julianflowers/Documents/R{\_}projects/random-chicken/PIIS0140673617308188.pdf:pdf},
isbn = {1474-547X (Electronic)
0140-6736 (Linking)},
issn = {01406736},
journal = {The Lancet},
number = {10091},
pages = {231--266},
pmid = {28528753},
title = {{Healthcare Access and Quality Index based on mortality from causes amenable to personal health care in 195 countries and territories, 1990–2015: a novel analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015}},
url = {http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0140673617308188},
volume = {390},
year = {2017}
}
@article{Access2016,
author = {Access, Healthcare and Index, Quality},
file = {:Users/julianflowers/Downloads/GBD 2016 HAQ Paper/GBD 2016 HAQ Supplementary Appendix.pdf:pdf},
title = {{Appendix to Measuring performance on the Healthcare Access and Quality Index for 195 countries and territories and selected subnational locations : a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study Table of Contents}},
year = {2016}
}
@article{Nolte2003b,
abstract = {OBJECTIVE: To assess whether and how the rankings of the world's health systems based on disability adjusted life expectancy as done in the 2000 World Health Report change when using the narrower concept of mortality amenable to health care, an outcome more closely linked to health system performance.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nDESIGN: Analysis of mortality amenable to health care (including and excluding ischaemic heart disease).$\backslash$n$\backslash$nMAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Age standardised mortality from causes amenable to health care$\backslash$n$\backslash$nSETTING: 19 countries belonging to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nRESULTS: Rankings based on mortality amenable to health care (excluding ischaemic heart disease) differed substantially from rankings of health attainment given in the 2000 World Health Report. No country retained the same position. Rankings for southern European countries and Japan, which had performed well in the report, fell sharply, whereas those of the Nordic countries improved. Some middle ranking countries (United Kingdom, Netherlands) also fell considerably; New Zealand improved its position. Rankings changed when ischaemic heart disease was included as amenable to health care.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nCONCLUSION: The 2000 World Health Report has been cited widely to support claims for the merits of otherwise different health systems. High levels of health attainment in well performing countries may be a consequence of good fortune in geography, and thus dietary habits, and success in the health effects of policies in other sectors. When assessed in terms of achievements that are more explicitly linked to health care, their performance may not be as good.},
author = {Nolte, E.},
doi = {10.1136/bmj.327.7424.1129},
isbn = {1468-5833 (Electronic)},
issn = {0959-8138},
journal = {BMJ},
number = {7424},
pages = {1129--0},
pmid = {14615335},
title = {{Measuring the health of nations: analysis of mortality amenable to health care}},
url = {http://www.bmj.com/cgi/doi/10.1136/bmj.327.7424.1129},
volume = {327},
year = {2003}
}
@misc{Alleyne2008,
author = {Alleyne, George},
booktitle = {Health Affairs},
doi = {10.1377/hlthaff.27.4.1195},
issn = {02782715},
number = {4},
pages = {1196--1197},
pmid = {18607056},
title = {{Amenable mortality: A different view}},
volume = {27},
year = {2008}
}
@article{Plug2012,
abstract = {BACKGROUND: Previous studies have reported large socioeconomic inequalities in mortality from conditions amenable to medical intervention, but it is unclear whether these can be attributed to inequalities in access or quality of health care, or to confounding influences such as inequalities in background risk of diseases. We therefore studied whether inequalities in mortality from conditions amenable to medical intervention vary between countries in patterns which differ from those observed for other (non-amenable) causes of death. More specifically, we hypothesized that, as compared to non-amenable causes, inequalities in mortality from amenable causes are more strongly associated with inequalities in health care use and less strongly with inequalities in common risk factors for disease such as smoking.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nMETHODS: Cause-specific mortality data for people aged 30-74 years were obtained for 14 countries, and were analysed by calculating age-standardized mortality rates and relative risks comparing a lower with a higher educational group. Survey data on health care use and behavioural risk factors for people aged 30-74 years were obtained for 12 countries, and were analysed by calculating age-and sex-adjusted odds ratios comparing a low with a higher educational group. Patterns of association were explored by calculating correlation coefficients.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nRESULTS: In most countries and for most amenable causes of death substantial inequalities in mortality were observed, but inequalities in mortality from amenable causes did not vary between countries in patterns that are different from those seen for inequalities in non-amenable mortality. As compared to non-amenable causes, inequalities in mortality from amenable causes are not more strongly associated with inequalities in health care use. Inequalities in mortality from amenable causes are also not less strongly associated with common risk factors such as smoking.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nCONCLUSIONS: We did not find evidence that inequalities in mortality from amenable conditions are related to inequalities in access or quality of health care. Further research is needed to find the causes of socio-economic inequalities in mortality from amenable conditions, and caution should be exercised in interpreting these inequalities as indicating health care deficiencies.},
author = {Plug, Iris and Hoffmann, Rasmus and Artnik, Barbara and Bopp, Matthias and Borrell, Carme and Costa, Giuseppe and Deboosere, Patrick and Esnaola, Santi and Kalediene, Ramune and Leinsalu, Mall and Lundberg, Olle and Martikainen, Pekka and Regidor, Enrique and Rychtarikova, Jitka and Strand, Bj{\"{o}}rn Heine and Wojtyniak, Bogdan and MacKenbach, Johan P.},
doi = {10.1186/1471-2458-12-346},
isbn = {1471-2458 (Electronic)$\backslash$n1471-2458 (Linking)},
issn = {14712458},
journal = {BMC Public Health},
number = {1},
pmid = {22578154},
title = {{Socioeconomic inequalities in mortality from conditions amenable to medical interventions: Do they reflect inequalities in access or quality of health care?}},
volume = {12},
year = {2012}
}
@article{Fantini2012,
abstract = {Background: Mortality amenable to health-care services ('amenable mortality') has been defined as " premature deaths that should not occur in the presence of timely and effective health care " and as " conditions for which effective clinical interventions exist. " We analyzed the regional variability in health-care services using amenable mortality as a performance indicator. Convergent validity was examined against other indicators, such as health expenditure, GDP per capita, life expectancy at birth, disability-free life expectancy at age 15, number of diagnostic and laboratory tests per 1,000 inhabitants, and the prevalence of cancer and cardiovascular diseases. Methods: Amenable mortality rate was calculated as the average annual number of deaths in the population aged 0–74 years per 100,000 inhabitants, and it was then stratified by gender and region. Data were drawn from national mortality statistics for the period 2006–08. Results: During the study period (2006–08), the age-standardized death rate (SDR) amenable to health-care services in Italy was 62.6 per 100,000 inhabitants: 66.0 per 100,000 for males and 59.1 per 100,000 for females. Significant regional variations ranged from 54.1 per 100,000 inhabitants in Alto Adige to 76.3 per 100,000 in Campania. Regional variability in SDR was examined separately for male and females. The variability proved to be statistically significant for both males and females (males: Q-test = 638.5, p {\textless} 0.001; females: Q-test = 700.1, p {\textless} 0.001). However, among men, we found a clear-cut divide in SDR values between Central and Southern Italy; among women, this divide was less pronounced. Amenable mortality was negatively correlated with life expectancy at birth for both genders (male: r = −0.64, p = 0.002; female: r = −0.88, p {\textless}0.001) and with disability-free life expectancy at age 15 (male: r = −0.70, p {\textless}0.001; female: r = −0.67, p {\textless}0.001). Amenable mortality displayed a statistically significant negative relationship with GDP per capita, the quantity of diagnostic and laboratory tests per 1,000 inhabitants, and the prevalence of cancer. Conclusions: Amenable mortality shows a wide variation across Italian regions and an inverse relationship with life expectancy and GDP per capita, as expected.},
author = {Fantini, Maria P. and Lenzi, Jacopo and Franchino, Giuseppe and Raineri, Cristina and Burgio, Alessandra and Frova, Luisa and Domenighetti, Gianfranco and Ricciardi, Walter and Damiani, Gianfranco},
doi = {10.1186/1472-6963-12-310},
isbn = {1472-6963},
issn = {14726963},
journal = {BMC Health Services Research},
keywords = {Amenable mortality,Gender,Health-care services performance,Socioeconomic status},
number = {1},
pmid = {22963259},
title = {{Amenable mortality as a performance indicator of Italian health-care services}},
volume = {12},
year = {2012}
}
@article{Tobias2009,
abstract = {OBJECTIVE: To estimate the contribution of health care to health gain, and to ethnic and socio-economic health inequalities, in New Zealand over the past quarter century. METHOD: Amenable and all-cause mortality rates by ethnicity and equivalised household income tertile from 1981-84 to 2001-04 were estimated from linked census-mortality datasets (the New Zealand Census-Mortality Study). Amenable mortality (deaths under age 75 from conditions responsive to health care) was defined using a classification recently developed for use in Australia and New Zealand. The contribution of health care to the observed improvement in population health status was estimated by the ratio of the difference in amenable to the difference in all-cause mortality over the observation period. RESULTS: Trends in amenable causes of death were estimated to account for approximately one-third of the fall in mortality over the past quarter century, for the population as a whole and for all income and ethnic groups except Pacific peoples, for whom there was no reduction in amenable mortality. In 2001-04, amenable causes accounted for approximately one quarter of the mortality gap between all ethnic groups compared to the European/Other reference. DISCUSSION: Our finding provides one indicator of the social impact of health care over this period. More importantly, that Pacific peoples seem to have benefited less than other ethnic groups calls for urgent explanation. Also, our finding that amenable causes account for about one quarter of current mortality disparities, clearly indicates that improvement in access to and quality of health care for disadvantaged groups could substantively reduce health inequalities.},
author = {Tobias, Martin and Yeh, Li Chia},
doi = {10.1111/j.1753-6405.2009.00342.x},
isbn = {1753-6405},
issn = {13260200},
journal = {Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health},
keywords = {Amenable mortality,New Zealand,Trends},
number = {1},
pages = {70--78},
pmid = {19236363},
title = {{How much does health care contribute to health gain and to health inequality? Trends in amenable mortality in New Zealand 1981-2004}},
volume = {33},
year = {2009}
}
@article{Poikolainen1986,
abstract = {The impact of the Finnish health services on mortality from natural causes amenable to interventions by them was estimated for the period 1969 to 1981. During this period, mortality from amenable causes fell by 63{\%} among males and 68{\%} among females aged 64 years or less. The respective decreases for non-amenable natural causes of death were 24{\%} and 29{\%}. The rate of decline in mortality from amenable causes was similar for the two sexes. It was assumed that the decline in mortality from non-amenable causes reflects the joint influences of environmental, social, nutritional, and genetic factors and that the difference between this and the decline in mortality from amenable causes approximates to the true effect of the health services. Health services were estimated to account for 50{\%} of the total decline in mortality from amenable causes for both sexes. {\textcopyright} 1986.},
author = {Poikolainen, Kari and Eskola, Juhani},
doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90664-1},
isbn = {0140-6736},
issn = {01406736},
journal = {The Lancet},
number = {8474},
pages = {199--202},
pmid = {2868216},
title = {{THE EFFECT OF HEALTH SERVICES ON MORTALITY: DECLINE IN DEATH RATES FROM AMENABLE AND NON-AMENABLE CAUSES IN FINLAND, 1969-81}},
volume = {327},
year = {1986}
}
@article{Desai2011,
abstract = {OBJECTIVES: The new performance framework for the NHS in England will assess how well health services are preventing people from dying prematurely, based on the concept of mortality amenable to healthcare. We ask how the different parts of the UK would be assessed had this measure been in use over the past two decades, a period that began with somewhat lower levels of health expenditure in England and Wales than in Scotland and Northern Ireland but which, after 1999, saw the gap closing.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nDESIGN: We assessed the change in age-standardized death rates in England and Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland in two time periods: 1990-1999 and 1999-2009. Mortality data by five-year age group, sex and cause of death for the years 1990 to 2009 were analysed using age-standardized death rates from causes considered amenable to healthcare. The absolute change was assessed by fitting linear regression and the relative change was estimated as the average annual percent decline for the two periods.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nSETTING: United Kingdom.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nPARTICIPANTS: Not applicable.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nMAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality from causes amenable to healthcare.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nRESULTS: Between 1990 and 1999 deaths amenable to medical care had been falling more slowly in England and Wales than in Scotland and Northern Ireland. However the rate of decline in England and Wales increased after 1999 when funding of the NHS there increased. Examination of individual causes of death reveals a complex picture, with some improvements, such as in breast cancer deaths, occurring simultaneously across the UK, reflecting changes in diagnosis and treatment that took place in each nation at the same time, while others varied.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nCONCLUSIONS: Amenable mortality is a useful indicator of health system performance but there are many methodological issues that must be taken into account when interpreting it once it is adopted for routine use in England.},
author = {Desai, Monica and Nolte, Ellen and Karanikolos, Marina and Khoshaba, Bernadette and McKee, Martin},
doi = {10.1258/jrsm.2011.110120},
isbn = {1758-1095},
issn = {01410768},
journal = {Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine},
number = {9},
pages = {370--379},
pmid = {21881088},
title = {{Measuring NHS performance 1990-2009 using amenable mortality: Interpret with care}},
volume = {104},
year = {2011}
}
@article{Charlton1986,
abstract = {A series of outcome indicators was proposed for assessing the curative aspects of health care using several diseases for which evidence suggested that death was largely avoidable provided that appropriate medical treatment could be given in time. International data were examined for those causes for which data were readily available. Time trends in mortality were compared for each of these conditions for six countries that had experienced appreciable growth in health services during 1950-80. Mortality from the heterogeneous "avoidable" causes had declined faster than mortality from all other causes in each of the six countries. Despite problems of diagnosis, reporting, and classification of diseases that may have existed among countries, making international comparisons of absolute mortality difficult, the trends of declining mortality were similar, lending credibility to the use of these causes of mortality as indices of health care within countries. Changes within countries may also have been attributable to changes in social, environmental, genetic, and diagnostic factors, which were not examined. Nevertheless, the consistency in mortality trends for this group of "amenable" diseases suggested that improvements in medical care were a factor in their rapid decline.},
author = {Charlton, John R.H. and Velez, Ramon},
doi = {10.1136/bmj.292.6516.295},
issn = {02670623},
journal = {British Medical Journal (Clinical research ed.)},
number = {6516},
pages = {295--301},
pmid = {3080144},
title = {{Some international comparisons of mortality amenable to medical intervention}},
volume = {292},
year = {1986}
}
@article{Mackenbach2013,
abstract = {BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: There is widespread consensus on the need for better indicators of the effectiveness of healthcare. We carried out an analysis of the validity of amenable mortality as an indicator of the effectiveness of healthcare, focusing on the potential use in routine surveillance systems of between-country variations in rates of mortality. We assessed whether the introduction of specific healthcare innovations coincided with declines in mortality from potentially amenable causes in seven European countries. In this paper, we summarise the main results of this study and illustrate them for four conditions.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nDATA AND METHODS: We identified 14 conditions for which considerable declines in mortality have been observed and for which there is reasonable evidence in the literature of the effectiveness of healthcare interventions to lower mortality. We determined the time at which these interventions were introduced and assessed whether the innovations coincided with favourable changes in the mortality trends from these conditions, measured using Poisson linear spline regression. All the evidence was then presented to a Delphi panel.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nMAIN RESULTS: The timing of innovation and favourable change in mortality trends coincided for only a few conditions. Other reasons for mortality decline are likely to include diffusion and improved quality of interventions and in incidence of diseases and their risk factors, but there is insufficient evidence to differentiate these at present. For most conditions, a Delphi panel could not reach consensus on the role of current mortality levels as measures of effectiveness of healthcare.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nDISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in healthcare probably lowered mortality from many of the conditions that we studied but occurred in a much more diffuse way than we assumed in the study design. Quantification of the contribution of healthcare to mortality requires adequate data on timing of innovation and trends in diffusion and quality and in incidence of disease, none of which are currently available. Given these gaps in knowledge, between-country differences in levels of mortality from amenable conditions should not be used for routine surveillance of healthcare performance. The timing and pace of mortality decline from amenable conditions may provide better indicators of healthcare performance.},
author = {Mackenbach, Johan P. and Hoffmann, Rasmus and Khoshaba, Bernadette and Plug, Iris and Rey, Gr{\'{e}}goire and Westerling, Ragnar and P{\"{a}}rna, Kersti and Jougla, Eric and Alfonso, Jos{\'{e}} and Looman, Caspar and McKee, Martin},
doi = {10.1136/jech-2012-201471},
isbn = {1470-2738 (Electronic)$\backslash$r0143-005X (Linking)},
issn = {0143005X},
journal = {Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health},
number = {2},
pages = {139--146},
pmid = {23012400},
title = {{Using 'amenable mortality' as indicator of healthcare effectiveness in international comparisons: Results of a validation study}},
volume = {67},
year = {2013}
}
@article{Charlton1983,
abstract = {There is a need for indicators of the outcome of health-care services against which the use of resources can be evaluated; From a previously published series of outcome indicators, which included diseases for which mortality is largely avoidable given appropriate medical intervention, causes were selected which were regarded as most amenable to medical intervention (excluding conditions whose control depends mainly on prevention) and for which there were sufficient numbers of deaths to allow an analysis of the variation in mortality rates among the 98 area health authorities of England and Wales. Considerable variation between AHAs was found in mortality from most of these diseases, and this variation remained even after adjustment for social factors. This substantial variation should be examined further in relation to health-service inputs and other factors. A finding of large variations in the quality of health-care delivery in different parts of the country would have important implications for resource allocation. ?? 1983.},
author = {Charlton, J. R H and Silver, R. and Hartley, R. M. and Holland, W. W.},
doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(83)91981-5},
isbn = {0140-6736 (Print)$\backslash$r0140-6736 (Linking)},
issn = {01406736},
journal = {The Lancet},
number = {8326},
pages = {691--696},
pmid = {6132049},
title = {{GEOGRAPHICAL VARIATION IN MORTALITY FROM CONDITIONS AMENABLE TO MEDICAL INTERVENTION IN ENGLAND AND WALES}},
volume = {321},
year = {1983}
}
@article{Lavergne2013,
abstract = {OBJECTIVES Amenable mortality is proposed as a health system performance measure, and has been used in comparisons across countries and socio-economic strata. We assess its utility as a health region–level indicator in Canada. APPROACH We classified all deaths in British Columbia from 2002 to 2009 using two common definitions of amenable mortality. Counts and standardized rates were calculated for 16 health regions. To assess reliability, sensitivity and validity, we compared rates across regions and over time, and examined correlations with premature and all-cause mortality. RESULTS Of the 238,849 deaths in the study period, 6.6{\%} or 13.7{\%} were classified as amenable (depending on the definition used). Rates were stable or falling in more populated regions, but unstable with large confidence intervals elsewhere. Correlation with overall mortality was strong. CONCLUSION Though amenable mortality is appealing as a feasible, understandable indicator, we question whether it is appropriate for comparisons at a subprovincial level.},
author = {Lavergne, M. Ruth and McGrail, Kimberlyn},
issn = {17156572},
journal = {Healthcare Policy},
number = {3},
pages = {79--90},
pmid = {23968629},
title = {{What, if anything, does amenable mortality tell us about regional health system Performance?}},
volume = {8},
year = {2013}
}
@article{Gianino2017a,
abstract = {{\textless}bold{\textgreater}Background: {\textless}/bold{\textgreater}Some studies have analyzed the association of health care systems variables, such as health service resources or expenditures, with amenable mortality, but the association of types of health care systems with the decline of amenable mortality has yet to be studied. The present study examines whether specific health care system types are associated with different time trend declines in amenable mortality from 2000 to 2014 in 22 European OECD countries.{\textless}bold{\textgreater}Methods: {\textless}/bold{\textgreater}A time trend analysis was performed. Using Nolte and McKee's list, age-standardized amenable mortality rates (SDRs) were calculated as the annual number of deaths over the population aged 0-74 years per 100,000 inhabitants. We classified health care systems according to a deductively generated classification by B{\"{o}}hm. This classification identifies three dimensions that are not entirely independent of each other but follow a clear order: the regulation dimension is first, followed by the financing dimension and finally service provision. We performed a hierarchical semi-log polynomial regression analysis on the annual SDRs to determine whether specific health care systems were associated with different SDR trajectories over time.{\textless}bold{\textgreater}Results: {\textless}/bold{\textgreater}The results showed a clear decline in SDRs in all 22 health care systems between 2000 and 2014 although at different annual changes (slopes). Regression analysis showed that there was a significant difference among the slopes according to provision dimension. Health care systems with a private provision exhibited a slowdown in the decline of amenable mortality over time. It therefore seems that ownership is the most relevant dimension in determining a different pattern of decline in mortality.{\textless}bold{\textgreater}Conclusions: {\textless}/bold{\textgreater}All countries experienced decreases in amenable mortality between 2000 and 2014; this decline seems to be partially a reflection of health care systems, especially when affected by the provision dimension. If the private ownership is maintained or promoted by health systems, these findings might be considered when thinking about regulation policies to control factors that might influence health care performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]},
author = {Gianino, Maria Michela and Lenzi, Jacopo and Fantini, Maria Pia and Ricciardi, Walter and Damiani, Gianfranco},
doi = {10.1186/s12913-017-2708-z},
issn = {14726963},
journal = {BMC Health Services Research},
keywords = {Amenable mortality,European countries,Healthcare systems},
number = {1},
pmid = {29141632},
title = {{Declining amenable mortality: A reflection of health care systems?}},
volume = {17},
year = {2017}
}
@article{Mackenbach1989,
abstract = {In order to investigate the contribution of medical care to the widening of mortality differences between socio-economic groups, we studied differences in the decline of mortality from conditions which have become amenable to medical intervention. For England and Wales, data on occupational mortality from the Decennial Supplements of the years around 1931, 1961 and 1981 were used. For the netherlands, a more indirect approach had to be followed, using data on geographical variation in mortality for the years around 1952, 1962, 1972 and 1982. In England and Wales during the period 1931-1961 mortality from conditions which became amenable to medical intervention generally declined more in relative terms among the higher occupational classes, both for men and for married women. During the period 1961-1981 the picture was less consistent, although for about half of the conditions mortality declines were again larger in the higher occupational classes. The findings for the Netherlands suggest a similar pattern of differential mortality decline for a small number of conditions only. Possible explanations for these findings are discussed. We conclude that: {\&}{\#}x02022; -the widening of the mortality differences between socio-economic groups in England and Wales was partly due to differences in decline of mortality from conditions amenable to medical intervention; the same may be true to some extent for the Netherlands, but the evidence is not striking; {\&}{\#}x02022; -differences in decline of mortality from 'amenable' conditions were probably due, at least in part and at least up to 1960, to differences between socio-economic groups in accessibility, utilization or quality of medical care. Thus, the evidence suggests that medical care contributed to the widening of the mortality differences between socio-economic groups. {\textcopyright} 1989.},
author = {Mackenbach, Johan P. and Stronks, Karien and Kunst, Anton E.},
doi = {10.1016/0277-9536(89)90285-2},
isbn = {0277-9536 (Print)$\backslash$n0277-9536 (Linking)},
issn = {02779536},
journal = {Social Science and Medicine},
keywords = {England/Wales,medical care,mortality,socio-economic differences,the Netherlands},
number = {3},
pages = {369--376},
pmid = {2762863},
title = {{The contribution of medical care to inequalities in health: Differences between socio-economic groups in decline of mortality from conditions amenable to medical intervention}},
volume = {29},
year = {1989}
}
@article{Gianino2017,
abstract = {{\textless}bold{\textgreater}Objective: {\textless}/bold{\textgreater}To update amenable mortality in 32 OECD countries at 2013 (or last available year), to describe the time trends during 2000-2013, and to evaluate the association of these trends with various geographic areas.{\textless}bold{\textgreater}Data Sources: {\textless}/bold{\textgreater}Secondary data from 32 countries during 2000-2013, gathered from the World Health Organization Mortality Database.{\textless}bold{\textgreater}Study Design: {\textless}/bold{\textgreater}Time trend analysis.{\textless}bold{\textgreater}Data Collection: {\textless}/bold{\textgreater}Using Nolte and McKee's list, age-standardized amenable mortality rates (SDRs) were calculated as the annual number of deaths over the population aged 0-74 years per 100,000 inhabitants. We performed a mixed-effects polynomial regression analysis on the annual SDRs to determine whether specific geographic areas were associated with different SDR trajectories over time.{\textless}bold{\textgreater}Principal Findings: {\textless}/bold{\textgreater}The OECD average annual decrease was 3.6/100,000 (p {\textless} .001), but slowed over time (coefficient for the quadratic term = 0.11, p {\textless} .001). Eastern and Atlantic European countries had the steepest decline (-6.1 and -4.7, respectively), while Latin American countries had the lowest slope (-1.7). The OECD average annual decline during the 14-year period was -0.5 (p {\textless} .001) for cancers and -2.5 (p {\textless} .001) for cardiovascular diseases, with significant differences among countries.{\textless}bold{\textgreater}Conclusion: {\textless}/bold{\textgreater}Declining trend of amenable SDRs was continuing to 2013 but with steepness change compared with previous periods and with a slowdown. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]},
author = {Gianino, Maria Michela and Lenzi, Jacopo and Mu{\c{c}}a, Aida and Fantini, Maria Pia and Siliquini, Roberta and Ricciardi, Walter and Damiani, Gianfranco},
doi = {10.1111/1475-6773.12563},
issn = {14756773},
journal = {Health Services Research},
keywords = {Amenable mortality,OECD countries,geographic area,health care services performance},
number = {5},
pages = {1908--1927},
pmid = {27704525},
title = {{Declining Amenable Mortality: Time Trend (2000–2013) and Geographic Area Analysis}},
volume = {52},
year = {2017}
}
@article{Mackenbach1991,
abstract = {This paper addresses the question whether within the European Community a higher national level of health care expenditure is associated with a larger degree of success in eliminating mortality from preventable and curable conditions. An aggregate measure of mortality from 12 amenable conditions was derived, incorporating an adjustment for the level of socio-economic development. In 1980-1984, between country variation in this measure was almost 2-fold and showed surprising patterns. Rates are relatively low in Greece, The Netherlands and Denmark, and relatively high in Portugal, Italy and Germany. There was no association at all between this measure and the level of health can expenditure. These disturbing findings, which suggest substantial variation In the cost-effectiveness of different health service systems, warrant further investigation. {\textcopyright} 1991.},
author = {Mackenbach, J. P.},
doi = {10.1016/0168-8510(91)90011-L},
isbn = {0168-8510},
issn = {01688510},
journal = {Health policy},
keywords = {European Community,Health care expenditure,Mortality},
number = {2-3},
pages = {245--255},
pmid = {10115995},
title = {{Health care expenditure and mortality from amenable conditions in the European community}},
volume = {19},
year = {1991}
}
@misc{Weber2017a,
abstract = {Amenable mortality has been recently included in the joint monitoring tool by the European Commission and Member States to assess a country's health system performance. Amenable deaths are premature deaths, which should not have occurred at this stage in the light of timely and effective health care. This paper recalculated annual amenable mortality rates for 28 EU countries and the EU for the period 1994–2013 based on the recently published list of deaths amenable to health care by Eurostat. Thereby, it offers a consistent calculation of amenable mortality across European Member States and provides time series data on amenable mortality. In addition, a sensitivity analysis of the amenable mortality indicator for varying age limits and attributional weights of circulatory system diseases is carried out. While large improvements were made in reducing amenable deaths in all European countries, great variations persist among Member States. Most of the decreases in amenable mortality are explained by a substantial reduction of deaths due to circulatory system diseases. In addition, even in countries with good national performance on amenable mortality, sub-national analysis shows that great regional disparities exist. The sensitivity analysis revealed that for the large majority of countries results are stable across different attributional weights used for ischaemic heart diseases and cerebrovascular diseases.},
author = {Weber, Anke and Clerc, Marie},
booktitle = {Health Policy},
doi = {10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.03.017},
issn = {18726054},
keywords = {Cause of death,Healthcare disparities,Premature mortality,Public health},
number = {6},
pages = {644--652},
pmid = {28456413},
title = {{Deaths amenable to health care: Converging trends in the EU?}},
volume = {121},
year = {2017}
}
@misc{Lakhani1986,
author = {Lakhani, Azim and Charlton, John and Aristidou, Maria and Donaghy, Martin},
booktitle = {The Lancet},
doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(86)91293-6},
issn = {01406736},
number = {8488},
pages = {1029--1030},
title = {{MORTALITY FROM CAUSES AMENABLE TO HEALTH SERVICES INTERVENTION}},
volume = {327},
year = {1986}
}
@article{Mackenbach1990,
abstract = {STUDY OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to review published work reporting mortality from conditions amenable to medical intervention and compare the methods used and the results obtained. SOURCE MATERIAL: Two types of analysis were examined: (1) analyses of time trends, relating decline in mortality from amenable conditions to improvements in medical care (3 papers); (2) analyses of geographical variation, either between or within countries, in which mortality was related to the availability of health care resources and to other factors (8 papers).$\backslash$n$\backslash$nRESULTS: Time-trend studies have in general shown that mortality from amenable causes has declined faster over the past decades than most other causes of death. Studies of geographical variation have shown that mortality from amenable causes is consistently associated with socioeconomic factors, and that the association with the provision of health care resources is rather weak and inconsistent.$\backslash$n$\backslash$nCONCLUSIONS: (1) The low levels of mortality from amenable causes which presently prevail in industrialised countries are likely to reflect, at least in part, the increased effectiveness of health services; (2) geographical variation in mortality from amenable causes has not yet been shown to reflect differences in effectiveness of health services; and (3) if geographical variation in avoidable mortality does reflect such differences, they must arise from circumstances other than the level of supply, for example from more specific aspects of health care delivery, and are probably closely related to socioeconomic circumstances. In depth studies at the individual level are now more likely to produce information about factors limiting the effectiveness of health services than further studies of aggregate data.},
author = {Mackenbach, J. P. and Bouvier-Colle, M. H. and Jougla, E.},
doi = {10.1136/jech.44.2.106},
issn = {0143005X},
journal = {Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health},
number = {2},
pages = {106--111},
pmid = {2196328},
title = {{'Avoidable' mortality and health services: A review of aggregate data studies}},
volume = {44},
year = {1990}
}
@article{Statistics2017,
abstract = {This bulletin presents mortality figures for causes of death that are considered avoidable in the presence of timely and effective healthcare or public health interventions (avoidable mortality). Figures are presented for England and Wales and the regions of England for the period 2001–2011. Trends in mortality by causes considered preventable (preventable mortality) or amenable to healthcare (amenable mortality), which are subsets of total avoidable mortality are also presented.},
author = {Statistics, Office for National},
journal = {Office for National Statistics},
number = {October 2017},
pages = {1--19},
title = {{Avoidable mortality in England and Wales: 2015}},
year = {2017}
}
@article{Korda2006,
abstract = {Objectives: Using the concept of avoidable mortality, international studies suggest that healthcare has been effective in reducing mortality. This paper provides an analysis of avoidable mortality in Australia and compares trends with those of Western Europe. Methods: Using unit-record mortality data, we calculated avoidable mortality rates in Australia for 1968-2001. We partitioned avoidable causes into three categories: those amenable to medical care; those mainly responsive to health policy; and ischaemic heart disease. We used Poisson regression to model the trends. We compared trends with those of nine European countries using published data. Results: Total avoidable death rates fell by 68{\%} in females and 72{\%} in males. The corresponding non-avoidable death rates fell by 35 and 33{\%}. The annual declines in avoidable mortality rates were: 3.47{\%} [95{\%} confidence intervals (CI) 3.44-3.50{\%}] in males and 3.89{\%} (95{\%} CI 3.86-3.91{\%}) in females. For non-avoidable mortality rates, the annual declines were 1.09{\%} (95{\%} CI 1.05-1.13{\%}) and 0.95{\%} (95{\%} CI 0.92-0.98{\%}), respectively. In females, declines in death rates from causes amenable to medical care contributed 54{\%} to the decline in avoidable mortality rates, ischaemic heart disease contributed 45{\%}, and causes responsive to health policy intervention contributed 1{\%}. In males, the corresponding contributions were 32, 57 and 11{\%}. These rates, and the declines between 1980 and 1998, were comparable with selected European countries, with Australia's ranking improving over the period. Conclusion: Trends in avoidable mortality in Australia suggest that the Australian healthcare system has been effective in improving population health. Australia's experience compares favourably with that of Europe. {\textcopyright} 2005 The Royal Institute of Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.},
author = {Korda, R. J. and Butler, Jim R.G.},
doi = {10.1016/j.puhe.2005.07.006},
isbn = {0033-3506},
issn = {00333506},
journal = {Public Health},
keywords = {Australia,Avoidable mortality,Europe,Mortality/trends},
number = {2},
pages = {95--105},
pmid = {16269160},
title = {{Effect of healthcare on mortality: Trends in avoidable mortality in Australia and comparisons with Western Europe}},
volume = {120},
year = {2006}
}