Search

Background: The focus of most epidemiological studies has been mortality or clinical events, with less information on activity limitations related to basic daily functions and their consequences. Standardised data from multiple countries at different economic levels in different regions of the world on activity limitations and their associations with clinical outcomes are sparse. We aimed to quantify the prevalence of activity limitations and use of assistive devices and the association of limitations with adverse outcomes in 25 countries grouped by different economic levels., Methods: In this analysis, we obtained data from individuals in 25 high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries from the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiological (PURE) study (175 660 participants). In the PURE study, individuals aged 35-70 years who intended to continue living in their current home for a further 4 years were invited to complete a questionnaire on activity limitations. Participant follow-up was planned once every 3 years either by telephone or in person. The activity limitation screen consisted of questions on self-reported difficulty with walking, grasping, bending, seeing close, seeing far, speaking, hearing, and use of assistive devices (gait, vision, and hearing aids). We estimated crude prevalence of self-reported activity limitations and use of assistive devices, and prevalence standardised by age and sex. We used logistic regression to additionally adjust prevalence for education and socioeconomic factors and to estimate the probability of activity limitations and assistive devices by age, sex, and country income. We used Cox frailty models to evaluate the association between each activity limitation with mortality and clinical events (cardiovascular disease, heart failure, pneumonia, falls, and cancer). The PURE study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03225586., Findings: Between Jan 12, 2001, and May 6, 2019, 175 584 individuals completed at least one question on the activity limitation questionnaire (mean age 50·6 years [SD 9·8]; 103 625 [59%] women). Of the individuals who completed all questions, mean follow-up was 10·7 years (SD 4·4). The most common self-reported activity limitations were difficulty with bending (23 921 [13·6%] of 175 515 participants), seeing close (22 532 [13·4%] of 167 801 participants), and walking (22 805 [13·0%] of 175 554 participants); prevalence of limitations was higher with older age and among women. The prevalence of all limitations standardised by age and sex, with the exception of hearing, was highest in low-income countries and middle-income countries, and this remained consistent after adjustment for socioeconomic factors. The use of gait, visual, and hearing aids was lowest in low-income countries and middle-income countries, particularly among women. The prevalence of seeing close limitation was four times higher (6257 [16·5%] of 37 926 participants vs 717 [4·0%] of 18 039 participants) and the prevalence of seeing far limitation was five times higher (4003 [10·6%] of 37 923 participants vs 391 [2·2%] of 18 038 participants) in low-income countries than in high-income countries, but the prevalence of glasses use in low-income countries was half that in high-income countries. Walking limitation was most strongly associated with mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1·32 [95% CI 1·25-1·39]) and most consistently associated with other clinical events, with other notable associations observed between seeing far limitation and mortality, grasping limitation and cardiovascular disease, bending limitation and falls, and between speaking limitation and stroke., Interpretation: The global prevalence of activity limitations is substantially higher in women than men and in low-income countries and middle-income countries compared with high-income countries, coupled with a much lower use of gait, visual, and hearing aids. Strategies are needed to prevent and mitigate activity limitations globally, with particular emphasis on low-income countries and women., Funding: Funding sources are listed at the end of the Article., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AR received grants from the Swedish Research Council and Swedish Heart and Lung Foundation. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Background: Higher intake of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) has been associated with increased risk of CVD and mortality in observational studies from Western countries but data from non-Western countries are limited., Objectives: We aimed to assess the association between consumption of UPFs and risk of mortality and major CVD in a cohort from multiple world regions., Design: This analysis includes 138,076 participants without a history of CVD between the ages of 35 and 70 y living on 5 continents, with a median follow-up of 10.2 y. We used country-specific validated food-frequency questionnaires to determine individuals' food intake. We classified foods and beverages based on the NOVA classification into UPFs. The primary outcome was total mortality (CV and non-CV mortality) and secondary outcomes were incident major cardiovascular events. We calculated hazard ratios using multivariable Cox frailty models and evaluated the association of UPFs with total mortality, CV mortality, non-CV mortality, and major CVD events., Results: In this study, 9227 deaths and 7934 major cardiovascular events were recorded during the follow-up period. We found a diet high in UPFs (≥2 servings/d compared with 0 intake) was associated with higher risk of mortality (HR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.15, 1.42; P-trend < 0.001), CV mortality (HR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.98, 1.41; P-trend = 0.04), and non-CV mortality (HR: 1.32; 95% CI 1.17, 1.50; P-trend < 0.001). We did not find a significant association between UPF intake and risk of major CVD., Conclusions: A diet with a high intake of UPFs was associated with a higher risk of mortality in a diverse multinational study. Globally, limiting the consumption of UPFs should be encouraged., (Copyright © 2022 American Society for Nutrition. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Dietary guidelines recommend limiting red meat intake because it is a major source of medium- and long-chain SFAs and is presumed to increase the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Evidence of an association between unprocessed red meat intake and CVD is inconsistent., Objective: The study aimed to assess the association of unprocessed red meat, poultry, and processed meat intake with mortality and major CVD., Methods: The Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) Study is a cohort of 134,297 individuals enrolled from 21 low-, middle-, and high-income countries. Food intake was recorded using country-specific validated FFQs. The primary outcomes were total mortality and major CVD. HRs were estimated using multivariable Cox frailty models with random intercepts., Results: In the PURE study, during 9.5 y of follow-up, we recorded 7789 deaths and 6976 CVD events. Higher unprocessed red meat intake (≥250 g/wk vs. <50 g/wk) was not significantly associated with total mortality (HR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.85, 1.02; P-trend = 0.14) or major CVD (HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.92, 1.11; P-trend = 0.72). Similarly, no association was observed between poultry intake and health outcomes. Higher intake of processed meat (≥150 g/wk vs. 0 g/wk) was associated with higher risk of total mortality (HR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.08, 2.10; P-trend = 0.009) and major CVD (HR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.08, 1.98; P-trend = 0.004)., Conclusions: In a large multinational prospective study, we did not find significant associations between unprocessed red meat and poultry intake and mortality or major CVD. Conversely, a higher intake of processed meat was associated with a higher risk of mortality and major CVD., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society for Nutrition.)