STUDY OBJECTIVE: EURALIM (EURope ALIMentation), a European collaborative study, aimed to determine and describe the extent to which European data on risk factor distributions from different populations could be pooled and harmonised in a common database for international comparisons. SETTING: Seven independent population-based surveys from six European countries (France, Italy, Northern Ireland/United Kingdom, Spain, Switzerland, the Netherlands). METHODS: Data for 18 381 women and 12 908 men aged 40-59 were pooled in a common database. Central statistical analyses on major cardiovascular risk factors were conducted with careful consideration of methodological issues, including differences in study designs, data assessment tools, and analytic techniques used. MAIN RESULTS: Because of the detected variability among methods used, direct comparisons of risk factor distributions and prevalences between studies were problematic. None the less, comparisons of within population contrasts by sex, age group, and other health determinants were considered to be meaningful and apt, as illustrated here for obesity. Results were targeted and disseminated to both the general public and public health professionals and framed in the context of a European information campaign. CONCLUSIONS: International and national comparisons between existing locally run studies are feasible and useful, but harmonisation methods need improvement. Development of an international risk factor surveillance programme based on decentralised data collection is warranted. In the meantime, risk factor contrasts across populations can be used as a basis for targeting needed public health intervention programmes.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: EURALIM (EURope ALIMentation), a European collaborative study, aimed to determine and describe the extent to which European data on risk factor distributions from different populations could be pooled and harmonised in a common database for international comparisons. SETTING: Seven independent population-based surveys from six European countries (France, Italy, Northern Ireland/United Kingdom, Spain, Switzerland, the Netherlands). METHODS: Data for 18 381 women and 12 908 men aged 40-59 were pooled in a common database. Central statistical analyses on major cardiovascular risk factors were conducted with careful consideration of methodological issues, including differences in study designs, data assessment tools, and analytic techniques used. MAIN RESULTS: Because of the detected variability among methods used, direct comparisons of risk factor distributions and prevalences between studies were problematic. None the less, comparisons of within population contrasts by sex, age group, and other health determinants were considered to be meaningful and apt, as illustrated here for obesity. Results were targeted and disseminated to both the general public and public health professionals and framed in the context of a European information campaign. CONCLUSIONS: International and national comparisons between existing locally run studies are feasible and useful, but harmonisation methods need improvement. Development of an international risk factor surveillance programme based on decentralised data collection is warranted. In the meantime, risk factor contrasts across populations can be used as a basis for targeting needed public health intervention programmes.
Authors: P P Huijbregts; E J Feskens; L Räsänen; A Alberti-Fidanza; M Mutanen; F Fidanza; D Kromhout Journal: Eur J Clin Nutr Date: 1995-11 Impact factor: 4.016
Authors: G D Friedman; G R Cutter; R P Donahue; G H Hughes; S B Hulley; D R Jacobs; K Liu; P J Savage Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 1988 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Venkata Sukumar Gurugubelli; Hua Fang; James M Shikany; Salvador V Balkus; Joshua Rumbut; Hieu Ngo; Honggang Wang; Jeroan J Allison; Lyn M Steffen Journal: Smart Health (Amst) Date: 2022-01-13
Authors: Isabel Fortier; Paul R Burton; Paula J Robson; Vincent Ferretti; Julian Little; Francois L'Heureux; Mylène Deschênes; Bartha M Knoppers; Dany Doiron; Joost C Keers; Pamela Linksted; Jennifer R Harris; Geneviève Lachance; Catherine Boileau; Nancy L Pedersen; Carol M Hamilton; Kristian Hveem; Marilyn J Borugian; Richard P Gallagher; John McLaughlin; Louise Parker; John D Potter; John Gallacher; Rudolf Kaaks; Bette Liu; Tim Sprosen; Anne Vilain; Susan A Atkinson; Andrea Rengifo; Robin Morton; Andres Metspalu; H Erich Wichmann; Mark Tremblay; Rex L Chisholm; Andrés Garcia-Montero; Hans Hillege; Jan-Eric Litton; Lyle J Palmer; Markus Perola; Bruce H R Wolffenbuttel; Leena Peltonen; Thomas J Hudson Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2010-09-02 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Marcus R Makowski; Christian H P Jansen; Ullrich Ebersberger; Tobias Schaeffter; Reza Razavi; Massimo Mangino; Tim D Spector; Rene M Botnar; Gerald F Greil Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-10-14 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Anne Berghöfer; Tobias Pischon; Thomas Reinhold; Caroline M Apovian; Arya M Sharma; Stefan N Willich Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2008-06-05 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Perminder S Sachdev; Darren M Lipnicki; Nicole A Kochan; John D Crawford; Kenneth Rockwood; Shifu Xiao; Juan Li; Xia Li; Carol Brayne; Fiona E Matthews; Blossom C M Stephan; Richard B Lipton; Mindy J Katz; Karen Ritchie; Isabelle Carrière; Marie-Laure Ancelin; Sudha Seshadri; Rhoda Au; Alexa S Beiser; Linda C W Lam; Candy H Y Wong; Ada W T Fung; Ki Woong Kim; Ji Won Han; Tae Hui Kim; Ronald C Petersen; Rosebud O Roberts; Michelle M Mielke; Mary Ganguli; Hiroko H Dodge; Tiffany Hughes; Kaarin J Anstey; Nicolas Cherbuin; Peter Butterworth; Tze Pin Ng; Qi Gao; Simone Reppermund; Henry Brodaty; Kenichi Meguro; Nicole Schupf; Jennifer Manly; Yaakov Stern; Antonio Lobo; Raúl Lopez-Anton; Javier Santabárbara Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2013-11-06 Impact factor: 2.474