Mark Drew Crosland Guimarães1, Mariângela Carneiro2, Daisy Maria Xavier de Abreu1, Elisabeth Barboza França1. 1. Grupo de Pesquisas em Epidemiologia e Avaliação em Saúde, Departamento de Medicina Preventiva e Social, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais - Belo Horizonte (MG), Brasil. 2. Departamento de Parasitologia, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais - Belo Horizonte (MG), Brasil.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: : Mortality studies are essential for the monitoring of the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Quality and completeness of data from the mortality information system (SIM) require complementary approaches. METHODS: : Two sources of data were used to assess mortality trends due to HIV/AIDS in Brazil from 2000 and 2014/15: a) data from the SIM published by the Department of STDs, AIDS, and viral hepatitis, and b) Global Burden of Disease 2015 (GBD 2015) studies. Descriptive analyses were carried out and trends in relative reduction of age-adjusted mortality rates per 100,000 inhabitants were compared according to the two methods. RESULTS: : Overall, the magnitude of the mortality rates estimated by the GBD method, for Brazil and its Federative Units (FU), was greater than those obtained from the SIM. The relative reduction was higher for SIM data and there were shifts in the ranking according to the FUs. Between 2000 and 2014/15 there was an increase in the mortality rates for most of the FUs (78 and 88% according to the SIM and GBD, respectively). CONCLUSION: : Data regarding mortality due to HIV/AIDS in Brazil should be of concern, regardless of the method used. Differences in magnitude, relative reductions, and ranking can be attributed to methodological differences, but the GBD is broader, with a higher capacity to capture incorrectly classified data and causes of death not registered or not coded as being due to HIV/AIDS. Alternative and complementary data sources can provide important information for HIV/AIDS public policies in Brazil.
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: : Mortality studies are essential for the monitoring of the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Quality and completeness of data from the mortality information system (SIM) require complementary approaches. METHODS: : Two sources of data were used to assess mortality trends due to HIV/AIDS in Brazil from 2000 and 2014/15: a) data from the SIM published by the Department of STDs, AIDS, and viral hepatitis, and b) Global Burden of Disease 2015 (GBD 2015) studies. Descriptive analyses were carried out and trends in relative reduction of age-adjusted mortality rates per 100,000 inhabitants were compared according to the two methods. RESULTS: : Overall, the magnitude of the mortality rates estimated by the GBD method, for Brazil and its Federative Units (FU), was greater than those obtained from the SIM. The relative reduction was higher for SIM data and there were shifts in the ranking according to the FUs. Between 2000 and 2014/15 there was an increase in the mortality rates for most of the FUs (78 and 88% according to the SIM and GBD, respectively). CONCLUSION: : Data regarding mortality due to HIV/AIDS in Brazil should be of concern, regardless of the method used. Differences in magnitude, relative reductions, and ranking can be attributed to methodological differences, but the GBD is broader, with a higher capacity to capture incorrectly classified data and causes of death not registered or not coded as being due to HIV/AIDS. Alternative and complementary data sources can provide important information for HIV/AIDS public policies in Brazil.
Authors: Mark Drew Crosland Guimarães; Carl Kendall; Laio Magno; Gustavo Machado Rocha; Daniela Riva Knauth; Andrea Fachel Leal; Ines Dourado; Maria Amélia Veras; Ana Maria de Brito; Ligia Regina Franco Sansigolo Kerr Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2018-05 Impact factor: 1.889
Authors: Jennifer M Ross; Nathaniel J Henry; Laura A Dwyer-Lindgren; Andrea de Paula Lobo; Fatima Marinho de Souza; Molly H Biehl; Sarah E Ray; Robert C Reiner; Rebecca W Stubbs; Kirsten E Wiens; Lucas Earl; Michael J Kutz; Natalia V Bhattacharjee; Hmwe H Kyu; Mohsen Naghavi; Simon I Hay Journal: BMC Med Date: 2018-09-06 Impact factor: 8.775