4.6 Article

Global, regional, and national prevalence and disability-adjusted life-years for infertility in 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: results from a global burden of disease study, 2017

期刊

AGING-US
卷 11, 期 23, 页码 10952-10991

出版社

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/aging.102497

关键词

female infertility; male infertility; prevalence; disability-adjusted life-years; global burden of disease study

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2017YFC0907400]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of China [81602918]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2018M641752]
  4. Campus Research Fund of China Medical University [YQ20170002]
  5. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To provide comprehensive estimates of the global, regional, and national burden of infertility from 1990 to 2017, using findings from a 2017 study on the global burden of disease (GBD), we assessed the burden of infertility in 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2017. DisMod-MR 2.1 is a Bayesian meta-regression method that estimates non-fatal outcomes using sparse and heterogeneous epidemiological data. Globally, the age-standardized prevalence rate of infertility increased by 0.370% per year for females and 0.291% per year for males from 1990 to 2017. Additionally, age-standardized disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) of infertility increased by 0.396% per year for females and 0.293% per year for males during the observational period. An increasing trend to these burden estimates was observed throughout the all socio-demographic index (SDI) countries. Interestingly, we found that high SDI countries had the lowest level of prevalence and DALYs in both genders. However, the largest increasing trend was observed in high-SDI countries for females. By contrast, low-SDI countries had the largest increasing trend in males. Negative associations were observed between these burden estimates and the SDI level. The global disease burden of infertility has been increasing throughout the period from 1990 to 2017.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据