Hamid Sharifi

Prof. Hamid Sharifi

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

20Years (2007-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 November 2018 in The Lancet
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JSJeffrey D Stanaway
Jeffrey D Stanaway
AAAshkan Afshin
Ashkan Afshin
EGEmmanuela Gakidou
Emmanuela Gakidou
SLStephen S Lim
Stephen S Lim
DADegu Abate
Degu Abate
CMChristopher J L Murray
Christopher J L Murray
The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2017 comparative risk assessment (CRA) is a comprehensive approach to risk factor quantification that offers a useful tool for synthesising evidence on risks and risk-outcome associations. With each annual GBD study, we update the GBD CRA to incorporate improved methods, new risks and risk-outcome pairs, and new data on risk exposure levels and risk-outcome associations. We used the CRA framework developed for previous iterations of GBD to estimate levels and trends in exposure, attributable deaths, and attributable disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), by age group, sex, year, and location for 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or groups of risks from 1990 to 2017. This study included 476 risk-outcome pairs that met the GBD study criteria for convincing or probable evidence of causation. We extracted relative risk and exposure estimates from 46 749 randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, household surveys, census data, satellite data, and other sources. We used statistical models to pool data, adjust for bias, and incorporate covariates. Using the counterfactual scenario of theoretical minimum risk exposure level (TMREL), we estimated the portion of deaths and DALYs that could be attributed to a given risk. We explored the relationship between development and risk exposure by modelling the relationship between the Socio-demographic Index (SDI) and risk-weighted exposure prevalence and estimated expected levels of exposure and risk-attributable burden by SDI. Finally, we explored temporal changes in risk-attributable DALYs by decomposing those changes into six main component drivers of change as follows: (1) population growth; (2) changes in population age structures; (3) changes in exposure to environmental and occupational risks; (4) changes in exposure to behavioural risks; (5) changes in exposure to metabolic risks; and (6) changes due to all other factors, approximated as the risk-deleted death and DALY rates, where the risk-deleted rate is the rate that would be observed had we reduced the exposure levels to the TMREL for all risk factors included in GBD 2017. In 2017, 34·1 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 33·3-35·0) deaths and 1·21 billion (1·14-1·28) DALYs were attributable to GBD risk factors. Globally, 61·0% (59·6-62·4) of deaths and 48·3% (46·3-50·2) of DALYs were attributed to the GBD 2017 risk factors. When ranked by risk-attributable DALYs, high systolic blood pressure (SBP) was the leading risk factor, accounting for 10·4 million (9·39-11·5) deaths and 218 million (198-237) DALYs, followed by smoking (7·10 million [6·83-7·37] deaths and 182 million [173-193] DALYs), high fasting plasma glucose (6·53 million [5·23-8·23] deaths and 171 million [144-201] DALYs), high body-mass index (BMI; 4·72 million [2·99-6·70] deaths and 148 million [98·6-202] DALYs), and short gestation for birthweight (1·43 million [1·36-1·51] deaths and 139 million [131-147] DALYs). In total, risk-attributable DALYs declined by 4·9% (3·3-6·5) between 2007 and 2017. In the absence of demographic changes (ie, population growth and ageing), changes in risk exposure and risk-deleted DALYs would have led to a 23·5% decline in DALYs during that period. Conversely, in the absence of changes in risk exposure and risk-deleted DALYs, demographic changes would have led to an 18·6% increase in DALYs during that period. The ratios of observed risk exposure levels to exposure levels expected based on SDI (O/E ratios) increased globally for unsafe drinking water and household air pollution between 1990 and 2017. This result suggests that development is occurring more rapidly than are changes in the underlying risk structure in a population. Conversely, nearly universal declines in O/E ratios for smoking and alcohol use indicate that, for a given SDI, exposure to these risks is declining. In 2017, the leading Level 4 risk factor for age-standardised DALY rates was high SBP in four super-regions: central Europe, eastern Europe, and central Asia; north Africa and Middle East; south Asia; and southeast Asia, east Asia, and Oceania. The leading risk factor in the high-income super-region was smoking, in Latin America and Caribbean was high BMI, and in sub-Saharan Africa was unsafe sex. O/E ratios for unsafe sex in sub-Saharan Africa were notably high, and those for alcohol use in north Africa and the Middle East were notably low. By quantifying levels and trends in exposures to risk factors and the resulting disease burden, this assessment offers insight into where past policy and programme efforts might have been successful and highlights current priorities for public health action. Decreases in behavioural, environmental, and occupational risks have largely offset the effects of population growth and ageing, in relation to trends in absolute burden. Conversely, the combination of increasing metabolic risks and population ageing will probably continue to drive the increasing trends in non-communicable diseases at the global level, which presents both a public health challenge and opportunity. We see considerable spatiotemporal heterogeneity in levels of risk exposure and risk-attributable burden. Although levels of development underlie some of this heterogeneity, O/E ratios show risks for which countries are overperforming or underperforming relative to their level of development. As such, these ratios provide a benchmarking tool to help to focus local decision making. Our findings reinforce the importance of both risk exposure monitoring and epidemiological research to assess causal connections between risks and health outcomes, and they highlight the usefulness of the GBD...

1 December 2019 in JAMA Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
GCGlobal Burden of Disease Cancer Collaboration
Global Burden of Disease Cancer Collaboration
CFChristina Fitzmaurice
Christina Fitzmaurice
DADegu Abate
Degu Abate
NANaghmeh Abbasi
Naghmeh Abbasi
HAHedayat Abbastabar
Hedayat Abbastabar
CMChristopher J. L. Murray
Christopher J. L. Murray
Cancer is now widely recognized as a global problem that unfortunately lacks a global solution. The latest United Nations high-level meeting on noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) exemplified this conundrum.1 Despite global commitment to reducing the risk of and disability from NCDs, including cancer, implementation of known solutions is inadequate to reach the 2011 Political Declaration on the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases2,3 (25% reduction in premature mortality from NCDs by 2025) and the third Sustainable Development Goal (by 2030 reduce by one-third premature mortality from NCDs through prevention and treatment, and promote mental health and well-being).4 To reduce cancer burden, identifying the scope of the problem and mapping out implementation of solutions is best done in National Cancer Control Plans (NCCPs). However, a recent review showed that only 29% of low-income countries had a NCCP, and even if NCCPs existed, cost, financing, monitoring, and expansion of information systems was often inadequate. Many highly effective prevention and treatment strategies exist for cancer. However, they are often very specific (eg, vaccination for human papillomavirus and hepatitis B virus for prevention of cervical and liver cancer, or tyrosine kinase inhibitors for cancers with targetable mutations). Effective NCCPs therefore require detailed knowledge about the local burden of cancer and associated risk factors. We herein present results from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 study describing cancer incidence, mortality, years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 195 countries from 1990 through 2017, which can inform cancer control through policy, resource allocation, and health system planning.

1 December 2019 in The Lancet HIV
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
TFTahvi D Frank
Tahvi D Frank
ACAustin Carter
Austin Carter
DJDeepa Jahagirdar
Deepa Jahagirdar
MBMolly H Biehl
Molly H Biehl
DDDirk Douwes-Schultz
Dirk Douwes-Schultz
CMChristopher J L Murray
Christopher J L Murray
Understanding the patterns of HIV/AIDS epidemics is crucial to tracking and monitoring the progress of prevention and control efforts in countries. We provide a comprehensive assessment of the levels and trends of HIV/AIDS incidence, prevalence, mortality, and coverage of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for 1980-2017 and forecast these estimates to 2030 for 195 countries and territories. We determined a modelling strategy for each country on the basis of the availability and quality of data. For countries and territories with data from population-based seroprevalence surveys or antenatal care clinics, we estimated prevalence and incidence using an open-source version of the Estimation and Projection Package-a natural history model originally developed by the UNAIDS Reference Group on Estimates, Modelling, and Projections. For countries with cause-specific vital registration data, we corrected data for garbage coding (ie, deaths coded to an intermediate, immediate, or poorly defined cause) and HIV misclassification. We developed a process of cohort incidence bias adjustment to use information on survival and deaths recorded in vital registration to back-calculate HIV incidence. For countries without any representative data on HIV, we produced incidence estimates by pulling information from observed bias in the geographical region. We used a re-coded version of the Spectrum model (a cohort component model that uses rates of disease progression and HIV mortality on and off ART) to produce age-sex-specific incidence, prevalence, and mortality, and treatment coverage results for all countries, and forecast these measures to 2030 using Spectrum with inputs that were extended on the basis of past trends in treatment scale-up and new infections. Global HIV mortality peaked in 2006 with 1·95 million deaths (95% uncertainty interval 1·87-2·04) and has since decreased to 0·95 million deaths (0·91-1·01) in 2017. New cases of HIV globally peaked in 1999 (3·16 million, 2·79-3·67) and since then have gradually decreased to 1·94 million (1·63-2·29) in 2017. These trends, along with ART scale-up, have globally resulted in increased prevalence, with 36·8 million (34·8-39·2) people living with HIV in 2017. Prevalence of HIV was highest in southern sub-Saharan Africa in 2017, and countries in the region had ART coverage ranging from 65·7% in Lesotho to 85·7% in eSwatini. Our forecasts showed that 54 countries will meet the UNAIDS target of 81% ART coverage by 2020 and 12 countries are on track to meet 90% ART coverage by 2030. Forecasted results estimate that few countries will meet the UNAIDS 2020 and 2030 mortality and incidence targets. Despite progress in reducing HIV-related mortality over the past decade, slow decreases in incidence, combined with the current context of stagnated funding for related interventions, mean that many countries are not on track to reach the 2020 and 2030 global targets for reduction in incidence and mortality. With a growing population of people living with HIV, it will continue to be a major threat to public health for years to come. The pace of progress needs to be hastened by continuing to expand access to ART and increasing investments in proven HIV prevention initiatives that can be scaled up to have population-level impact. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, National Institute of Mental Health of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the National Institute on Aging of the NIH.

16 October 2019 in Nature
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RBRoy Burstein
Roy Burstein
NHNathaniel J Henry
Nathaniel J Henry
MCMichael L Collison
Michael L Collison
LMLaurie B Marczak
Laurie B Marczak
ASAmber Sligar
Amber Sligar
SHSimon Hay
Simon Hay
Since 2000, many countries have achieved considerable success in improving child survival, but localized progress remains unclear. To inform efforts towards United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 3.2—to end preventable child deaths by 2030—we need consistently estimated data at the subnational level regarding child mortality rates and trends. Here we quantified, for the period 2000–2017, the subnational variation in mortality rates and number of deaths of neonates, infants and children under 5 years of age within 99 low- and middle-income countries using a geostatistical survival model. We estimated that 32% of children under 5 in these countries lived in districts that had attained rates of 25 or fewer child deaths per 1,000 live births by 2017, and that 58% of child deaths between 2000 and 2017 in these countries could have been averted in the absence of geographical inequality. This study enables the identification of high-mortality clusters, patterns of progress and geographical inequalities to inform appropriate investments and implementations that will help to improve the health of all populations.

30 July 2020 in AIDS and Behavior
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
HMHossein Mirzaei
Hossein Mirzaei
WMWilli McFarland
Willi McFarland
MKMohammad Karamouzian
Mohammad Karamouzian
HSHamid Sharifi
Hamid Sharifi

29 June 2020 in Epidemiology and Infection
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MKMalahat Khalili
Malahat Khalili
MKMohammad Karamouzian
Mohammad Karamouzian
NNNaser Nasiri
Naser Nasiri
SJSara Javadi
Sara Javadi
AMAli Mirzazadeh
Ali Mirzazadeh
HSHamid Sharifi
Hamid Sharifi
Our understanding of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to evolve and there are many unknowns about its epidemiology. This study aims to synthesise case fatality rate (CFR) among confirmed COVID-19 patients, incubation period and time from onset of COVID-19 symptoms to first medical visit, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, recovery, and death. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, and bibliographies of relevant articles from 01 December 2019 to 11 March 2020 without any language restrictions. Quantitative studies that recruited people with confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis were included. Two independent reviewers extracted the data. Out of 1675 non-duplicate studies, 43 were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled mean incubation period was 5.68 (99% confidence interval [CI]: 4.78, 6.59) days. The pooled mean number of days from the onset of COVID-19 symptoms to first clinical visit was 4.92 (95% CI: 3.95, 5.90), ICU admission was 9.84 (95% CI: 8.78, 10.90), recovery was 18.55 (95% CI: 13.69, 23.41), and death was 15.93 (95% CI: 13.07, 18.79). Pooled CFR among confirmed COVID-19 patients was 0.02 (95% CI: 0.02, 0.03). We found that the incubation period and lag between the onset of symptoms and first clinical visit for COVID-19 are longer than other respiratory viral infections including Middle East respiratory syndrome and severe acute respiratory syndrome; however, the current policy of 14 days of mandatory quarantine for everyone potentially exposed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) might be too conservative. Longer quarantine periods might be more justified for extreme cases.