Introduction First study of social inequalities in tobacco-attributable mortality (TAM) in Spain considering the joint influence of sex, age, and education (intersectional perspective). Methods Data on all deaths due to cancer, cardiometabolic and respiratory diseases among people aged �35 years in 2016 were obtained from the Spanish Statistical Office. TAM was calculated based on sex-, age-and education-specific smoking prevalence, and on sex-, ageand disease-specific relative risks of death for former and current smokers vs lifetime nonsmokers. As inequality measures, the relative index of inequality (RII) and the slope index of inequality (SII) were calculated using Poisson regression. The RII is interpreted as the relative risk of mortality between the lowest and the highest educational level, and the SII as the absolute difference in mortality. Results The crude TAM rate was 55 and 334 per 100,000 in women and men, respectively. Half of these deaths occurred among people with the lowest educational level (27% of the population). The RII for total mortality was 0.39 (95%CI: 0.35-0.42) in women and 1.61 (95%CI: 1.55-1.67) in men. The SII was-41 and 111 deaths per 100,000, respectively. Less-educated women aged <55 years and men (all ages) showed an increased mortality risk; nonetheless, less educated women aged �55 had a reduced risk.

Recent international communicable disease crises have highlighted the need for countries to assure their preparedness to respond effectively to public health emergencies. The objective of this study was to critically review existing tools to support a country’s assessment of its health emergency preparedness. We developed a framework to analyze the expected effectiveness and utility of these tools. Through mixed search strategies, we identified 12 tools with relevance to public health emergencies. There was considerable consensus concerning the critical preparedness system elements to be assessed, although their relative emphasis and means of assessment and measurement varied considerably. Several tools identified appeared to have reporting requirements as their primary aim, rather than primary utility for system self-assessment of the countries and states using the tool. Few tools attempted to give an account of their underlying evidence base. Only some tools were available in a user-friendly electronic modality or included quantitative measures to support the monitoring of system preparedness over time. We conclude there is still a need for improvement in tools available for assessment of country preparedness for public health emergencies, and for applied research to increase identification of system measures that are valid indicators of system response capability.

No abstract

No abstract