Abstract:No assessment of the quality of publicly available population data being used in the UAE diabetes metrics has been published. Examining the reliability of diabetes metrics for the UAE has offered
“…According to the report, 15 to 30 percent of prediabetics will develop T2D within five years, unless they make lifestyle changes (including diet and exercise). Based on these considerations, in light of the fact that many of the apparently healthy control individuals who are genetically predisposed will develop T2D later in life, it is easy to understand how difficult it can be to define an appropriate non-diabetic control group in conducting case-control studies of T2D without extensive testing and personal interviews aimed at recruiting healthy individuals with neither a personal nor family history of T2D and related conditions, including hypertension, hyperlipidemia and cardiovascular disease [ 9 , 53 ]. Thus, this issue could represent a misclassification bias that might lead to misleading results in studies investigating the association of T2D with certain genotypes [ 54 ], including the more recent GWAS [ 55 – 57 ].…”
The high-mobility group A1 (HMGA1) gene has been previously identified as a potential novel candidate gene for susceptibility to insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes (T2D) mellitus. For this reason, several studies have been conducted in recent years examining the association of the HMGA1 gene variant rs146052672 (also designated IVS5-13insC) with T2D. Because of non-univocal data and non-overlapping results among laboratories, we conducted the current meta-analysis with the aim to yield a more precise and reliable conclusion for this association. Using predetermined inclusion criteria, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar and Embase were searched for all relevant available literature published until November 2014. Two of the authors independently evaluated the quality of the included studies and extracted the data. Values from the single studies were combined to determine the meta-analysis pooled estimates. Heterogeneity and publication bias were also examined. Among the articles reviewed, five studies (for a total of 13,789 cases and 13,460 controls) met the predetermined criteria for inclusion in this meta-analysis. The combined adjusted odds ratio estimates revealed that the rs146052672 variant genotype had an overall statistically significant effect on increasing the risk of development of T2D. As most of the study subjects were Caucasian, further studies are needed to establish whether the association of this variant with an increased risk of T2D is generalizable to other populations. Also, in the light of this result, it would appear to be highly desirable that further in-depth investigations should be undertaken to elucidate the biological significance of the HMGA1 rs146052672 variant.
“…According to the report, 15 to 30 percent of prediabetics will develop T2D within five years, unless they make lifestyle changes (including diet and exercise). Based on these considerations, in light of the fact that many of the apparently healthy control individuals who are genetically predisposed will develop T2D later in life, it is easy to understand how difficult it can be to define an appropriate non-diabetic control group in conducting case-control studies of T2D without extensive testing and personal interviews aimed at recruiting healthy individuals with neither a personal nor family history of T2D and related conditions, including hypertension, hyperlipidemia and cardiovascular disease [ 9 , 53 ]. Thus, this issue could represent a misclassification bias that might lead to misleading results in studies investigating the association of T2D with certain genotypes [ 54 ], including the more recent GWAS [ 55 – 57 ].…”
The high-mobility group A1 (HMGA1) gene has been previously identified as a potential novel candidate gene for susceptibility to insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes (T2D) mellitus. For this reason, several studies have been conducted in recent years examining the association of the HMGA1 gene variant rs146052672 (also designated IVS5-13insC) with T2D. Because of non-univocal data and non-overlapping results among laboratories, we conducted the current meta-analysis with the aim to yield a more precise and reliable conclusion for this association. Using predetermined inclusion criteria, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar and Embase were searched for all relevant available literature published until November 2014. Two of the authors independently evaluated the quality of the included studies and extracted the data. Values from the single studies were combined to determine the meta-analysis pooled estimates. Heterogeneity and publication bias were also examined. Among the articles reviewed, five studies (for a total of 13,789 cases and 13,460 controls) met the predetermined criteria for inclusion in this meta-analysis. The combined adjusted odds ratio estimates revealed that the rs146052672 variant genotype had an overall statistically significant effect on increasing the risk of development of T2D. As most of the study subjects were Caucasian, further studies are needed to establish whether the association of this variant with an increased risk of T2D is generalizable to other populations. Also, in the light of this result, it would appear to be highly desirable that further in-depth investigations should be undertaken to elucidate the biological significance of the HMGA1 rs146052672 variant.
“…High rates of childhood obesity, diabetes, renal failure, and other chronic conditions are of key concern within the UAE. While it is difficult to access valid and contemporaneous data (S. Brownie et al., 2014 ; Hunter, Robb, & Brownie, 2014 ) that permits the comparison of the health of the UAE population against the health of other countries, in 2014, the comparative prevalence rate of diabetes (among the adult population) in UAE (at 19.02%) was more than double the global comparative prevalence ( International Diabetes Federation, 2014 ). Obesity and overweight amongst children and adolescents, increasing the risk of metabolic and chronic diseases, has also attracted much attention in the UAE ( Al Junaibi, Abdulle, Sabri, Hag-Ali, & Nagelkerke, 2013 ; Al-Haddad, Little, & Abdul-Fhartoor, 2005 ; Al-Sharbatti et al., 2011 ; Hajat, Harrison, & Shather, 2012 ; Katsaiti & El Anshasy, 2013 ).…”
Section: Emerging Roles For Nurses In the Uaementioning
In 2009, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) established a Nursing and Midwifery Council with a mandate to develop standards for the registration and regulation of nursing and midwifery and to strengthen the nursing and midwifery workforce. Priorities included workforce Emiratization and the development of regulatory standards to support advanced and speciality nursing practice and new models of care—particularly for the management of noncommunicable diseases. This article provides background, context for, and best practice inputs to the effort to provide one unified framework of nursing regulation and licensure across the whole of the UAE. This article is intended for nurse leaders, policy makers, and regulators who are reviewing or developing nursing regulatory processes and advancing nursing workforce capacity building activities; and nurse educators and nurses wishing to work in the UAE.
Purpose of ReviewThe aim of this review is to identify the key contextual and methodological differences in health impact assessments (HIA) of ambient air pollution performed for Europe. We limited our review to multi-country reviews. An additional aim is to quantify some of these differences by applying them in a HIA template in three European cities.Recent FindingsSeveral HIAs of ambient air pollution have been performed for Europe, and their key results have been largely disseminated. Different studies have, however, come up with substantial differences in attributed health effects. It is of importance to review the background contributing to these differences and to quantify their importance for decision makers who will use them.SummaryWe identified several methodological differences that could explain the discrepancy behind the number of attributable deaths or years of life lost. The main differences are due to the exposure-response functions chosen, the ways of assessing air pollution levels, the air pollution scenarios and the study population. In the quantification part, we found that using risk estimates from the European Study of Cohorts for Air Pollution Effects (ESCAPE) instead of the American Cancer Society (ACS) study could nearly double the attributable burden of ambient air pollution.This study provides some insights into the differential results in previously published HIAs on air pollution in Europe. These results are important for stakeholders in order to make informed decisions.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s40572-018-0175-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.