Long-Term Disability Outcomes for Migrants (and Non-migrants) 12 Years Post-injury: Results from the Prospective Outcomes of Injury Study in New Zealand.

To understand, and identify predictors of, long-term post-injury (i.e. 12 years post-injury) disability outcomes for migrants and non-migrants. This 12-year longitudinal study followed participants with entitlement claim injuries registered with New Zealand's universal no-fault injury insurer between 2007 and 2009. Information was collected about migrant status, other sociodemographic, health and disability characteristics, and injury characteristics. Disability outcome information was collected 12 years later. Of 1543 people interviewed 12 years post-injury, 1497 had disability and migrant status data available; 20% were migrants (n = 301). Migrants reporting inadequate pre-injury household income or those who perceived their injury as a threat to life at the time of injury were more likely to experience disability 12 years post-injury (aRR 2.08; 95% CI 1.09-4.03, aRR 2.93; 95%CI 1.17-6.69, respectively). Hospitalised injured migrants were significantly less likely to have long-term disability (aRR 0.18; 95%CI 0.04-0.55) than those not hospitalised. We found sociodemographic and injury-related characteristics were independently associated with long-term disability among migrants. We highlight that some characteristics, ascertained early in the injury pathway, predict risk of long-term disability. Early post-injury interventions focused on improving disability outcomes for migrants may also have long-term impacts.

Cascade of care of people diagnosed with HIV in New Zealand between 2006 and 2017.

OBJECTIVES: We estimated the proportion of people reported with HIV in New Zealand between 2006 and 2017, and alive in 2017-2019, who were on antiretroviral therapy (ART) and had a suppressed viral load (VL), and explored their associated characteristics. METHODS: Data were anonymously linked to information on ART and VL within the data collection period (January 2017 to August 2019) using the National Health Index (NHI), Ministry of Health and laboratory datasets, as well as information from clinical specialists. Logistic regression was used to test for associations. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken to estimate the range for the key proportions. RESULTS: Overall, 2355 people were reported with HIV, of whom 116 (5%) had died, 337 (14%) were overseas, and 1701 (72%) were alive in New Zealand; for the remaining 201 (9%) the outcome was unknown. Clinical data were available for 1490 people (87.6%): 1408 (94.5%) were on ART, 11 (< 1%) were not on ART, and for 71 (4.8%) this was unknown. Of those on ART, 1156 (82.1%) had a suppressed VL (< 200 copies/mL), 34 (2.4%) were unsuppressed, and for 218 (15.5%) this was unknown. The estimate of the proportion on ART ranged from 99% to 78%, and those with a suppressed VL ranged from 98% to 78%. CONCLUSIONS: Among people with HIV in New Zealand who are under care, a high proportion were on ART and had suppressed VL. Increasing collection of NHIs and better linkage with laboratory information will reduce the number with unknown information and provide more complete VL results in the future.

The relationship between study sponsorship, risks of bias, and research outcomes in atrazine exposure studies conducted in non-human animals: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A critical component of systematic review methodology is the assessment of the risks of bias of studies that are included in the review. There is controversy about whether funding source should be included in a risk of bias assessment of animal toxicology studies. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether industry research sponsorship is associated with methodological biases, the results, or conclusions of animal studies examining the effect of exposure to atrazine on reproductive or developmental outcomes. METHODS: We searched multiple electronic databases and the reference lists of relevant articles to identify original research studies examining the effect of any dose of atrazine exposure at any life stage on reproduction or development in non-human animals. We compared methodological risks of bias, the conclusions of the studies, the statistical significance of the findings, and the magnitude of effect estimates between industry sponsored and non-industry sponsored studies. RESULTS: Fifty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. There were no differences in methodological risks of bias in industry versus non-industry sponsored studies. 39 studies tested environmentally relevant concentrations of atrazine (11 industry sponsored, 24 non-industry sponsored, 4 with no funding disclosures). Non-industry sponsored studies (12/24, 50.0%) were more likely to conclude that atrazine was harmful compared to industry sponsored studies (2/11, 18.1%) (p value=0.07). A higher proportion of non-industry sponsored studies reported statistically significant harmful effects (8/24, 33.3%) compared to industry-sponsored studies (1/11; 9.1%) (p value=0.13). The association of industry sponsorship with decreased effect sizes for harm outcomes was inconclusive. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the inclusion of research sponsorship as a risk of bias criterion in tools used to assess risks of bias in animal studies for systematic reviews. The reporting of other empirically based risk of bias criteria for animal studies, such as blinded outcome assessment, randomization, and all animals included in analyses, needs to improve to facilitate the assessment of studies for systematic reviews.