The Human Fertility Database (HFD) was created in response to the growing need of freely available, high-quality, internationally comparable population-level fertility data. In the midst of discussions about the shift to later childbearing and low fertility levels in industrialized countries, the lack of proper fertility data became particularly apparent. A number of other sources of fertility data exist, but accessibility, scope and comparability of these data vary widely, and data documentation is often inadequate or absent. Officially launched in 2009, the HFD is a collaborative endeavour of the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research (MPIDR) in Rostock (Germany) and the Vienna Institute of Demography / Wittgenstein Centre for Demography and Global Human Capital (Austria). The development of the HFD was inspired by the success of the Human Mortality Database (HMD) that had become an important resource of detailed mortality data. By providing free access to detailed fertility data which meet the highest quality standards, the HFD not only fills the gap in the availability of comparable fertility data, but also promotes more sophisticated analyses and methodological advances.
The Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (RLMS) was initially created by the G-7 countries in 1992 as a way to obtain objective nationally representative data on the social, health and economic situation in Russia. It was established to mirror a multipurpose survey—the China Health and Nutrition Survey—and provide in-depth reliable raw data on Russia, accessible for the first time to both Russian and global scholars and institutions. This was instituted in the period following January 1992, when the Russian Federation introduced a series of sweeping economic reforms, including eliminating most food and reducing fuel and other subsidies, using freely fluctuating market prices, privatizing many state enterprises and working to create a growing private sector with private land ownership.
This article of the International Epidemiological Association commissioned paper series stocktakes the population health and status of epidemiology in 21 of the 53 countries of the WHO European Region. Published data were used to describe population health indicators and risk factors. Epidemiological training and research was assessed based on author knowledge, information searches and E-mail survey of experts. Bibliometric analyses determined epidemiological publication outputs.
Between-country differences in life expectancy, amount and profile of disease burden and prevalence of risk factors are marked. Epidemiological training is affected by ongoing structural reforms of educational systems. Training is advanced in Israel and several Eastern European countries. Epidemiological research is mainly university-based in most countries, but predominantly conducted by governmental research institutes in several countries of the former Soviet Union. Funding is generally external and limited, partially due to competition from and prioritization of biomedical research. Multiple relevant professional societies exist, especially in
Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary. Few of the region’s 39 epidemiological academic journals have international currency. The number of epidemiological publications per population is highest for Israel and lowest for South-Central Asian countries.
Epidemiological capacity will continue to be heterogeneous across the region and depend more on countries’ individual historical, social, political and economic conditions and contexts than their epidemiologists’ successive efforts
Background: Russia has the largest area of any country in the world and has one of the highest cardiovascular mortality rates. Over the past decade, the number of facilities able to perform percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) has increased substantially. We quantify the extent to which the constraints of geography make equitable access to this effective technology difficult to achieve. Methods: Hospitals performing PCIs in 2010 and 2015 were identified and combined with data on the population of districts throughout the country. A network analysis tool was used to calculate road-travel times to the nearest PCI facility for those aged 40+ years. Results: The number of PCI facilities increased from 144 to 260 between 2010 and 2015. Overall, the median travel time to the closest PCI facility was 48minutes in 2015, down from 73 minutes in 2010. Two-thirds of the urban population were within 60 minutes’ travel time to a PCI facility in 2015, but only one-fifth of the rural population. Creating 67 new PCI facilities in currently underserved urban districts would increase the population share within 60 minutes’ travel to 62% of the population, benefiting an additional 5.7 million people currently lacking adequate access. Conclusions: There have been considerable but uneven improvements in timely access to PCI facilities in Russia between 2010 and 2015. Russia has not achieved the level of access seen in other large countries with dispersed populations, such as Australian and Canada. However, creating a relatively small number of further PCI facilities could improve access substantially, thereby reducing inequality.