Economic globalization, inequality and body mass index:a cross-national analysis of 127 countries

This article investigates to what extent the worldwide increase in body mass index (BMI) has been affected by economic globalization and inequality. We used time-series and longitudinal cross-national analysis of 127 countries from 1980 to 2008. Data on mean adult BMI were obtained from the Global Burden of Metabolic Risk Factors of Chronic Diseases Collaborating Group. Globalization was measured using the Swiss Economic Institute (KOF) index of economic globalization. Economic inequality between countries was measured with the mean difference in gross domestic product per capita purchasing power parity in international dollars. Economic inequality within countries was measured using the Gini index from the Standardized World Income Inequality Database. Other covariates including poverty, population size, urban population, openness to trade and foreign direct investment were taken from the World Development Indicators (WDI) database. Time-series regression analyses showed that the global increase in BMI is positively associated with both the index of economic globalization and inequality between countries, after adjustment for covariates. Longitudinal panel data analyses showed that the association between economic globalization and BMI is robust after controlling for all covariates and using different estimators. The association between economic inequality within countries and BMI, however, was significant only among high-income nations. More research is needed to study the pathways between economic globalization and BMI. These findings, however, contribute to explaining how contemporary globalization can be reformed to promote better health and control the global obesity epidemic. © 2013 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.

The statistical significance of randomized controlled trial results is frequently fragile: A case for a Fragility Index

Objectives

A P-value <0.05 is one metric used to evaluate the results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT). We wondered how often statistically significant results in RCTs may be lost with small changes in the numbers of outcomes.

Study Design and Setting

A review of RCTs in high-impact medical journals that reported a statistically significant result for at least one dichotomous or time-to-event outcome in the abstract. In the group with the smallest number of events, we changed the status of patients without an event to an event until the P-value exceeded 0.05. We labeled this number the Fragility Index; smaller numbers indicated a more fragile result.

Results

The 399 eligible trials had a median sample size of 682 patients (range: 15-112,604) and a median of 112 events (range: 8-5,142); 53% reported a P-value <0.01. The median Fragility Index was 8 (range: 0-109); 25% had a Fragility Index of 3 or less. In 53% of trials, the Fragility Index was less than the number of patients lost to follow-up.

Conclusion

The statistically significant results of many RCTs hinge on small numbers of events. The Fragility Index complements the P-value and helps identify less robust results.