ArticleFrontiers in global women's health2025
Global, regional, and national burdens of PUD in women of reproductive age from 1992 to 2021: a trend analysis based on the global burden of disease study 2021.
Article in Frontiers in global women's health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) constitutes a significant global health concern, particularly in women of childbearing age (WCBA), who face elevated risks of severe pregnancy-associated complications. This investigation aimed to map the temporal dynamics and forecast the future incidence of PUD in this demographic to inform targeted prevention and control initiatives. Methods: This analysis drew on the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2021, extracting data on PUD incidence and mortality across seven age groups (15-49 years) in WCBA. Age-standardized incidence and mortality rates were calculated using the direct method of age standardization. Temporal trends from 1992 to 2021 were analyzed using joinpoint regression. The study further employed age-period-cohort analysis to discriminate the effects of these variables on incidence and mortality, and frontier analysis to evaluate potential reductions in burden by country based on developmental status. Nordpred modeling was used to project epidemiological trends up to 2044. Results: In 2021, the global age-standardized incidence rates (ASIR) and death rates (ASDR) for PUD among WCBA were 24.18 per 100,000 (95% CI: 14.72-36.38) and 0.54 per 100,000 (95% CI: 0.42-0.66), respectively. The highest incidence rates were observed in Oceania, while the greatest mortality rates were recorded in South Asia. Over the period from 1992 to 2021, global age-standardized mortality rates showed a significant decline. Conversely, after an initial drop, age-standardized incidence rates began to rise, with considerable regional and country-specific variation. This increase was particularly marked in regions with high Socio-demographic Index (SDI). Frontier analyses indicate that countries or regions in the middle SDI quintiles possess significant untapped potential to enhance both access to and quality of healthcare. Despite predictions of declining age-standardized incidence and mortality rates, total case numbers are expected to continue rising modestly through 2044. Conclusions: The study underscores substantial global disparities in PUD trends in WCBA, with increasing case numbers and regional inequalities. The findings highlight the need for focused attention on high SDI regions and older WCBA cohorts to refine disease management and prevention strategies, aiding in the mitigation of PUD's public health impact.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.