Previous Article in Journal
A Qualitative Exploratory Study of Facilitators and Barriers Influencing Organ Donation in Ghana: Insights for Health Policy and Advocacy
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Communication

On Burden of Diseases, Prevention, Medical Research and Health Service Delivery: Grampian Case Study

1
NHS Grampian, Summerfield House, Aberdeen AB15 6RE, UK
2
School of Medical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup WA 6027, Australia
3
School of Computational Science and Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA
4
The Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB25 2ZD, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2026, 23(6), 763; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph23060763 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 9 April 2026 / Revised: 30 May 2026 / Accepted: 3 June 2026 / Published: 5 June 2026
(This article belongs to the Section Health Care Sciences)

Highlights

Public health relevance—How does this work relate to a public health issue?
  • Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) quantify population health loss across diseases and regions, while DALY rates enable meaningful comparisons between populations of different sizes and age structures.
  • This study uses these measures to analyse regional disease burden and identify population health priorities in the Grampian region of Scotland.
Public health significance—Why is this work of significance to public health?
  • The analysis identifies leading contributors to disease burden (e.g., cancers, ischaemic heart disease, Alzheimer’s disease) and highlights worsening trends in drug use disorders and colorectal cancer.
  • The study demonstrates how publicly available surveillance data can be systematically analysed to generate actionable, region-specific insights beyond national averages, including variations by sex, age group, and sub-regions.
Public health implications—What are the key implications or messages for practitioners, policy makers and/or researchers in public health?
  • Finding support targeted prevention strategies (e.g., early interventions for drug use disorders from adolescence and colorectal cancer screening from early adulthood), particularly in areas with higher DALY rates, such as Aberdeen City.
  • The study provides a reproducible analytical framework to guide resource allocation, research prioritisation, and integrated public health and healthcare planning.

Abstract

Burden of diseases measured as disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) per 100,000 people can be mined from public domain data, when they are made available by population health surveillance systems. This can be analysed to allow insightful comparisons with the national average, and to understand differences in trends between the sexes, age groups, time periods, geographic regions, and sub-regions. In this illustrative case study, we have analysed the Scottish burden of disease database to understand what ailed the population of the Grampian region before the COVID-19 pandemic. We have identified that selected cancers, ischaemic heart disease, Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias are amongst the highest contributors to the burden; that drug use disorders and colorectal cancer are showing worsening trends and require health promotion and disease prevention measures from ages 15 and 25, respectively, especially in Aberdeen City; and that males are more vulnerable to atrial fibrillation and flutter, diabetes mellitus, oesophageal cancer, and self-harm, while females are more vulnerable to cerebrovascular and chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases. We demonstrate the usefulness of our analysis and methodology for the wider health system, allowing targeted medical research investments and coordinated response from public health and health service delivery. We also show the need for up-to-date surveillance data, forecasts, and evidence on the impact of interventions to be made available widely.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

The origins of quality of life and cost-effectiveness analyses in healthcare can be traced back to a study on chronic renal disease published in 1968 [1], leading to quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) being formally defined in 1976 as the output of a utility function [2], c.f. Acknowledgements. This concept gained gradual acceptance over the next three decades for the economic evaluation of healthcare programmes [3], using metrics such as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio developed at York [4], and the disability-adjusted life year (DALY) introduced in 1994 as a related term with age-weighting and discounting [5,6].
Disability-adjusted life year (DALY), the loss of equivalent of one year of full health, is a time-based measure that allows the burden of different diseases to be compared objectively. It is calculated as the sum of Years of Life Lost (YLL) due to premature mortality and Years Lived with Disability (YLD), i.e., DALY = YLL + YLD [5,6]. While DALYs quantify health loss at the population level, QALYs measure health gain by combining life expectancy with health-related quality of life [3]. In the United Kingdom (UK), QALYs are widely used in economic evaluation and health technology assessment by decision-making bodies such as the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to inform cost-effectiveness and resource allocation within the National Health Service (NHS) [7]. Thus, while QALYs support the evaluation of healthcare interventions, DALYs are particularly useful for identifying population health priorities.
DALY and DALY rate per 100,000 people in a given region can provide valuable insights to health service providers, public health departments, health economists, and policy makers if data are available to compare that region (for example, Grampian in Scotland) with others and the national average—as shown in this communication. Authentic and curated sources of such data in the UK include the Fingertips for England [8], the Scottish Burden of Disease [9], etc.
Such burden of disease estimates are also useful for identifying sub-populations with poorer outcomes (within the scope of this paper), which in turn can lead to further studies (not in the scope of this paper) on the underlying socio-economic determinants of health for each sub-population, and likely interventions by public health and local authorities. The reason for this is as follows: the NHS Research and Development department, with data scientists, can often produce the former analysis (as we have done); however, investigation of the wider socio-economic determinants of health and implementation of appropriate interventions typically fall within the remit of the Health and Social Care Partnerships in Scotland, Integrated Care Systems in England, and related regional bodies. Analysis, such as the one we have done, can help inform the work of organisations, including Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire, and Moray Health and Social Care Partnerships within NHS Grampian (Figure 1).
Grampian was selected as an illustrative case study due to its heterogeneous population, encompassing urban (including Aberdeen City), rural, and remote communities. The region also has a distinctive demographic profile influenced by global migration to the North Sea oil and gas sector. With circa 1% of the population of the UK, Grampian provides a representative setting to demonstrate how regional burden of disease data can be analysed to inform local health priorities. This communication is a descriptive study of regional burden of disease patterns intended to inform health policy, service planning, research prioritisation, and resource allocation through a reproducible analytical approach that can be applied by other health service providers worldwide.

2. Methods

For this work, we have used the Scottish Burden of Disease (SBoD) dataset [9], c.f. eight references therein, a population health surveillance system which monitors how diseases, injuries, and risk factors prevent the Scottish population from living longer lives in better health. DALY rates per 100,000 population were extracted for Scotland and the Grampian region. Morbidity estimates within the SBoD framework were derived from multiple sources, including linked primary care records, secondary care records, disease registers, national surveys, and communicable disease surveillance systems. Most estimates were based on routine administrative datasets linked using Community Health Index (CHI) numbers, while some conditions additionally incorporated self-reported (depression and anxiety) or aggregate survey data. The SBoD methodology estimates prevalent ill-health rather than incident diagnoses; however, the publicly available methodology does not specify a universal requirement for active treatment status or a fixed diagnostic ascertainment period across all conditions [9,10,11]. Although socio-economic stratification was not presented explicitly in this analysis, the underlying SBoD methodology incorporates age-specific, sex-specific, and Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD)-specific morbidity modelling, whereby national morbidity rates stratified by deprivation decile are applied to local population structures to estimate expected burden [10,12].
Analyses were conducted by sex, age group, and time period. Data were initially analysed for the years 2016 to 2019 [13]; 2014 and 2015 were included in this analysis when data were made available. In addition to cross-sectional comparisons for the most recent year available (2019), temporal trends were assessed using compound annual growth rates (CAGR), calculated as:
CAGR = V a l u e   a t   Y e a r   N V a l u e   a t   Y e a r   1 1 N 1 × 100
where N is the number of years. CAGR was calculated for the periods of 2014–19 and 2016–19 to capture both longer-term and more recent trends. Differences between CAGR estimates across time intervals reflect both temporal changes and sensitivity to baseline selection, particularly for conditions with smaller absolute annual changes or non-linear trends. The use of two time windows, therefore, provides complementary insights into disease trends.
Our analysis is descriptive in nature, focusing on identifying patterns and relative differences across regions and population subgroups. Formal statistical hypothesis testing was not undertaken because the publicly available SBoD dataset does not provide uncertainty intervals or sufficiently granular raw data for robust inferential statistical analyses. The SBoD methodology notes that conventional confidence intervals would not fully capture uncertainties related to modelling assumptions and disability weights [10]. Therefore, observed differences between regions and sub-regions should be interpreted cautiously as descriptive indicators of variation rather than statistically confirmed differences.
The underlying raw Scottish burden of disease data used by this communication is available as Supplementary Material Table S1.

3. Results and Discussions

Burden of disease expressed as DALY rates per 100,000 population was calculated for Scotland versus Grampian for the latest year for which data are available (2019), separately for females (Table 1 and Table 2) and males (Table 3 and Table 4).
It is seen from Table 1 and Table 3 that the leading causes of disease burden for Grampian are also important for Scotland; however, their exact order may vary. Ischaemic heart disease, lung cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, and other dementias significantly affect both Grampian and Scotland (c.f. Figure 1), so it is important to focus on these national priorities.
We are able to identify those diseases where Grampian’s DALY rate exceeds the Scottish average as local priorities for the region. These include atrial fibrillation and flutter, diabetes, and oesophageal cancer for males; breast cancer, cerebrovascular disease, and other cardiovascular and circulatory diseases for females; colorectal cancer and drug use disorders that affect both sexes with worsening trends since 2014 (c.f. Table 1 and Table 3).
Age-stratified analyses (Table 2 and Table 4) identify the age groups for these diseases of concern where the burden is especially high. For example, Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias primarily affect those aged 65+, whereas drug use disorders and self-harm disproportionately impact younger and working-age populations. We assessed temporal trends using CAGR for 2014–19 as well as 2016–19 (as previously computed [13]) to identify diseases with significant temporal changes that warrant closer monitoring in future analyses. Application of CAGR across two time intervals (2014–2019 and 2016–2019) enabled the identification of additional priority conditions.
It is important to address these unmet needs through a combination of public health measures (e.g., health promotion, disease prevention) and interventions arising from life sciences, health, and medical research and innovation [14]. The latter is very important as demonstrated by, for example, the recent reviews of Australia’s Medical Research Future Fund [15,16], in which it was found that 231 grants were awarded during 2016–19 with a total value of AU$574.5 million [16], but when mapped against 17 disease groups in the Australian burden of disease study 2015 [17], only a weak association was observed with DALY (r2 = 0.4359) and no association was observed with disability burden YLD (r2 = 0.0009) [16]. Any life sciences, health, and medical research and innovation investments into Grampian by public, private, or non-profit sectors should take these considerations into account. Realistic medicine approaches [18] and regional investments should target the local burden of diseases, lest there could be higher opportunity costs and unintentional widening of inequalities. For the Grampian region, disease priorities are summarised under the mnemonic “CICADAS” (Table 5), with the worst-affected age groups identified from Table 2 and Table 4.
As shown in Figure 1 and previously described, the Grampian region is in turn comprising three Health and Social Care Partnerships (viz. Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire, and Moray), which are local authorities in Scotland responsible for planning and delivering health and social care services in partnership with the NHS. Examining sub-regional variations can provide valuable insights for these partnerships to identify relevant socio-economic determinants of health and devise appropriate interventions for each affected sub-population. For example, the Aberdeen City Health and Social Care Partnerships is one of the UK’s ‘Marmot Places’, an initiative focused on reducing health inequalities through action on the social determinants of health [19].
From Table 6, it is seen that Aberdeenshire is close to the Grampian average for diseases in females listed under Table 2; Aberdeen City has a higher DALY rate than Grampian for Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias, lung and colorectal cancers, and drug use disorders; while Moray has a higher DALY rate than Grampian for ischaemic heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, and other cardiovascular and circulatory diseases.
From Table 7, it is seen that Aberdeenshire is below the Grampian average for diseases in males listed under Table 4 (except perhaps colorectal cancer, atrial fibrillation, and flutter); Moray has a higher DALY rate than Grampian for lung cancer, atrial fibrillation, and flutter; while Aberdeen has a higher DALY rate than Grampian for all but atrial fibrillation and flutter. Thus, we notice that while some trends are the same for both sexes, there are significant differences too, so we need a nuanced approach. Observed regional variations may partly reflect underlying socio-economic differences between urban, rural, and mixed populations across the Grampian region, including deprivation, occupational structure, environmental exposures, and differential access to healthcare and diagnostic services. In addition to these factors, broader contextual influences such as industrial activity, air quality, and natural environmental characteristics may also contribute to differences in disease burden, although these were not directly measured in this study.

4. Conclusions, Limitations, and Future Work

With health services under increasing pressure across the world, it is important to ensure better alignment between the long-term plans for population health and integrated health and social care. In many developed countries, we have health surveillance data in the public domain. These, especially on the burden of diseases, can be mined and analysed by health service providers to serve their populations more effectively and in a targeted manner, as shown in this communication with the Grampian region case study. For example, we were able to identify which diseases have the highest DALY rate burden, which ones are of particular concern to Grampian, and those that are showing a worsening trend. We were also able to gain a nuanced understanding in terms of differences between males and females, age groups, and the three sub-regions that make up Grampian. This will allow targeted medical research investments and coordinated response from public health and health service delivery [14].
Importantly, while DALYs are well-suited for population health assessment and prioritisation, decision-making within the UK’s National Health Service is typically informed by cost-effectiveness frameworks based on QALYs, particularly in health interventions [7]. Although QALY-based analyses are beyond the scope of this study, our findings provide robust, region-specific burden of disease data that can inform policy and resource allocation. These quantitative results can be complemented by qualitative analyses, such as the recent Grampian participatory research on patient, public, and stakeholder perspectives, which identifies priority health areas from the viewpoint of those directly affected [14]. Together, such quantitative and qualitative evidence can strengthen local NHS planning, providing a foundation that can be expanded to inform broader decision-making in epidemiology and health policy.
We acknowledge that the public domain Scottish burden of disease data extends only to 2019, limiting direct applicability to post-pandemic health contexts. However, this communication does provide a useful pre-pandemic baseline for future comparisons. The methodological framework remains robust and can be readily applied to updated datasets as they become available.
Future work in Scotland, perhaps led by the relevant Health and Social Care Partnerships, should incorporate socio-economic stratification using measures such as SIMD deciles to enable a more detailed assessment of health inequalities within and between sub-regions, thereby supporting more targeted and equitable health planning. Finer-scale analyses within regions, alongside consideration of environmental, occupational, and healthcare access factors, may further help to explain observed variations in disease burden across sub-regions and what targeted interventions are needed.
There are several categories of public domain SBoD data published by Public Health Scotland, which researchers are unable to modify and therefore act as limiting factors for our analysis. For example, self-harm and interpersonal violence are distinct with very dissimilar causes, social outcomes, policies, and prevention programmes; however, these are only available to us as an aggregated line item. Several categories, such as “other cardiovascular” or “other cancers”, are too broad and less specific in the underlying dataset, highlighting the need for more granular categorisation in the public domain.
Crucially, this study provides a template that other regions can adapt using their own local data. It highlights the need for future analyses incorporating improved data granularity and socio-economic stratification that would enable more targeted and equitable health planning, and provide a more nuanced understanding of regional health inequalities. We further demonstrate the importance of up-to-date surveillance data being available to health service providers, as well as the need for predictive trends and evidence on the impact of interventions, and it is heartening to note that such forecasting could soon be made available “to offer insights into future public health challenges in Scotland” [9].

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijerph23060763/s1, Table S1: Scottish burden of disease underlying dataset.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.S.V. and N.C.F.; methodology, S.S.V.; software, S.S.V. and S.A.; validation, S.S.V., S.A. and M.L.; formal analysis, S.S.V., S.A. and M.L.; investigation, S.S.V., S.A. and M.L.; resources, N.C.F.; data curation, S.S.V., S.A. and M.L.; writing—original draft preparation, S.S.V.; writing—review and editing, S.S.V., S.A., M.L. and N.C.F.; visualisation, S.S.V., S.A. and M.L.; supervision, N.C.F.; project administration, S.S.V.; funding acquisition, N.C.F. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data supporting reported results can be downloaded from the Scottish burden of disease [9] or the Supplementary Materials.

Acknowledgments

S.S.V. is grateful for discussions with his past collaborator and co-author, Donald S. Shepard of Brandeis University (see, for instance, [20,21]) on QALYs versus DALYs. Donald preferred the term QALY to quality-adjusted citizen years as the latter acronym was felt to be quacky and fowl usage. The authors thank Shantini Paranjothy and are also grateful to Tara Shivaji and Grant Wyper of Public Health Scotland for their helpful guidance.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Klarman, H.E.; Francis, J.O.S.; Rosenthal, G.D. Cost-effectiveness analysis applied to the treatment of chronic renal disease. Med. Care 1968, 6, 48–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Zeckhauser, R.; Shepard, D.S. Where now for saving lives? Law Contemp. Probl. 1976, 40, 5–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Drummond, M.F.; Sculpher, M.J.; Torrance, G.W.; O’Brien, B.J.; Stoddart, G.L. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2005; Available online: https://academic.oup.com/book/54294 (accessed on 20 November 2023).
  4. York Health Economics Consortium. Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio. Available online: https://yhec.co.uk/glossary/incremental-cost-effectiveness-ratio-icer/ (accessed on 20 November 2023).
  5. Murray, C. Quantifying the burden of disease: The technical basis for disability-adjusted life years. Bull. World Health Organ. 1994, 72, 429–445. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  6. World Health Organization. Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs). Available online: https://www.who.int/data/gho/indicator-metadata-registry/imr-details/158 (accessed on 20 November 2023).
  7. Ogden, J. QALYs and their role in the NICE decision-making process. Prescriber 2017, 28, 41–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Office for Health Improvement and Disparities. Fingertips (Public Health Data). Available online: https://fingertips.phe.org.uk (accessed on 20 November 2023).
  9. Public Health Scotland. Scottish Burden of Disease. Available online: https://scotland.shinyapps.io/phs-local-trends-scottish-burden-diseases (accessed on 20 November 2023).
  10. The Scottish Public Health Observatory. Burden of Disease: Archive. Available online: https://www.scotpho.org.uk/comparative-health/burden-of-disease/archive/ (accessed on 9 May 2026).
  11. Wyper, G. (Public Health Scotland, Edinburgh, UK). Personal communication, 2026. [Google Scholar]
  12. Wyper, G.; Grant, I.; Fletcher, E.; McCartney, G.; Stockton, D. Scottish Burden of Disease (SBOD) study: Developments and findings of local estimates. Int. J. Popul. Data Sci. 2019, 4, 1257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Vasan, S.; Fluck, N. On Burden of Diseases, Prevention, Medical Research and Health Service Delivery: Grampian Case Study. Preprints 2023, 2023120361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Lee, M.; Anderson, L.A.; Piltonen, E.; Maheshwari, A.; Griffin, J.L.; Vasan, S.S. Participatory development of innovation and implementation strategy—An action-oriented approach. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2026, 26, 626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Australian National Audit Office. Department of Health’s Management of Financial Assistance Under the Medical Research Future Fund; Australian National Audit Office: Canberra, Australia, 2021. Available online: https://www.anao.gov.au/work/performance-audit/department-health-management-financial-assistance-under-the-medical-research-future-fund (accessed on 20 November 2023).
  16. Gilbert, S.E.; Buchbinder, R.; Harris, I.A.; Maher, C.G. A comparison of the distribution of Medical Research Future Fund grants with disease burden in Australia. Med. J. Aust. 2021, 214, 111–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Australian Burden of Disease Study 2015: Interactive Data on Disease Burden; Australian Institute of Health and Welfare: Canberra, Australia, 2019. Available online: https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/burden-of-disease/abds-2015-interactive-data-disease-burden/data (accessed on 20 November 2023).
  18. Realistic Medicine. Available online: https://realisticmedicine.scot (accessed on 20 November 2023).
  19. Macgill, J. Scotland Can Be a Marmot Nation. Healthandcare.scot, 30 April 2025. Available online: https://healthandcare.scot/stories/4136/marmot-alliance-inequalities-aberdeen-lanarkshire-ayrshire-equity-collaboration (accessed on 13 May 2026).
  20. Lee, H.L.; Vasan, S.S.; Birgelen, L.; Murtola, T.M.; Gong, H.F.; Field, R.W.; Mavalankar, D.V.; Ahmad, N.W.; Hakim, L.S.; Murad, S.; et al. Immediate cost of dengue to Malaysia and Thailand: An estimate. Dengue Bull. 2010, 34, 65–76. [Google Scholar]
  21. Murtola, T.M.; Vasan, S.S.; Puwar, T.I.; Govil, D.; Field, R.W.; Gong, H.F.; Bhavsar-Vyas, A.; Suaya, J.A.; Howard, M.; Shepard, D.S.; et al. Preliminary estimate of immediate cost of chikungunya and dengue to Gujarat, India. Dengue Bull. 2010, 34, 32–38. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Grampian is a region in Scotland, and its constituent Health and Social Care Partnerships are shown in yellow (Aberdeen City), amber (Aberdeenshire), and red (Moray). Remixed image from Wikipedia released under the GNU Free Documentation License are highlighted for clarity.
Figure 1. Grampian is a region in Scotland, and its constituent Health and Social Care Partnerships are shown in yellow (Aberdeen City), amber (Aberdeenshire), and red (Moray). Remixed image from Wikipedia released under the GNU Free Documentation License are highlighted for clarity.
Ijerph 23 00763 g001
Table 1. Disability-adjusted life year (DALY) rate per 100,000 people—females in Scotland versus Grampian (across time).
Table 1. Disability-adjusted life year (DALY) rate per 100,000 people—females in Scotland versus Grampian (across time).
FEMALES
DiseaseScotlandGrampian
2019201420152016201720182019Difference 6CAGR 7 2014–2019 (%)CAGR 7 2016–2019 (%)
Alzheimer’s disease 118271472163616161655167516931342.841.56
Ischaemic heart disease1605154314021525163916351489116−0.71−0.79
Lung cancer14741355133711631110128713661080.165.51
Low back and neck pain1452137013701370139113911390620.290.48
Cerebrovascular disease1379148815101508152113911414−35−1.02−2.12
Headache disorders1333132813271327133713371337−40.140.25
COPD 2130199212521060114495210872141.850.84
Depression12141045104510441068106810671470.420.73
Other cancers1094985106193011531169911183−1.55−0.69
Anxiety disorders10458998998989199199181270.420.74
Breast cancer102713281160110610928461077−50−4.1−0.88
Drug use disorders100331140155368352267732616.836.98
Other cardiovascular 37631096924837865679850−87−4.960.52
Colorectal cancer648690715638681668726−781.024.40
Lower respiratory infections622526690612800691528940.08−4.80
Diabetes mellitus58651351355560055148799−1.03−4.26
Cirrhosis 451045443444539642942189−1.5−1.83
Other musculoskeletal disorders46245146346647547844517−0.27−1.53
Osteoarthritis457438438438442442442150.180.30
Other digestive diseases44037135738737834436872−0.16−1.66
Skin and subcutaneous diseases40639940036438640639115−0.402.41
Self-harm 5399282449289311291332673.324.73
Chronic kidney disease382399420376499423396−14−0.151.74
Falls38036629927731628733248−1.936.22
Gynaecological diseases36835835836736036036080.11−0.64
Asthma330320383350392317334−40.86−1.55
1 and other dementias; 2 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; 3 and circulatory diseases; 4 and other chronic liver diseases; 5 and interpersonal violence; 6 difference between 2019 DALY rates for Scotland minus Grampian; 7 compound annual growth rate in percentage. Bold font indicates areas of concern.
Table 2. Disability-adjusted life year (DALY) rate per 100,000 people—females in Grampian 2019 (for selected diseases, age groups).
Table 2. Disability-adjusted life year (DALY) rate per 100,000 people—females in Grampian 2019 (for selected diseases, age groups).
FEMALES
Selected Diseases
of Concern
Grampian 2019
All AgesUnder 1515 to 2425 to 4445 to 6465 to 8485 and Over
Alzheimer’s disease 1169300272448936,399
Ischaemic heart disease148901811012492914,448
Cerebrovascular disease14141868113913387818,098
Lung cancer13660073176547782660
COPD108701513386541434646
Breast cancer1077018742177419263218
Other cancers91124535120121743216
Other cardiovascular 2850263730087222505948
Colorectal cancer7265738353022713851
Drug use disorders67704301763561658
Other musculoskeletal disorders445842713885306801667
Chronic Kidney Disease39602822712664738
Skin and subcutaneous diseases391435539343243500773
Falls332587140997925706
Self-harm 33321103938136568118
1 and other dementias; 2 circulatory diseases; and 3 interpersonal violence. Bold font indicates areas of concern.
Table 3. Disability-adjusted life year (DALY) rate per 100,000 people—males in Scotland versus Grampian (across time).
Table 3. Disability-adjusted life year (DALY) rate per 100,000 people—males in Scotland versus Grampian (across time).
MALES
CauseScotlandGrampian
2019201420152016201720182019Difference 6CAGR 7
2014–2019 (%)
CAGR 7
2016–2019 (%)
Ischaemic heart disease3713390933533311349534223488225−2.251.75
Drug use disorders2367889887100713371308123311346.766.98
Lung cancer1749173116561842173717381605144−1.5−4.49
Alzheimer’s disease 11639150415981370153615781592471.145.13
Cerebrovascular disease1516162917761800172017631291225−4.54−10.49
COPD 2129612791456120813851093120888−1.140
Other cancers12951004122112591235110811421532.61−3.2
Depression12771058105910591092109110901870.60.97
Self-harm 3119487110109308959729342601.410.14
Other cardiovascular 4107714021242121912411146924153−8−8.82
Low back and neck pain1075102910291028104110411040350.210.39
Diabetes mellitus923759736816924935973−505.096.04
Colorectal cancer87878083380810121083960−824.245.91
Alcohol use disorders8635837046377207146072560.81−1.6
Prostate cancer821926104377383076175863−3.92−0.65
Lower respiratory infections80184485067188473677427−1.724.88
Cirrhosis 5752556650747592596496256−2.26−12.76
Anxiety disorders646536536536553552552940.590.99
Headache disorders617619619619623623623−60.130.21
Oesophageal cancer483596727491545498617−1340.697.91
Falls4663363244553534243661001.73−7
Atrial fibrillation and flutter430382434447493412454−243.510.52
Other digestive diseases412331416376327351368442.14−0.71
Other chronic respiratory diseases395341338323353428360351.093.68
Chronic kidney disease3944393683943893853886−2.44−0.51
Other musculoskeletal disorders385379416374356379387−20.421.15
Pancreatic cancer37231130928538243636663.318.7
1 and other dementias; 2 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; 3 and interpersonal violence; 4 and circulatory diseases; 5 and other chronic liver diseases; 6 difference between 2019 DALY rates for Scotland minus Grampian; 7 compound annual growth rate in percentage. Bold font indicates areas of concern.
Table 4. Disability-adjusted life year (DALY) rate per 100,000 people—males in Grampian 2019 (for selected diseases, age groups).
Table 4. Disability-adjusted life year (DALY) rate per 100,000 people—males in Grampian 2019 (for selected diseases, age groups).
MALES
CauseGrampian 2019
All AgesUnder 1515 to 2425 to 4445 to 6465 to 8485 and Over
Ischaemic heart disease348812391357711,19621,317
Lung cancer160500141157458746083
Alzheimer’s disease 11592001204463229,994
Drug use disorders123308842671156421193
Other cancers1142174248364134932093429
Diabetes mellitus9731962286126628023015
Colorectal cancer9606119487233275437
Self-harm 2934211611690970442796
Oesophageal cancer61701707342235954
Atrial fibrillation and flutter454032022916014630
Other musculoskeletal disorders38791230314520612832
Pancreatic cancer3660006119991363
Falls36674125932048204851
Other chronic respiratory diseases36014822713432746
1 and other dementias; 2 and interpersonal violence. Bold font indicates areas of concern.
Table 5. Selected disease conditions of concern to Grampian and the age groups worst affected.
Table 5. Selected disease conditions of concern to Grampian and the age groups worst affected.
AcronymDisease Condition(s) of ConcernAge Groups Worst Affected
CCancer–breast, colorectal, lung, oesophageal (especially amongst males)25+
IIschaemic heart disease; other cardiovascular and circulatory diseases25+
CCerebrovascular disease and COPD (especially amongst females)45+
AAlzheimer’s disease and other dementias65+
DDrug use disorders15–64
AAtrial fibrillation and flutter (especially amongst males)45+
SSpecific conditions listed below (ordered by age groups)
  • Self-harm and interpersonal violence (especially amongst females) 1
  • Diabetes mellitus (especially amongst males)
  • Other musculoskeletal disorders
  • Lower respiratory infections (especially amongst males)
  • Other chronic respiratory diseases (especially amongst males)
  • Other digestive diseases (especially amongst males)
15–64
25+
25+
45+
65+
65+
1 Self-harm and interpersonal violence are combined as defined in the SBoD dataset and may represent conditions with differing underlying determinants and contextual factors.
Table 6. Disability-adjusted life year (DALY) rate per 100,000 people—females (2019, for selected diseases in Table 2, sub-regions).
Table 6. Disability-adjusted life year (DALY) rate per 100,000 people—females (2019, for selected diseases in Table 2, sub-regions).
Selected Diseases of ConcernGrampianAberdeenAberdeenshireMoray
Alzheimer’s disease 11693182116601526
Ischaemic heart disease1489146014771597
Cerebrovascular disease1414149312521683
Lung cancer1366160312071334
Breast cancer1077106811131012
Other cardiovascular 2850797850874
Colorectal cancer726960674438
Drug use disorders677830638449
1 and other dementias; 2 and circulatory diseases. Bold font indicates areas of concern. Values are presented descriptively to illustrate regional variation. No formal statistical comparisons were conducted, and differences should be interpreted cautiously.
Table 7. Disability-adjusted life year (DALY) rate per 100,000 people—males (2019, for selected diseases in Table 4, sub-regions).
Table 7. Disability-adjusted life year (DALY) rate per 100,000 people—males (2019, for selected diseases in Table 4, sub-regions).
Selected Diseases of ConcernGrampianAberdeenAberdeenshireMoray
Ischaemic heart disease3488416631093231
Lung cancer1605191012871898
Alzheimer’s disease 11592173215561440
Drug use disorders123316659491153
Diabetes mellitus9731153869930
Colorectal cancer9601103980682
Oesophageal cancer617823538449
Atrial fibrillation and flutter454399478503
1 and other dementias. Bold font indicates areas of concern. Values are presented descriptively to illustrate regional variation. No formal statistical comparisons were conducted, and differences should be interpreted cautiously.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Vasan, S.S.; Anand, S.; Lee, M.; Fluck, N.C. On Burden of Diseases, Prevention, Medical Research and Health Service Delivery: Grampian Case Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2026, 23, 763. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph23060763

AMA Style

Vasan SS, Anand S, Lee M, Fluck NC. On Burden of Diseases, Prevention, Medical Research and Health Service Delivery: Grampian Case Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2026; 23(6):763. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph23060763

Chicago/Turabian Style

Vasan, Seshadri S., Sudarshan Anand, Miae Lee, and Nicholas C. Fluck. 2026. "On Burden of Diseases, Prevention, Medical Research and Health Service Delivery: Grampian Case Study" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 23, no. 6: 763. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph23060763

APA Style

Vasan, S. S., Anand, S., Lee, M., & Fluck, N. C. (2026). On Burden of Diseases, Prevention, Medical Research and Health Service Delivery: Grampian Case Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 23(6), 763. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph23060763

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop