Annual incidence increase, presented both on relative and additive scales, for men and women combined and stratified by sex, where relevant*
| Country | Average incidence increase per decade on linear, that is, additive scale, cases/100 000 (95% CI) | Average annual incidence increase per year on log-linear, that is relative scale, % (95% CI) | p (sex-interaction)† |
|---|---|---|---|
| Australia | 0.74 (0.67 to 0.82) | 4.1 (3.9 to 4.4) | 0.05 |
| Denmark | 0.50 (0.45 to 0.56) | 5.2 (4.9 to 5.5) | 0.02 |
| Women | 0.14 (0.12 to 0.17) | 4.6 (4.0 to 5.2) | – |
| Men | 0.87 (0.77 to 0.97) | 5.3 (4.7 to 6.0) | – |
| England | 1.47 (1.39 to 1.55) | 5.0 (4.9 to 5.1) | 0.0002 |
| Women | 0.47 (0.44 to 0.50) | 4.7 (4.6 to 4.9) | – |
| Men | 2.46 (2.32 to 2.59) | 5.1 (4.9 to 5.2) | – |
| Finland | 0.21 (0.17 to 0.25) | 4.6 (4.2 to 5.0) | 0.84 |
| Norway | 0.34 (0.29 to 0.39) | 7.6 (7.1 to 8.1) | 0.17 |
| Scotland | 1.57 (1.42 to 1.73) | 3.5 (3.3 to 3.7) | <0.0001 |
| Women | 0.48 (0.39 to 0.57) | 2.8 (2.4 to 3.2) | – |
| Men | 2.66 (2.41 to 2.91) | 3.8 (3.3 to 4.3) | – |
| Sweden | 0.31 (0.26 to 0.35) | 4.8 (4.6 to 5.1) | 0.005 |
| Women | 0.08 (0.06 to 0.09) | 4.1 (3.5 to 4.7) | – |
| Men | 0.54 (0.46 to 0.61) | 5.0 (4.4 to 5.7) | – |
| USA: Atlanta | 0.61 (0.52 to 0.71) | 4.8 (3.9 to 5.7) | 0.04 |
| Women | 0.11 (0.07 to 0.16) | 7.6 (4.8 to 11) | – |
| Men | 1.08 (0.90 to 1.27) | 4.4 (1.5 to 7.4) | – |
| USA: Connecticut | 0.99 (0.90 to 1.07) | 5.5 (5.0 to 6.0) | 0.67 |
| USA: Detroit | 0.92 (0.84 to 0.99) | 6.4 (5.9 to 6.9) | 0.18 |
| USA: Hawaii | 0.40 (0.33 to 0.47) | 8.1 (6.4 to 10) | 0.63 |
| USA: Iowa | 1.24 (1.13 to 1.35) | 6.8 (6.3 to 7.3) | 0.68 |
| USA: New Mexico | 0.77 (0.64 to 0.91) | 6.1 (5.1 to 7.0) | 0.14 |
| USA: San Francisco | 0.62 (0.53 to 0.71) | 5.2 (4.6 to 5.7) | 0.53 |
| USA: Seattle | 0.92 (0.81 to 1.03) | 4.6 (4.1 to 5.0) | 0.10 |
| USA: Utah | 0.77 (0.64 to 0.89) | 5.9 (5.0 to 6.9) | 0.77 |
* The average incidence change was estimated by fitting poisson models with a linear term for calendar period. On the additive scale we fitted age standardised rates with an identity link function, and for the relative scale we fitted incidence rates, adjusted for age, with a log link function.
† The presence of sex interaction was assessed on a relative scale by adding an interaction term between sex and calendar year.