Cargando…

Multiple-bias analysis as a technique to address systematic error in measures of abortion-related mortality

BACKGROUND: The UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have brought heightened global attention to the measurement of maternal mortality. It is imperative that new and novel approaches be used to measure maternal mortality and to better understand existing da...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gerdts, Caitlin, Ahern, Jennifer
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4802921/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27006645
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12963-016-0075-3
_version_ 1782422814790254592
author Gerdts, Caitlin
Ahern, Jennifer
author_facet Gerdts, Caitlin
Ahern, Jennifer
author_sort Gerdts, Caitlin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have brought heightened global attention to the measurement of maternal mortality. It is imperative that new and novel approaches be used to measure maternal mortality and to better understand existing data. In this paper we present one approach: an epidemiologic framework for identifying the identification and quantification of systematic error (multiple-bias analysis), outline the necessary steps for investigators interested in conducting multiple-bias analyses in their own data, and suggest approaches for reporting such analyses in the literature. METHODS: To conceptualize the systematic error present in studies of abortion-related deaths, we propose a bias framework. We posit that selection bias and misclassification are present in both verbal autopsy studies and facility-based studies. The multiple-bias analysis framework provides a relatively simple, quantitative strategy for assessing systematic error and resulting bias in any epidemiologic study. RESULTS: In our worked example of multiple-bias analysis on a study reporting 20.6 % of maternal deaths to be abortion related, after adjustment for selection bias, misclassification, and random error, the median increased, on average, to 0.308, approximately 20 % greater than the reported proportion of abortion-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting results of multiple-bias analyses in estimates of abortion-related mortality, predictors of unsafe abortion, and other reproductive health questions that suffer from similar biases would not only improve reporting practices in the field, but might also provide a more accurate understanding of the range of potential impact of policies and programs that target the underlying causes of unsafe abortion and abortion-related mortality. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12963-016-0075-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4802921
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48029212016-03-23 Multiple-bias analysis as a technique to address systematic error in measures of abortion-related mortality Gerdts, Caitlin Ahern, Jennifer Popul Health Metr Research BACKGROUND: The UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have brought heightened global attention to the measurement of maternal mortality. It is imperative that new and novel approaches be used to measure maternal mortality and to better understand existing data. In this paper we present one approach: an epidemiologic framework for identifying the identification and quantification of systematic error (multiple-bias analysis), outline the necessary steps for investigators interested in conducting multiple-bias analyses in their own data, and suggest approaches for reporting such analyses in the literature. METHODS: To conceptualize the systematic error present in studies of abortion-related deaths, we propose a bias framework. We posit that selection bias and misclassification are present in both verbal autopsy studies and facility-based studies. The multiple-bias analysis framework provides a relatively simple, quantitative strategy for assessing systematic error and resulting bias in any epidemiologic study. RESULTS: In our worked example of multiple-bias analysis on a study reporting 20.6 % of maternal deaths to be abortion related, after adjustment for selection bias, misclassification, and random error, the median increased, on average, to 0.308, approximately 20 % greater than the reported proportion of abortion-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting results of multiple-bias analyses in estimates of abortion-related mortality, predictors of unsafe abortion, and other reproductive health questions that suffer from similar biases would not only improve reporting practices in the field, but might also provide a more accurate understanding of the range of potential impact of policies and programs that target the underlying causes of unsafe abortion and abortion-related mortality. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12963-016-0075-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-03-22 /pmc/articles/PMC4802921/ /pubmed/27006645 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12963-016-0075-3 Text en © Gerdts and Ahern. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Gerdts, Caitlin
Ahern, Jennifer
Multiple-bias analysis as a technique to address systematic error in measures of abortion-related mortality
title Multiple-bias analysis as a technique to address systematic error in measures of abortion-related mortality
title_full Multiple-bias analysis as a technique to address systematic error in measures of abortion-related mortality
title_fullStr Multiple-bias analysis as a technique to address systematic error in measures of abortion-related mortality
title_full_unstemmed Multiple-bias analysis as a technique to address systematic error in measures of abortion-related mortality
title_short Multiple-bias analysis as a technique to address systematic error in measures of abortion-related mortality
title_sort multiple-bias analysis as a technique to address systematic error in measures of abortion-related mortality
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4802921/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27006645
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12963-016-0075-3
work_keys_str_mv AT gerdtscaitlin multiplebiasanalysisasatechniquetoaddresssystematicerrorinmeasuresofabortionrelatedmortality
AT ahernjennifer multiplebiasanalysisasatechniquetoaddresssystematicerrorinmeasuresofabortionrelatedmortality