Cargando…

Validation studies for population-based intervention coverage indicators: design, analysis, and interpretation

BACKGROUND: Population-based intervention coverage indicators are widely used to track country and program progress in improving health and to evaluate health programs. Indicator validation studies that compare survey responses to a “gold standard” measure are useful to understand whether the indica...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Munos, Melinda K, Blanc, Ann K, Carter, Emily D, Eisele, Thomas P, Gesuale, Steve, Katz, Joanne, Marchant, Tanya, Stanton, Cynthia K, Campbell, Harry
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Edinburgh University Global Health Society 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6126515/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30202519
http://dx.doi.org/10.7189/jogh.08.020804
_version_ 1783353343043698688
author Munos, Melinda K
Blanc, Ann K
Carter, Emily D
Eisele, Thomas P
Gesuale, Steve
Katz, Joanne
Marchant, Tanya
Stanton, Cynthia K
Campbell, Harry
author_facet Munos, Melinda K
Blanc, Ann K
Carter, Emily D
Eisele, Thomas P
Gesuale, Steve
Katz, Joanne
Marchant, Tanya
Stanton, Cynthia K
Campbell, Harry
author_sort Munos, Melinda K
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Population-based intervention coverage indicators are widely used to track country and program progress in improving health and to evaluate health programs. Indicator validation studies that compare survey responses to a “gold standard” measure are useful to understand whether the indicator provides accurate information. The Improving Coverage Measurement (ICM) Core Group has developed and implemented a standard approach to validating coverage indicators measured in household surveys, described in this paper. METHODS: The general design of these studies includes measurement of true health status and intervention receipt (gold standard), followed by interviews with the individuals observed, and a comparison of the observations (gold standard) to the responses to survey questions. The gold standard should use a data source external to the respondent to document need for and receipt of an intervention. Most frequently, this is accomplished through direct observation of clinical care, and/or use of a study-trained clinician to obtain a gold standard diagnosis. Follow-up interviews with respondents should employ standard survey questions, where they exist, as well as alternative or additional questions that can be compared against the standard household survey questions. RESULTS: Indicator validation studies should report on participation at every stage, and provide data on reasons for non-participation. Metrics of individual validity (sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) and population-level validity (inflation factor) should be reported, as well as the percent of survey responses that are “don’t know” or missing. Associations between interviewer and participant characteristics and measures of validity should be assessed and reported. CONCLUSIONS: These methods allow respondent-reported coverage measures to be validated against more objective measures of need for and receipt of an intervention, and should be considered together with cognitive interviewing, discriminative validity, or reliability testing to inform decisions about which indicators to include in household surveys. Public health researchers should assess the evidence for validity of existing and proposed household survey coverage indicators and consider validation studies to fill evidence gaps.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6126515
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Edinburgh University Global Health Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61265152018-09-10 Validation studies for population-based intervention coverage indicators: design, analysis, and interpretation Munos, Melinda K Blanc, Ann K Carter, Emily D Eisele, Thomas P Gesuale, Steve Katz, Joanne Marchant, Tanya Stanton, Cynthia K Campbell, Harry J Glob Health Research Theme 4: Improving Coverage Measurement BACKGROUND: Population-based intervention coverage indicators are widely used to track country and program progress in improving health and to evaluate health programs. Indicator validation studies that compare survey responses to a “gold standard” measure are useful to understand whether the indicator provides accurate information. The Improving Coverage Measurement (ICM) Core Group has developed and implemented a standard approach to validating coverage indicators measured in household surveys, described in this paper. METHODS: The general design of these studies includes measurement of true health status and intervention receipt (gold standard), followed by interviews with the individuals observed, and a comparison of the observations (gold standard) to the responses to survey questions. The gold standard should use a data source external to the respondent to document need for and receipt of an intervention. Most frequently, this is accomplished through direct observation of clinical care, and/or use of a study-trained clinician to obtain a gold standard diagnosis. Follow-up interviews with respondents should employ standard survey questions, where they exist, as well as alternative or additional questions that can be compared against the standard household survey questions. RESULTS: Indicator validation studies should report on participation at every stage, and provide data on reasons for non-participation. Metrics of individual validity (sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) and population-level validity (inflation factor) should be reported, as well as the percent of survey responses that are “don’t know” or missing. Associations between interviewer and participant characteristics and measures of validity should be assessed and reported. CONCLUSIONS: These methods allow respondent-reported coverage measures to be validated against more objective measures of need for and receipt of an intervention, and should be considered together with cognitive interviewing, discriminative validity, or reliability testing to inform decisions about which indicators to include in household surveys. Public health researchers should assess the evidence for validity of existing and proposed household survey coverage indicators and consider validation studies to fill evidence gaps. Edinburgh University Global Health Society 2018-12 2018-09-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6126515/ /pubmed/30202519 http://dx.doi.org/10.7189/jogh.08.020804 Text en Copyright © 2018 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
spellingShingle Research Theme 4: Improving Coverage Measurement
Munos, Melinda K
Blanc, Ann K
Carter, Emily D
Eisele, Thomas P
Gesuale, Steve
Katz, Joanne
Marchant, Tanya
Stanton, Cynthia K
Campbell, Harry
Validation studies for population-based intervention coverage indicators: design, analysis, and interpretation
title Validation studies for population-based intervention coverage indicators: design, analysis, and interpretation
title_full Validation studies for population-based intervention coverage indicators: design, analysis, and interpretation
title_fullStr Validation studies for population-based intervention coverage indicators: design, analysis, and interpretation
title_full_unstemmed Validation studies for population-based intervention coverage indicators: design, analysis, and interpretation
title_short Validation studies for population-based intervention coverage indicators: design, analysis, and interpretation
title_sort validation studies for population-based intervention coverage indicators: design, analysis, and interpretation
topic Research Theme 4: Improving Coverage Measurement
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6126515/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30202519
http://dx.doi.org/10.7189/jogh.08.020804
work_keys_str_mv AT munosmelindak validationstudiesforpopulationbasedinterventioncoverageindicatorsdesignanalysisandinterpretation
AT blancannk validationstudiesforpopulationbasedinterventioncoverageindicatorsdesignanalysisandinterpretation
AT carteremilyd validationstudiesforpopulationbasedinterventioncoverageindicatorsdesignanalysisandinterpretation
AT eiselethomasp validationstudiesforpopulationbasedinterventioncoverageindicatorsdesignanalysisandinterpretation
AT gesualesteve validationstudiesforpopulationbasedinterventioncoverageindicatorsdesignanalysisandinterpretation
AT katzjoanne validationstudiesforpopulationbasedinterventioncoverageindicatorsdesignanalysisandinterpretation
AT marchanttanya validationstudiesforpopulationbasedinterventioncoverageindicatorsdesignanalysisandinterpretation
AT stantoncynthiak validationstudiesforpopulationbasedinterventioncoverageindicatorsdesignanalysisandinterpretation
AT campbellharry validationstudiesforpopulationbasedinterventioncoverageindicatorsdesignanalysisandinterpretation
AT validationstudiesforpopulationbasedinterventioncoverageindicatorsdesignanalysisandinterpretation