Cargando…

Validating women’s reports of antenatal and postnatal care received in Bangladesh, Cambodia and Kenya

BACKGROUND: Global indicators for monitoring progress in maternal and newborn health have tended to rely on contact coverage indicators rather than the content of services received. As part of the effort to improve measurement of progress in maternal and newborn health, this study examines how accur...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McCarthy, Katharine J, Blanc, Ann K, Warren, Charlotte, Bajracharya, Ashish, Bellows, Benjamin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7245420/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2019-002133
_version_ 1783537755160051712
author McCarthy, Katharine J
Blanc, Ann K
Warren, Charlotte
Bajracharya, Ashish
Bellows, Benjamin
author_facet McCarthy, Katharine J
Blanc, Ann K
Warren, Charlotte
Bajracharya, Ashish
Bellows, Benjamin
author_sort McCarthy, Katharine J
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Global indicators for monitoring progress in maternal and newborn health have tended to rely on contact coverage indicators rather than the content of services received. As part of the effort to improve measurement of progress in maternal and newborn health, this study examines how accurately women can report on information and health interventions received during an antenatal or postnatal health consultation at health facilities in Bangladesh, Cambodia and Kenya. METHODS: We conducted secondary analysis of matched observation and client interview data to compare women’s reports of care received at exit interview with observation by a trained third-party observer. We assessed indicator accuracy by calculating sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and inflation factor (IF). Indicators considered to have both high individual accuracy (an AUC value of 0.70 or greater) and low population-level bias (0.75<IF<1.25) were considered to have acceptable validity. In addition, we considered the number of countries where both validation criteria were met. RESULTS: For indicators of antenatal care, we found 16 of 18 indicators in Bangladesh, 3 of 6 in Cambodia and 3 of 8 in Kenya met both validation criteria. For postnatal care, we found evidence of acceptable validity for 6 of 8 indicators in Bangladesh, 5 of 14 in Cambodia and 3 of 16 in Kenya. In general, we documented higher validity for indicators related to concrete, observable actions, as opposed to information or advice given. Women were more likely to recall care received for themselves, rather than for their newborn. CONCLUSIONS: Women reported accurately on multiple aspects of antenatal and postnatal care. While we describe broad patterns in the types of indicators likely to be recalled with accuracy, differences by setting warrant further investigation. Findings inform efforts to better monitor the coverage and quality of maternal and newborn health interventions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7245420
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72454202020-06-03 Validating women’s reports of antenatal and postnatal care received in Bangladesh, Cambodia and Kenya McCarthy, Katharine J Blanc, Ann K Warren, Charlotte Bajracharya, Ashish Bellows, Benjamin BMJ Glob Health Original Research BACKGROUND: Global indicators for monitoring progress in maternal and newborn health have tended to rely on contact coverage indicators rather than the content of services received. As part of the effort to improve measurement of progress in maternal and newborn health, this study examines how accurately women can report on information and health interventions received during an antenatal or postnatal health consultation at health facilities in Bangladesh, Cambodia and Kenya. METHODS: We conducted secondary analysis of matched observation and client interview data to compare women’s reports of care received at exit interview with observation by a trained third-party observer. We assessed indicator accuracy by calculating sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and inflation factor (IF). Indicators considered to have both high individual accuracy (an AUC value of 0.70 or greater) and low population-level bias (0.75<IF<1.25) were considered to have acceptable validity. In addition, we considered the number of countries where both validation criteria were met. RESULTS: For indicators of antenatal care, we found 16 of 18 indicators in Bangladesh, 3 of 6 in Cambodia and 3 of 8 in Kenya met both validation criteria. For postnatal care, we found evidence of acceptable validity for 6 of 8 indicators in Bangladesh, 5 of 14 in Cambodia and 3 of 16 in Kenya. In general, we documented higher validity for indicators related to concrete, observable actions, as opposed to information or advice given. Women were more likely to recall care received for themselves, rather than for their newborn. CONCLUSIONS: Women reported accurately on multiple aspects of antenatal and postnatal care. While we describe broad patterns in the types of indicators likely to be recalled with accuracy, differences by setting warrant further investigation. Findings inform efforts to better monitor the coverage and quality of maternal and newborn health interventions. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-04-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7245420/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2019-002133 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Research
McCarthy, Katharine J
Blanc, Ann K
Warren, Charlotte
Bajracharya, Ashish
Bellows, Benjamin
Validating women’s reports of antenatal and postnatal care received in Bangladesh, Cambodia and Kenya
title Validating women’s reports of antenatal and postnatal care received in Bangladesh, Cambodia and Kenya
title_full Validating women’s reports of antenatal and postnatal care received in Bangladesh, Cambodia and Kenya
title_fullStr Validating women’s reports of antenatal and postnatal care received in Bangladesh, Cambodia and Kenya
title_full_unstemmed Validating women’s reports of antenatal and postnatal care received in Bangladesh, Cambodia and Kenya
title_short Validating women’s reports of antenatal and postnatal care received in Bangladesh, Cambodia and Kenya
title_sort validating women’s reports of antenatal and postnatal care received in bangladesh, cambodia and kenya
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7245420/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2019-002133
work_keys_str_mv AT mccarthykatharinej validatingwomensreportsofantenatalandpostnatalcarereceivedinbangladeshcambodiaandkenya
AT blancannk validatingwomensreportsofantenatalandpostnatalcarereceivedinbangladeshcambodiaandkenya
AT warrencharlotte validatingwomensreportsofantenatalandpostnatalcarereceivedinbangladeshcambodiaandkenya
AT bajracharyaashish validatingwomensreportsofantenatalandpostnatalcarereceivedinbangladeshcambodiaandkenya
AT bellowsbenjamin validatingwomensreportsofantenatalandpostnatalcarereceivedinbangladeshcambodiaandkenya