Cargando…
Birthweight data completeness and quality in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study
BACKGROUND: Low birthweight (< 2500 g) is an important marker of maternal health and is associated with neonatal mortality, long-term development and chronic diseases. Household surveys remain an important source of population-based birthweight information, notably Demographic and Health Surveys...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7869202/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33557859 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12963-020-00229-w |
_version_ | 1783648581580750848 |
---|---|
author | Biks, Gashaw Andargie Blencowe, Hannah Hardy, Victoria Ponce Geremew, Bisrat Misganaw Angaw, Dessie Abebaw Wagnew, Alemakef Abebe, Solomon Mekonnen Guadu, Tadesse Martins, Justiniano S.D. Fisker, Ane Baerent Imam, Md. Ali Nettey, Obed Ernest A. Kasasa, Simon Di Stefano, Lydia Akuze, Joseph Kwesiga, Doris Lawn, Joy E. |
author_facet | Biks, Gashaw Andargie Blencowe, Hannah Hardy, Victoria Ponce Geremew, Bisrat Misganaw Angaw, Dessie Abebaw Wagnew, Alemakef Abebe, Solomon Mekonnen Guadu, Tadesse Martins, Justiniano S.D. Fisker, Ane Baerent Imam, Md. Ali Nettey, Obed Ernest A. Kasasa, Simon Di Stefano, Lydia Akuze, Joseph Kwesiga, Doris Lawn, Joy E. |
author_sort | Biks, Gashaw Andargie |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Low birthweight (< 2500 g) is an important marker of maternal health and is associated with neonatal mortality, long-term development and chronic diseases. Household surveys remain an important source of population-based birthweight information, notably Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) and UNICEF’s Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS); however, data quality concerns remain. Few studies have addressed how to close these gaps in surveys. METHODS: The EN-INDEPTH population-based survey of 69,176 women was undertaken in five Health and Demographic Surveillance System sites (Matlab-Bangladesh, Dabat-Ethiopia, Kintampo-Ghana, Bandim-Guinea-Bissau, IgangaMayuge-Uganda). Responses to existing DHS/MICS birthweight questions on 14,411 livebirths were analysed and estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) associated with reporting weighing, birthweight and heaping reported. Twenty-eight focus group discussions with women and interviewers explored barriers and enablers to reporting birthweight. RESULTS: Almost all women provided responses to birthweight survey questions, taking on average 0.2 min to answer. Of all babies, 62.4% were weighed at birth, 53.8% reported birthweight and 21.1% provided health cards with recorded birthweight. High levels of heterogeneity were observed between sites. Home births and neonatal deaths were less likely to be weighed at birth (home births aOR 0.03(95%CI 0.02–0.03), neonatal deaths (aOR 0.19(95%CI 0.16–0.24)), and when weighed, actual birthweight was less likely to be known (aOR 0.44(95%CI 0.33–0.58), aOR 0.30(95%CI 0.22–0.41)) compared to facility births and post-neonatal survivors. Increased levels of maternal education were associated with increases in reporting weighing and knowing birthweight. Half of recorded birthweights were heaped on multiples of 500 g. Heaping was more common in IgangaMayuge (aOR 14.91(95%CI 11.37–19.55) and Dabat (aOR 14.25(95%CI 10.13–20.3) compared to Bandim. Recalled birthweights were more heaped than those recorded by card (aOR 2.59(95%CI 2.11–3.19)). A gap analysis showed large missed opportunity between facility birth and known birthweight, especially for neonatal deaths. Qualitative data suggested that knowing their baby’s weight was perceived as valuable by women in all sites, but lack of measurement and poor communication, alongside social perceptions and spiritual beliefs surrounding birthweight, impacted women’s ability to report birthweight. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial data gaps remain for birthweight data in household surveys, even amongst facility births. Improving the accuracy and recording of birthweights, and better communication with women, for example using health cards, could improve survey birthweight data availability and quality. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7869202 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78692022021-02-08 Birthweight data completeness and quality in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study Biks, Gashaw Andargie Blencowe, Hannah Hardy, Victoria Ponce Geremew, Bisrat Misganaw Angaw, Dessie Abebaw Wagnew, Alemakef Abebe, Solomon Mekonnen Guadu, Tadesse Martins, Justiniano S.D. Fisker, Ane Baerent Imam, Md. Ali Nettey, Obed Ernest A. Kasasa, Simon Di Stefano, Lydia Akuze, Joseph Kwesiga, Doris Lawn, Joy E. Popul Health Metr Research BACKGROUND: Low birthweight (< 2500 g) is an important marker of maternal health and is associated with neonatal mortality, long-term development and chronic diseases. Household surveys remain an important source of population-based birthweight information, notably Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) and UNICEF’s Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS); however, data quality concerns remain. Few studies have addressed how to close these gaps in surveys. METHODS: The EN-INDEPTH population-based survey of 69,176 women was undertaken in five Health and Demographic Surveillance System sites (Matlab-Bangladesh, Dabat-Ethiopia, Kintampo-Ghana, Bandim-Guinea-Bissau, IgangaMayuge-Uganda). Responses to existing DHS/MICS birthweight questions on 14,411 livebirths were analysed and estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) associated with reporting weighing, birthweight and heaping reported. Twenty-eight focus group discussions with women and interviewers explored barriers and enablers to reporting birthweight. RESULTS: Almost all women provided responses to birthweight survey questions, taking on average 0.2 min to answer. Of all babies, 62.4% were weighed at birth, 53.8% reported birthweight and 21.1% provided health cards with recorded birthweight. High levels of heterogeneity were observed between sites. Home births and neonatal deaths were less likely to be weighed at birth (home births aOR 0.03(95%CI 0.02–0.03), neonatal deaths (aOR 0.19(95%CI 0.16–0.24)), and when weighed, actual birthweight was less likely to be known (aOR 0.44(95%CI 0.33–0.58), aOR 0.30(95%CI 0.22–0.41)) compared to facility births and post-neonatal survivors. Increased levels of maternal education were associated with increases in reporting weighing and knowing birthweight. Half of recorded birthweights were heaped on multiples of 500 g. Heaping was more common in IgangaMayuge (aOR 14.91(95%CI 11.37–19.55) and Dabat (aOR 14.25(95%CI 10.13–20.3) compared to Bandim. Recalled birthweights were more heaped than those recorded by card (aOR 2.59(95%CI 2.11–3.19)). A gap analysis showed large missed opportunity between facility birth and known birthweight, especially for neonatal deaths. Qualitative data suggested that knowing their baby’s weight was perceived as valuable by women in all sites, but lack of measurement and poor communication, alongside social perceptions and spiritual beliefs surrounding birthweight, impacted women’s ability to report birthweight. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial data gaps remain for birthweight data in household surveys, even amongst facility births. Improving the accuracy and recording of birthweights, and better communication with women, for example using health cards, could improve survey birthweight data availability and quality. BioMed Central 2021-02-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7869202/ /pubmed/33557859 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12963-020-00229-w Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Biks, Gashaw Andargie Blencowe, Hannah Hardy, Victoria Ponce Geremew, Bisrat Misganaw Angaw, Dessie Abebaw Wagnew, Alemakef Abebe, Solomon Mekonnen Guadu, Tadesse Martins, Justiniano S.D. Fisker, Ane Baerent Imam, Md. Ali Nettey, Obed Ernest A. Kasasa, Simon Di Stefano, Lydia Akuze, Joseph Kwesiga, Doris Lawn, Joy E. Birthweight data completeness and quality in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study |
title | Birthweight data completeness and quality in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study |
title_full | Birthweight data completeness and quality in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study |
title_fullStr | Birthweight data completeness and quality in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study |
title_full_unstemmed | Birthweight data completeness and quality in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study |
title_short | Birthweight data completeness and quality in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study |
title_sort | birthweight data completeness and quality in population-based surveys: en-indepth study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7869202/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33557859 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12963-020-00229-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT biksgashawandargie birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT blencowehannah birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT hardyvictoriaponce birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT geremewbisratmisganaw birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT angawdessieabebaw birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT wagnewalemakef birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT abebesolomonmekonnen birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT guadutadesse birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT martinsjustinianosd birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT fiskeranebaerent birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT imammdali birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT netteyobedernesta birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT kasasasimon birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT distefanolydia birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT akuzejoseph birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT kwesigadoris birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT lawnjoye birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy AT birthweightdatacompletenessandqualityinpopulationbasedsurveysenindepthstudy |