Cargando…
How reliable are self-reported estimates of birth registration completeness? Comparison with vital statistics systems
BACKGROUND: The widely-used estimates of completeness of birth registration collected by Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) and published by UNICEF primarily rely on registration status of children as reported by respondents. However, these self-report...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8186773/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34101745 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252140 |
_version_ | 1783705013077409792 |
---|---|
author | Adair, Tim Lopez, Alan D. |
author_facet | Adair, Tim Lopez, Alan D. |
author_sort | Adair, Tim |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The widely-used estimates of completeness of birth registration collected by Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) and published by UNICEF primarily rely on registration status of children as reported by respondents. However, these self-reported estimates may be inaccurate when compared with completeness as assessed from nationally-reported official birth registration statistics, for several reasons, including over-reporting of registration due to concern about penalties for non-registration. This study assesses the concordance of self-reported birth registration and certification completeness with completeness calculated from civil registration and vital statistics (CRVS) systems data for 57 countries. METHODS: Self-reported estimates of birth registration and certification completeness, at ages less than five years and 12–23 months, were compiled and calculated from the UNICEF birth registration database, DHS and MICS. CRVS birth registration completeness was calculated as birth registrations reported by a national authority divided by estimates of live births published in the United Nations (UN) World Population Prospects or the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study. Summary measures of concordance were used to compare completeness estimates. FINDINGS: Birth registration completeness (based on ages less than five years) calculated from self-reported data is higher than that estimated from CRVS data in most of the 57 countries (31 countries according to UN estimated births, average six percentage points (p.p.) higher; 43 countries according to GBD, average eight p.p. higher). For countries with CRVS completeness less than 95%, self-reported completeness was higher in 26 of 28 countries, an average 13 p.p. and median 9–10 p.p. higher. Self-reported completeness is at least 30 p.p. higher than CRVS completeness in three countries. Self-reported birth certification completeness exhibits closer concordance with CRVS completeness. Similar results are found for self-reported completeness at 12–23 months. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that self-reported completeness figures over-estimate completeness when compared with CRVS data, especially at lower levels of completeness, partly due to over-reporting of registration by respondents. Estimates published by UNICEF should be viewed cautiously, especially given their wide usage. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8186773 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81867732021-06-16 How reliable are self-reported estimates of birth registration completeness? Comparison with vital statistics systems Adair, Tim Lopez, Alan D. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: The widely-used estimates of completeness of birth registration collected by Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) and published by UNICEF primarily rely on registration status of children as reported by respondents. However, these self-reported estimates may be inaccurate when compared with completeness as assessed from nationally-reported official birth registration statistics, for several reasons, including over-reporting of registration due to concern about penalties for non-registration. This study assesses the concordance of self-reported birth registration and certification completeness with completeness calculated from civil registration and vital statistics (CRVS) systems data for 57 countries. METHODS: Self-reported estimates of birth registration and certification completeness, at ages less than five years and 12–23 months, were compiled and calculated from the UNICEF birth registration database, DHS and MICS. CRVS birth registration completeness was calculated as birth registrations reported by a national authority divided by estimates of live births published in the United Nations (UN) World Population Prospects or the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study. Summary measures of concordance were used to compare completeness estimates. FINDINGS: Birth registration completeness (based on ages less than five years) calculated from self-reported data is higher than that estimated from CRVS data in most of the 57 countries (31 countries according to UN estimated births, average six percentage points (p.p.) higher; 43 countries according to GBD, average eight p.p. higher). For countries with CRVS completeness less than 95%, self-reported completeness was higher in 26 of 28 countries, an average 13 p.p. and median 9–10 p.p. higher. Self-reported completeness is at least 30 p.p. higher than CRVS completeness in three countries. Self-reported birth certification completeness exhibits closer concordance with CRVS completeness. Similar results are found for self-reported completeness at 12–23 months. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that self-reported completeness figures over-estimate completeness when compared with CRVS data, especially at lower levels of completeness, partly due to over-reporting of registration by respondents. Estimates published by UNICEF should be viewed cautiously, especially given their wide usage. Public Library of Science 2021-06-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8186773/ /pubmed/34101745 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252140 Text en © 2021 Adair, Lopez https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Adair, Tim Lopez, Alan D. How reliable are self-reported estimates of birth registration completeness? Comparison with vital statistics systems |
title | How reliable are self-reported estimates of birth registration completeness? Comparison with vital statistics systems |
title_full | How reliable are self-reported estimates of birth registration completeness? Comparison with vital statistics systems |
title_fullStr | How reliable are self-reported estimates of birth registration completeness? Comparison with vital statistics systems |
title_full_unstemmed | How reliable are self-reported estimates of birth registration completeness? Comparison with vital statistics systems |
title_short | How reliable are self-reported estimates of birth registration completeness? Comparison with vital statistics systems |
title_sort | how reliable are self-reported estimates of birth registration completeness? comparison with vital statistics systems |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8186773/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34101745 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252140 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT adairtim howreliableareselfreportedestimatesofbirthregistrationcompletenesscomparisonwithvitalstatisticssystems AT lopezaland howreliableareselfreportedestimatesofbirthregistrationcompletenesscomparisonwithvitalstatisticssystems |