| Literature DB >> 24314302 |
Eva A Rehfuess1, Nicky Best, David J Briggs, Mike Joffe.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Effective interventions require evidence on how individual causal pathways jointly determine disease. Based on the concept of systems epidemiology, this paper develops Diagram-based Analysis of Causal Systems (DACS) as an approach to analyze complex systems, and applies it by examining the contributions of proximal and distal determinants of childhood acute lower respiratory infections (ALRI) in sub-Saharan Africa.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24314302 PMCID: PMC3904753 DOI: 10.1186/1742-7622-10-13
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Emerg Themes Epidemiol ISSN: 1742-7622
Terminology for key steps in Diagram-based Analysis of Causal Systems
| A causal diagram developed using | A conceptual causal diagram provides the underlying conceptual framework for statistical analysis, independent of the specific statistical approach or approaches chosen. | |
| A causal diagram derived from the conceptual diagram, and informed by data availability as determined by one data source. All variables are in their actually measured form, which may include proxies depending on the data source. Pathways connecting them may be testable (where all relevant variables are measured) or conceptual (where some or all relevant variables are unmeasured). Depending on the available data and approach to analysis, distinct versions of the operational causal diagrams may be developed for different data sources or datasets* (e.g. for different countries, settings or years). | An operational causal diagram provides the basis for statistical analysis, shedding light on specific statistical approaches that may be applied to a given data source. | |
| A causal diagram derived from the conceptual diagram, as informed by empirical testing across more than one data source. As for operational causal diagrams, variables and the pathways connecting them may be in their actual or conceptual form; actual variables and the pathways connecting them derive from more than one data source. | An integrated causal diagram provides a current summary of knowledge about the whole system, illustrating causal pathways that are well-supported |
* We use “data source” to refer to different types of data (e.g. DHS vs. WHS data), and “dataset” to refer to the same type of data being available for different settings (e.g. DHS data for Benin vs. DHS data for Ethiopia).
Figure 1Notational conventions.
DHS sample sizes by country
| 5,769 (97.0) | 6,219 (96.4) | 4,597 | |
| 14,072 (99.3) | 15,367 (97.8) | 9,255 | |
| 6,333 (96.3) | 8,195 (94.0) | 5,288 | |
| 4,653 (96.9) | 6,755 (92.4) | 3,616 |
WHS sample sizes by country
| 5,046 (98) | 2,122 (99) | 1,629 | 3,602 | |
| 5,075 (95) | 1,909 (97) | 1,054 | 2,346 | |
| 1,860 (98) | 636 (97) | 313 | 698 | |
| 3,158 (64) | 1,193 (98) | 553 | 971 | |
| 3,298 (81) | 1,154 (99) | 586 | 1,052 | |
| 5,131 (96) | 2,053 (99) | 1,355 | 3,260 | |
| 5,662 (73) | 1,529 (97) | 991 | 2,047 | |
| 5,365 (81) | 1,985 (96) | 1,447 | 3,197 | |
| 5,727 (93( | 2,396 (96) | 1,785 | 3,856 | |
| 5,445 (94) | 1,270 (85) | 351 | 827 | |
| 3,929 (95) | 1,754 (99) | 767 | 1,656 | |
| 4,656 (93) | 2,025 (99) | 1,175 | 2,034 | |
| 3,649 (69) | 1,205 (90) | 402 | 809 | |
| 3,122 (54) | 1,323 (98) | 480 | 956 | |
| 4,350 (83) | 1,794 (94) | 1,268 | 2,898 | |
| 4,343 (89) | 2,096 (99) | 1,359 | 2,411 | |
| 69,816 | 26,444 | 15,515 | 32,620 |
Variables related to ALRI and its determinants in DHS and WHS
| Household | Paternal education | | |
| Paternal occupation | |||
| Overcrowding | |||
| Woman | | ||
| Child | Birth weight | ALRI morbidity (cough and rapid breathing during last two weeks) | |
| Breastfeeding | |||
| Malnutrition | |||
| Micronutrient intake | |||
| Vaccination status |
Bold: DHS and WHS.
Regular: DHS only.
Italics: WHS only.
* Electric goods, shelter and mobility indices in DHS and WHS; wealth quintiles in WHS only.
Figure 2Assessment of sign of relationship in individual settings. Consistency in (statistically significant) odds ratios is determined by assessing whether the central estimates of (statistically significant) odds ratios across different levels of a given variable (e.g. low, intermediate, high electric goods index) are always above or always below 1.
Figure 3Assessment of homogeneity/heterogeneity across settings. ntotal refers to all settings where the hypothesis can be tested. neffect refers to all settings where an effect can be detected.
A step-by-step example: impact of wealth and parental education on solid fuel use
| Few published studies have quantitatively assessed the determinants of cooking practices [ | |
| As the rural Beninese population almost exclusively relies on solid fuels, hypothesis 9 could only be tested in urban Benin. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses show consistent trends in odds ratios for wealth, maternal education and paternal education (Table | |
| Equally, the analysis in Ethiopia, Kenya and Namibia concludes that all three socio-economic factors play a role (Table | |
| With the exception of paternal education, all variables relevant to hypothesis 9 are available in DHS and WHS and assessed in a comparable way; their population distribution in Ethiopia, Kenya and Namibia is similar. Hypothesis testing confirms the robustness of the links between wealth, maternal education and solid fuel use in the individual WHS datasets, as well as in the pooled WHS dataset (Table |
Figure 4A conceptual causal diagram.
Figure 5An operational single-dataset causal diagram.
Empirically testable hypotheses
| Hypothesis 1 | Paternal education impacts on paternal occupation. |
| Hypothesis 2 | Maternal education impacts on maternal occupation. |
| Hypothesis 2a | Maternal education impacts on maternal occupation (working/not working). |
| Hypothesis 2b | Maternal education impacts on maternal occupation (type of work). |
| Hypothesis 3 | Paternal and maternal occupations impact on household wealth. |
| Hypothesis 3a | Paternal and maternal occupations impact on the electric goods index. |
| Hypothesis 3b | Paternal and maternal occupations impact on the shelter index. |
| Hypothesis 3c | Paternal and maternal occupations impact on the mobility index. |
| Hypothesis 4 | Low birthweight and breastfeeding duration impact on stunting [ |
| Hypothesis 5 | Wealth, maternal education and maternal occupation impact on low birthweight [ |
| Hypothesis 6 | Wealth, maternal education and paternal education impact on stunting [ |
| Hypothesis 7 | Wealth, maternal education and maternal occupation impact on breastfeeding duration [ |
| Hypothesis 8 | Wealth, maternal education and paternal education impact on vaccination index [ |
| Hypothesis 9 | Wealth, maternal education and paternal education impact on solid fuel use [ |
| Hypothesis 10 | Wealth, maternal education, maternal occupation and paternal education impact on overcrowding. |
| Hypothesis 11 | Maternal education, wealth and solid fuel use impact on child’s ALRI mortality. |
Figure 6An operational multiple-dataset causal diagram.
Results for hypothesis 9 using DHS data: Odds ratios for logistic regression of solid fuel use on wealth, maternal education and paternal education**
| | 6.30* | N/A | 1.00 | N/A | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 27.43* | |
| | 1.00 | N/A | 0.21* | N/A | 0.47* | 0.25* | 0.31* | 1.00 | |
| | 0.53* | N/A | 0.09* | N/A | 0.20* | 0.02* | 0.04* | 0.07* | |
| | 1.97 | N/A | 23.77* | N/A | 1.00 | 3.58 | N/A | N/A | |
| | 1.00 | N/A | 1.00 | N/A | 0.63 | 1.00 | N/A | N/A | |
| | - | N/A | 0.30* | N/A | 0.52* | 0.36* | N/A | N/A | |
| | 1.00 | N/A | 1.00 | N/A | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| | 1.50 | N/A | 0.47* | N/A | 0.69 | 0.78 | 1.69* | 2.28* | |
| | 1.14 | N/A | - | N/A | - | - | - | - | |
| Decrease | N/A | N/A | Non-ordered | Non-ordered | Setting-specific decrease | ||||
| | 1.38 | N/A | 1.00 | N/A | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| | 1.00 | N/A | 0.72* | N/A | 0.41* | 1.00 | 0.48* | 0.79 | |
| | 0.56* | N/A | 0.68* | N/A | 0.39* | 0.86 | 0.20* | 0.32* | |
| | - | N/A | - | N/A | 0.44* | 0.49 | 0.10* | 0.52 | |
| N/A | N/A | Decrease with strong support | |||||||
| | 1.00 | N/A | 1.00 | N/A | 8.22* | - | - | 7.96* | |
| | 0.68* | N/A | 0.93 | N/A | 1.00 | - | - | 1.00 | |
| | 0.55* | N/A | 0.84 | N/A | 0.89 | - | - | 0.74 | |
| | - | N/A | - | N/A | 1.27 | - | - | 0.47 | |
| N/A | Decrease | N/A | Decrease | No effect | No effect | Setting-specific decrease | |||
* Statistically significant with p < 0.05.
** Bold font indicates strong support, normal font indicates limited support for the direction of the relationship.
Results for hypothesis 9 using WHS data: Odds ratios for logistic regression of solid fuel use on wealth and maternal education**
| | 1.00 | N/A | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 10.00* | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| | 0.15* | N/A | 0.41* | 0.12* | 0.44* | 1.00 | 0.30* | 0.18* |
| | - | N/A | 0.52 | - | 0.07* | 0.14* | 0.12* | 0.04* |
| | 0.20 | N/A | 1.00 | 3.06 | 1.00 | 4.47* | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| | 1.00 | N/A | 0.41 | 1.00 | 0.33* | 1.00 | 0.52* | 0.25* |
| | 0.51 | N/A | 0.52 | 0.73 | 0.17* | 0.54 | 0.29* | 0.12* |
| | N/A | N/A | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| | N/A | N/A | 0.63 | 1.64 | 0.64 | 1.89 | 0.52* | 0.52* |
| | Decrease | N/A | Decrease | Decrease | Decrease | |||
| | 1.00 | N/A | 1.00 | 1.00 | - | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| | 0.18* | N/A | 0.54 | 0.81 | - | 0.81 | 0.74* | 1.14 |
| | 0.11* | N/A | 0.29* | 0.35 | - | 0.22* | 0.46* | 0.64* |
| | - | N/A | - | - | - | - | 0.29* | 0.56* |
| N/A | Decrease | |||||||
* Statistically significant with p < 0.05.
** Bold font indicates strong support, normal font indicates limited support for the direction of the relationship.
Figure 7An integrated causal diagram.