| Literature DB >> 32181389 |
Eunice Twumwaa Tagoe1, Pascal Agbadi2, Emmanuel K Nakua3, Precious Adade Duodu2, Jerry John Nutor4, Justice Moses K Aheto5.
Abstract
Sierra Leone is among the countries that recorded high under-five child mortality rate in the world. To design and implement policies that can address this public health challenge, the present study developed a predictive model of factors that explained under-five mortality in Sierra Leone using the 2008 and 2013 Sierra Leone Demographic and Health Survey (SDHS) datasets. LASSO regression technique was used to select the predictors to build the under-five predictive single-level logit and multilevel logit models. Statistical analyses were performed in the R freeware version 3.6.1. About 588 (10.4%) and 1320 (11.1%) children under five were reported dead in 2008 and 2013, respectively. The significant predictors of under-five mortality in Sierra Leone were the total number of children ever born, number of children under five in the household, mother's birth in the last five years, mother's number of living children, and number of household members, household wealth, maternal contraceptive use and intention, number of eligible women in the household, type of toilet facility, sex of the child, and weight of the child at birth. The study identified certain predictors that deserve policy attention and interventions to strengthen the efforts of creating child welfare and survival atmosphere in Sierra Leone.Entities:
Keywords: Epidemiology; Health disparity; LASSO Regression; Pediatrics; Predictive model; Public health; Quality of life; Sierra Leone; Sub-saharan africa; Under-five mortality
Year: 2020 PMID: 32181389 PMCID: PMC7063153 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03508
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
The 2008 predictive model of under-five mortality in Sierra Leone.
| Single Level Logit Model | Multilevel Logit Model | |
|---|---|---|
| aOR [95% CI] | aOR [95% CI] | |
| Intercept | 0.07∗∗∗ [0.04, 0.12] | 0.07∗∗∗ [0.04, 0.12] |
| No | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Yes | 1.36 [0.98, 1.88] | 1.37 [0.99, 1.89] |
| Using modern method | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Using traditional method | 1.94 [0.83, 4.31] | 1.94 [0.85, 4.42] |
| Non-user intend to use later | 0.86 [0.58, 1.30] | 0.86 [0.58, 1.29] |
| Does not intend to | 0.86 [0.58, 1.29] | 0.86 [0.58, 1.28] |
| 2.33∗∗∗ [2.13, 2.58] | 2.34∗∗∗ [2.13, 2.57] | |
| 0.32∗∗∗ [0.28, 0.37] | 0.32∗∗∗ [0.28, 0.37] | |
| 1.02 [0.87, 1.19] | 1.02 [0.87, 1.19] | |
| 3.40∗∗∗ [2.84, 4.08] | 3.40∗∗∗ [2.84, 4.08] | |
| 0.25∗∗∗ [0.22, 0.29] | 0.25∗∗∗ [0.22, 0.29] | |
| Poorest | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Poorer | 0.65∗ [0.45, 0.94] | 0.65∗ [0.45, 0.94] |
| Middle | 0.90 [0.64, 1.25] | 0.90 [0.64, 1.26] |
| Richer | 0.84 [0.59, 1.19] | 0.84 [0.59, 1.19] |
| Richest | 0.98 [0.69, 1.39] | 0.98 [0.69, 1.39] |
| 1.14∗∗∗ [1.09, 1.20] | 1.14∗∗∗ [1.09, 1.20] | |
| McFadden R2 | 0.325 | |
| Observations | 5237 | 5237 |
| Second-level units | 351 | |
| VPC | 0.00% | |
| AIC | 2296.9 | 2298.9 |
| BIC | 2395.345 | 2403.9 |
| Deviance | 2266.9 | 2266.9 |
aOR: Adjusted odds ratio, CI: Confidence interval.
∗: p-value < 0.05. ∗∗: p-value < 0.01. ∗∗∗: p-value < 0.001. n=5,237.
The 2013 predictive model of under-five mortality in Sierra Leone.
| Single Level Logit Model | Multilevel Logit Model | |
|---|---|---|
| OR [95% CI) | OR [95% CI) | |
| (Intercept) | 0.06 [0.04, 0.10] | 0.06 [0.038, 0.10] |
| Home | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| public hospital | 1.10 [0.87, 1.38] | 1.10 [0.87, 1.39] |
| public health centre | 0.91 [0.76, 1.07] | 0.91 [0.76, 1.07] |
| Public health post or other | 0.86 [0.61, 1.19] | 0.86 [0.62, 1.20] |
| private hospital/clinic/other | 0.70 [0.38, 1.24] | 0.70 [0.39, 1.27] |
| Modern method | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Using traditional method | 0.91 [0.35, 2.11] | 0.91 [0.37, 2.23] |
| Non-user - intends to use later | 0.78∗ [0.64, 0.95] | 0.78∗ [0.64, 0.95] |
| Does not intend to use | 0.85 [0.69, 1.06] | 0.85 [0.69, 1.06] |
| Never married | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Currently married/living with partner | 0.87 [0.66 1.14] | 0.87 [0.66, 1.14] |
| Ever married/widowed/divorced/separated | 1.21 [0.82, 1.80] | 1.21 [0.82, 1.80] |
| No education | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Primary | 1.01 [0.82, 1.25] | 1.01 [0.82, 1.25] |
| Secondary | 0.81 [0.65, 1.02] | 0.81 [0.65, 1.02] |
| Higher | 0.33∗ [0.11, 0.81] | 0.33∗ [0.12, 0.89] |
| 2.07∗∗∗ [1.94, 2.21] | 2.07∗∗∗ [1.94, 2.21] | |
| 0.38∗∗∗ [0.34, 0.41] | 0.38∗∗∗ [0.34, 0.41] | |
| 1.15∗∗ [1.05, 1.27] | 1.15∗∗ [1.05, 1.27] | |
| 3.62∗∗∗ [3.20, 4.10] | 3.62∗∗∗ [3.19, 4.10] | |
| 0.28∗∗∗ [0.26, 0.31] | 0.28∗∗∗ [0.26, 0.31] | |
| Open defecation (bush/beach/field] | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Flush type of toilet facilities | 0.92 [0.55, 1.49] | 0.92 [0.56 1.51] |
| Ventilated Improved Pit Latrine | 1.31∗ [1.03, 1.65] | 1.31∗ [1.03, 1.65] |
| Pit latrine with slab | 1.00 [0.80, 1.26] | 1.00 [0.80, 1.26] |
| Pit latrine without slab | 1.21 [0.99, 1.49] | 1.21 [0.99, 1.48] |
| others (composting/bucket toilet/hanging toilet) | 1.64 [0.97, 2.68] | 1.64 [0.99, 2.71] |
| River/stream | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Piped water into dwelling/yard | 0.82 [0.48, 1.36] | 0.82 [0.49, 1.38] |
| Public tap/standing pipe | 0.91 [0.69, 1.18] | 0.91 [0.69, 1.18] |
| Tube well/borehole | 0.93 [0.74, 1.18] | 0.93 [0.74, 1.18] |
| Protected well | 0.86 [0.69, 1.09] | 0.86 [0.69, 1.09] |
| Unprotected well | 0.95 [0.71, 1.27] | 0.95 [0.71, 1.27] |
| Spring (protected/unprotected) | 0.97 [0.76, 1.23] | 0.97 [0.76, 1.24] |
| Bottled/sachet water | 0.67 [0.25, 1.60] | 0.67 [0.27, 1.69] |
| others (rain, tunker, etc) | 1.89 [0.87, 3.78] | 1.89 [0.91, 3.93] |
| Not at all | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Less than once a week | 0.93 [0.65, 1.31] | 0.93 [0.65, 1.32] |
| At least once a week | 0.82 [0.61, 1.09] | 0.82 [0.61, 1.10] |
| 1.14∗∗∗ [1.10, 1.18] | 1.14∗∗∗ [1.10, 1.18] | |
| Male | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Female | 0.83∗ [0.72, 0.96] | 0.83∗ [0.72, 0.96] |
| Very large | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Larger than average | 0.98 [0.77, 1.26] | 0.98 [0.77, 1.25] |
| Average | 1.06 [0.85, 1.34] | 1.06 [0.85, 1.33] |
| Smaller than average | 1.63∗∗∗ [1.25, 2.13] | 1.63∗∗∗ [1.25, 2.13] |
| Very small | 1.82∗∗∗ [1.31, 2.52] | 1.82∗∗∗ [1.31, 2.52] |
| Don't know (can't tell) | 2.54∗∗∗ [1.67, 3.85] | 2.54∗∗∗ [1.67, 3.86] |
| 15–19 years | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| 20–24 years | 0.81 [0.62, 1.07] | 0.81 [0.62, 1.07] |
| 25–29 years | 0.88 [0.66, 1.17] | 0.88 [0.66, 1.17] |
| 30–34 years | 1.02 [0.73, 1.41] | 1.02 [0.73, 1.41] |
| 35–39 years | 1.21 [0.84, 1.74] | 1.21 [0.84, 1.74] |
| 40–44 years | 1.21 [0.75, 1.94] | 1.21 [0.75, 1.95] |
| 45–49 years | 1.35 [0.74, 2.41] | 1.35 [0.75, 2.43] |
| McFadden R2 | 0.309 | |
| Observations | 11,476 | 11,476 |
| Second-level units | 435 | |
| VPC | 0.00% | |
| AIC | 5502.3 | 5504.3 |
| BIC | 5840.28 | 5849.6 |
| Deviance | 5410.3 | 5410.3 |
aOR Adjusted odds ratio, CI Confidence interval.
∗: p-value < 0.05. ∗∗: p-value < 0.01. ∗∗∗: p-value < 0.001. n=11,476.
Figure 1Area Under Receiver Operating Characteristic curve of multiple logistic models for predicting under-five mortality outcome.