Joseph Akuze1,2, Hannah Blencowe3, Simon Cousens3, Joy E Lawn3, Peter Waiswa4,5, Vladimir Sergeevich Gordeev3,6, Fred Arnold7, Trevor Croft7, Angela Baschieri3. 1. Maternal, Adolescent, Reproductive & Child Health (MARCH) Centre, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK. jakuze@musph.ac.ug. 2. Centre of Excellence for Maternal Newborn and Child Health Research, Dept. of Health Policy, Planning and Management, Makerere University School of Public Health, Kampala, Uganda. jakuze@musph.ac.ug. 3. Maternal, Adolescent, Reproductive & Child Health (MARCH) Centre, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK. 4. Centre of Excellence for Maternal Newborn and Child Health Research, Dept. of Health Policy, Planning and Management, Makerere University School of Public Health, Kampala, Uganda. 5. Global Health Division, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 6. Institute of Population Health Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. 7. The Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) Program, ICF, Rockville, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Worldwide, an estimated 5.1 million stillbirths and neonatal deaths occur annually, 98% in low- and middle-income countries. Limited coverage of civil and vital registration systems necessitates reliance on women's retrospective reporting in household surveys for data on these deaths. The predominant platform, Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), has evolved over the last 35 years and differs by country, yet no previous study has described these differences and the effects of these changes on stillbirth and neonatal death measurement. METHODS: We undertook a review of DHS model questionnaires, protocols and methodological reports from DHS-I to DHS-VII, focusing on the collection of information on stillbirth and neonatal deaths describing differences in approaches, questionnaires and geographic reach up to December 9, 2019. We analysed the resultant data, applied previously used data quality criteria including ratios of stillbirth rate (SBR) to neonatal mortality rate (NMR) and early NMR (ENMR) to NMR, comparing by country, over time and by DHS module. RESULTS: DHS has conducted >320 surveys in 90 countries since 1984. Two types of maternity history have been used: full birth history (FBH) and full pregnancy history (FPH). A FBH collecting information only on live births has been included in all model questionnaires to date, with data on stillbirths collected through a reproductive calendar (DHS II-VI) or using additional questions on non-live births (DHS-VII). FPH collecting information on all pregnancies including live births, miscarriages, abortions and stillbirths has been used in 17 countries. We found no evidence of variation in stillbirth data quality assessed by SBR:NMR over time for FBH surveys with reproductive calendar, some variation for surveys with FBH in DHS-VII and most variation among the surveys conducted with a FPH. ENMR:NMR ratio increased over time, which may reflect changes in data quality or real epidemiological change. CONCLUSION: DHS remains the major data source for pregnancy outcomes worldwide. Although the DHS model questionnaire has evolved over the last three and half decades, more robust evidence is required concerning optimal methods to obtain accurate data on stillbirths and neonatal deaths through household surveys and also to develop and test standardised data quality criteria.
BACKGROUND: Worldwide, an estimated 5.1 million stillbirths and neonatal deaths occur annually, 98% in low- and middle-income countries. Limited coverage of civil and vital registration systems necessitates reliance on women's retrospective reporting in household surveys for data on these deaths. The predominant platform, Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), has evolved over the last 35 years and differs by country, yet no previous study has described these differences and the effects of these changes on stillbirth and neonatal death measurement. METHODS: We undertook a review of DHS model questionnaires, protocols and methodological reports from DHS-I to DHS-VII, focusing on the collection of information on stillbirth and neonatal deaths describing differences in approaches, questionnaires and geographic reach up to December 9, 2019. We analysed the resultant data, applied previously used data quality criteria including ratios of stillbirth rate (SBR) to neonatal mortality rate (NMR) and early NMR (ENMR) to NMR, comparing by country, over time and by DHS module. RESULTS: DHS has conducted >320 surveys in 90 countries since 1984. Two types of maternity history have been used: full birth history (FBH) and full pregnancy history (FPH). A FBH collecting information only on live births has been included in all model questionnaires to date, with data on stillbirths collected through a reproductive calendar (DHS II-VI) or using additional questions on non-live births (DHS-VII). FPH collecting information on all pregnancies including live births, miscarriages, abortions and stillbirths has been used in 17 countries. We found no evidence of variation in stillbirth data quality assessed by SBR:NMR over time for FBH surveys with reproductive calendar, some variation for surveys with FBH in DHS-VII and most variation among the surveys conducted with a FPH. ENMR:NMR ratio increased over time, which may reflect changes in data quality or real epidemiological change. CONCLUSION: DHS remains the major data source for pregnancy outcomes worldwide. Although the DHS model questionnaire has evolved over the last three and half decades, more robust evidence is required concerning optimal methods to obtain accurate data on stillbirths and neonatal deaths through household surveys and also to develop and test standardised data quality criteria.
Entities:
Keywords:
Demographic and Health Surveys; Neonatal deaths; Questionnaires; Stillbirths
Authors: Joy E Lawn; Hannah Blencowe; Shefali Oza; Danzhen You; Anne C C Lee; Peter Waiswa; Marek Lalli; Zulfiqar Bhutta; Aluisio J D Barros; Parul Christian; Colin Mathers; Simon N Cousens Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-05-19 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Mikkel Zahle Oestergaard; Mie Inoue; Sachiyo Yoshida; Wahyu Retno Mahanani; Fiona M Gore; Simon Cousens; Joy E Lawn; Colin Douglas Mathers Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2011-08-30 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Hannah Blencowe; Simon Cousens; Fiorella Bianchi Jassir; Lale Say; Doris Chou; Colin Mathers; Dan Hogan; Suhail Shiekh; Zeshan U Qureshi; Danzhen You; Joy E Lawn Journal: Lancet Glob Health Date: 2016-01-19 Impact factor: 26.763
Authors: Alexander E P Heazell; Dimitrios Siassakos; Hannah Blencowe; Christy Burden; Zulfiqar A Bhutta; Joanne Cacciatore; Nghia Dang; Jai Das; Vicki Flenady; Katherine J Gold; Olivia K Mensah; Joseph Millum; Daniel Nuzum; Keelin O'Donoghue; Maggie Redshaw; Arjumand Rizvi; Tracy Roberts; H E Toyin Saraki; Claire Storey; Aleena M Wojcieszek; Soo Downe Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-01-19 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Joy E Lawn; Hannah Blencowe; Peter Waiswa; Agbessi Amouzou; Colin Mathers; Dan Hogan; Vicki Flenady; J Frederik Frøen; Zeshan U Qureshi; Claire Calderwood; Suhail Shiekh; Fiorella Bianchi Jassir; Danzhen You; Elizabeth M McClure; Matthews Mathai; Simon Cousens Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-01-19 Impact factor: 79.321