ArticleBMJ open2013
How accurate are medical record data in Afghanistan's maternal health facilities? An observational validity study.
Article in BMJ open, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- How and why does mode of birth affect processes for routine data collection and use? A qualitative study in Bangladesh and Tanzania.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Determinants of childbirth care quality along the care continuum in limited resource settings: A structural equation modeling analysis of cross-sectional data from Burkina Faso and Côte d'Ivoire.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Article
- Socioeconomic inequalities in effective service coverage for reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health: a comparative analysis of 39 low-income and middle-income countries.EClinicalMedicine · 2021Article
- Immediate newborn care and breastfeeding: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Observational
- Uterotonics for prevention of postpartum haemorrhage: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Observational
- Quality of Maternal Death Documentation in Afghanistan: A Retrospective Health Facility Record Review.Frontiers in global women's health · 2021Article
- "Journal of global health · 2019Observational
- Measuring the quality of maternal and care processes at the time of delivery in sub-Saharan Africa: development and validation of a short index.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2019Article
- The burden of misclassification of antepartum stillbirth in Nepal.BMJ global health · 2019Article
- Article
- Delays in receiving obstetric care and poor maternal outcomes: results from a national multicentre cross-sectional study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesImprovement activities, surveillance and research in maternal and neonatal health in Afghanistan rely heavily on medical record data. This study investigates accuracy in delivery care records from three hospitals across workshifts.
designObservational cross-sectional study.
settingThe study was conducted in one maternity hospital, one general hospital maternity department and one provincial hospital maternity department. Researchers observed vaginal deliveries and recorded observations to later check against data recorded in patient medical records and facility registers. OUTCOME MEASURES: We determined the sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operator characteristics curves (AUROCs), proportions correctly classified and the tendency to make performance seem better than it actually was.
results600 observations across the three shifts and three hospitals showed high compliance with active management of the third stage of labour, measuring blood loss and uterine contraction at 30 min, cord care, drying and wrapping newborns and Apgar scores and low compliance with monitoring vital signs. Compliance with quality indicators was high and specificity was lower than sensitivity. For adverse outcomes in birth registries, specificity was higher than sensitivity. Overall AUROCs were between 0.5 and 0.6. Of 17 variables that showed biased errors, 12 made performance or outcomes seem better than they were, and five made them look worse (71% vs 29%, p=0.143). Compliance, sensitivity and specificity varied less among the three shifts than among hospitals.
conclusionsMedical record accuracy was generally poor. Errors by clinicians did not appear to follow a pattern of self-enhancement of performance. Because successful improvement activities, surveillance and research in these settings are heavily reliant on collecting accurate data on processes and outcomes of care, substantial improvement is needed in medical record accuracy.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.