Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26193897›Full record

ArticleGlobal health action2015

Local perceptions of causes of death in rural South Africa: a comparison of perceived and verbal autopsy causes of death.

Laith Hussain-Alkhateeb, Edward Fottrell, Max Petzold, Kathleen Kahn, Peter Byass

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global health action, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Laith Hussain-AlkhateebHealth Metrics, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden; laith.hussain@gu.se.
Edward FottrellInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Max PetzoldHealth Metrics, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Kathleen KahnWHO Collaborating Centre for Verbal Autopsy, Umeå Centre for Global Health Research, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Peter ByassWHO Collaborating Centre for Verbal Autopsy, Umeå Centre for Global Health Research, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
University of the Witwatersrand · ZASouth African Medical Research Council · ZAUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Gothenburg · SE

Funding

Medical Research CouncilWellcome Trust 058893/Z/99/AWellcome Trust 069683/Z/02/ZWellcome Trust 085477/Z/08/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnderstanding how lay people perceive the causes of mortality and their associated risk factors is important for public health. In resource-limited settings, where verbal autopsy (VA) is used as the most expedient method of determining cause of death, it is important to understand how pre-existing concepts of cause of death among VA-informants may influence their VA-responses and the consequential impact on cause of death assessment. This study describes the agreement between VA-derived causes of death and informant-perceived causes and associated influential factors, which also reflects lay health literacy in this setting.

methodUsing 20 years of VA data (n=11,228) from the Agincourt Health and Demographic Surveillance System (HDSS) site in rural South Africa, we explored the agreement between the causes of death perceived by the VA-informants and those assigned by the automated Inter-VA tool. Kappa statistics and concordance correlation coefficients were applied to measure agreement at individual and population levels, respectively. Multivariable regression models were used to explore factors associated with recognised lay perceptions of causes of mortality.

resultsAgreement between informant-perceived and VA-derived causes of death at the individual level was limited, but varied substantially by cause of death. However, agreement at the population level, comparing cause-specific mortality fractions was higher, with the notable exception of bewitchment as a cause. More recent deaths, those in adults aged 15-49 years, deaths outside the home, and those associated with external causes showed higher concordance with InterVA.

conclusionOverall, informant perception of causes of death was limited, but depended on informant characteristics and causes of death, and to some extent involved non-biomedical constructs. Understanding discordance between perceived and recognised causes of death is important for public health planning; low community understanding of causes of death may be detrimental to public health. These findings also illustrate the importance of using rigorous and standardised VA methods rather than relying on informants' reported causes of death.

Indexed as

Cause of DeathPerceptionAdolescentAdultAgedAge FactorsAutopsyChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleMiddle AgedModels, Statisticalcauses of deathcommunity perceptionverbal autopsy

Identifiers

PMID26193897
PMCPMC4507750
OpenAlexW1759823869

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.