ArticleJournal of global health2018
Validation of maternal reports for low birthweight and preterm birth indicators in rural Nepal.
Article in Journal of global health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 92 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Community-based cluster randomized controlled trial: empowering households to identify and provide appropriate care for low-birthweight newborns in Nepal.BMC public health · 2020Trial
- Pediatric Reference and Optimal Curves for Hemoglobin.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Examining the combined effect of antenatal care visits and iron-folic acid supplementation on low birth weight: a pooled analysis of two national data sets from Nepal.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Assessing the validity of maternal report on breastfeeding counselling in Kosovo's primary health facilities.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Estimating birthweight reduction attributable to maternal ozone exposure in low- and middle-income countries.Science advances · 2023Article
- Exploring the accuracy of self-reported maternal and newborn care in select studies from low and middle-income country settings: do respondent and facility characteristics affect measurement?BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Validation of maternal report of nutrition-related interventions and counselling during antenatal care in southern Nepal.Maternal & child nutrition · 2022Article
- To call or not to call: exploring the validity of telephone interviews to derive maternal self-reports of experiences with facility childbirth care in northern Nigeria.BMJ global health · 2022Article
- Validation of Maternal Report of Receipt of Iron-Folic Acid Supplementation during Antenatal Care in Rural Southern Nepal.The Journal of nutrition · 2022Article
- Effect of birthweight measurement quality improvement on low birthweight prevalence in rural Ethiopia.Population health metrics · 2021Article
- Birthweight: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Observational
- Birthweight measurement processes and perceived value: qualitative research in one EN-BIRTH study hospital in Tanzania.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Observational
- Survey of women's report for 33 maternal and newborn indicators: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Observational
- Gestational age data completeness, quality and validity in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study.Population health metrics · 2021Article
- Birthweight data completeness and quality in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study.Population health metrics · 2021Article
- Adherence to iron and folic acid supplementation during pregnancy among postnatal mothers seeking maternal and child healthcare at Kakamega level 5 hospital in Kenya: a cross-sectional study.Wellcome open research · 2021Article
- What is meant by validity in maternal and newborn health measurement? A conceptual framework for understanding indicator validation.PloS one · 2020Article
- Monitoring childbirth care in primary health facilities: a validity study in Gombe State, northeastern Nigeria.Journal of global health · 2019Article
- National, regional, and worldwide estimates of low birthweight in 2015, with trends from 2000: a systematic analysis.The Lancet. Global health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTracking progress towards global newborn health targets depends largely on maternal reported data collected through large, nationally representative surveys. We evaluated the validity, across a range of recall period lengths (1 to 24 months post-delivery), of maternal report of birthweight, birth size and length of pregnancy.
methodsWe compared maternal reports to reference standards of birthweights measured within 72 hours of delivery and gestational age generated from reported first day of the last menstrual period (LMP) prospectively collected as part of a population-based study (n = 1502). We calculated sensitivity, specificity, area the under the receiver operating curve (AUC) as a measure of individual-level accuracy, and the inflation factor (IF) to quantify population-level bias for each indicator. We assessed if length of recall period modified accuracy by stratifying measurements across time bins and using a modified Poisson regression with robust error variance to estimate the relative risk (RR) of correctly classifying newborns as low birthweight (LBW) or preterm, adjusting for child sex, place of delivery, maternal age, maternal education, parity, and ethnicity.
resultsThe LBW indicator using maternally reported birthweight in grams had low individual-level accuracy (AUC = 0.69) and high population-level bias (inflation factor IF = 0.62). LBW using maternally reported birth size and the preterm birth indicator had lower individual-level accuracy (AUC = 0.58 and 0.56, respectively) and higher population-level bias (IF = 0.28 and 0.35, respectively) up to 24 months following birth. Length of recall time did not affect accuracy of LBW indicators. For the preterm birth indicator, accuracy did not change with length of recall up to 20 months after birth and improved slightly beyond 20 months.
conclusionsThe use of maternal reports may underestimate and bias indicators for LBW and preterm birth. In settings with high prevalence of LBW and preterm births, these indicators generated from maternal reports may be more vulnerable to misclassification. In populations where an important proportion of births occur at home or where weight is not routinely measured, mothers perhaps place less importance on remembering size at birth. Further work is needed to explore whether these conclusions on the validity of maternal reports hold in similar rural and low-income settings.
Indexed as
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.