Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30254744›Full record

Trial reportJournal of global health2018

A prospective validation study in South-West Nigeria on caregiver report of childhood pneumonia and antibiotic treatment using Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) questions.

Adejumoke I Ayede, Amir Kirolos, Kayode R Fowobaje, Linda J Williams, Ayobami A Bakare, Oladapo B Oyewole, Oluwaseun B Olorunfemi, Oluwaseun Kuna, Nkechi T Iwuala, Abolanle Oguntoye and 6 more

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialValidation Study
In one paragraph

Trial report 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 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. 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

16 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Adejumoke I AyedeDepartment of Paediatrics, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Amir KirolosCentre for Global Health Research, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Kayode R FowobajeUniversity College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Linda J WilliamsCentre for Global Health Research, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Ayobami A BakareUniversity College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Oladapo B OyewoleUniversity College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Oluwaseun B OlorunfemiUniversity College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Oluwaseun KunaUniversity College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Nkechi T IwualaUniversity College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Abolanle OguntoyeUniversity College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Simeon O KusoroUniversity College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Mofeyisade E OkunlolaUniversity College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Shamim A QaziDepartment of Maternal Newborn Child and Adolescent Health, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Harish NairCentre for Global Health Research, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Adegoke G FaladeDepartment of Paediatrics, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Harry CampbellCentre for Global Health Research, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
University College Hospital, Ibadan · NGUniversity of Edinburgh · GBWorld Health Organization · CH

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChildhood pneumonia is the single largest infectious cause of death in children under five worldwide. Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) provide health information on care sought for sick children in resource poor settings. Despite not being primarily designed to identify childhood pneumonia, there are concerns that reported episodes of "symptoms of acute respiratory infection" in DHS and MICS are often interpreted by other groups as a "proxy" for childhood pneumonia. Using DHS5 and MICS5 survey tools, this study aimed to assess how accurately caregivers report of "symptoms of acute respiratory infection" reflect pneumonia episodes and antibiotic use in children under five.

methodsChildren aged 0 to 59 months presenting with cough and/or difficult breathing were recruited from four study hospitals in Ibadan, Nigeria from August 2015 to March 2017. Children were assessed using World Health Organization (WHO) standard criteria by study physicians to identify whether they had pneumonia. Three hundred and two matched children in each category of 'pneumonia' and "no pneumonia" were followed up at home, either two or eight weeks later, using questions from DHS5 and MICS5 surveys to assess the accuracy of caregiver recall of pneumonia.

resultsThe specificity of DHS5 and MICS5 questions for identifying childhood pneumonia were 87.4 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 83.1-91.0) and 86.1 (95% CI = 81.7-89.8) respectively and the sensitivity of questions were 37.1 (95% CI = 31.6-42.8) and 37.1 (95% CI = 31.6-42.8). Correct recall of antibiotic treatment was poor (kappa statistic = 0.064) but improved with the use of medicine pill boards (kappa statistic = 0.235).

conclusionsDHS5 and MICS5 survey questions are not designed to identify childhood pneumonia and this study confirms that they do not accurately discern episodes of childhood pneumonia from cough/cold in children under five. The proportion of pneumonia episodes appropriately treated with antibiotics cannot be accurately assessed using current DHS and MICS surveys. If these results are used to guide programmatic decisions, it is likely to encourage overuse and inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics for episodes of cough/cold. International agencies who continue to use these household data to monitor the proportion of children with pneumonia who receive antibiotic treatment should be discouraged from doing this as these data are likely to mislead national and global programmes. Medicine pill boards are used in a number of DHS surveys and should be promoted for wider use in national population surveys to improve the accuracy of antibiotic recall.

Indexed as

Surveys and QuestionnairesAdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsCaregiversChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleMental RecallNigeriaPneumoniaProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID30254744
PMCPMC6150611
OpenAlexW2891073175

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.