Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31360449›Full record

ArticleJournal of global health2019

Monitoring childbirth care in primary health facilities: a validity study in Gombe State, northeastern Nigeria.

Antoinette Alas Bhattacharya, Elizabeth Allen, Nasir Umar, Adamu Umar Usman, Habila Felix, Ahmed Audu, Joanna Rm Schellenberg, Tanya Marchant

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of global health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Observational
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

8 authors.

Antoinette Alas BhattacharyaDepartment of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Elizabeth AllenDepartment of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Nasir UmarDepartment of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Adamu Umar UsmanData Research and Mapping Consult, Abuja, Nigeria.
Habila FelixState Primary Health Care Development Agency, Gombe, Nigeria.
Ahmed AuduState Primary Health Care Development Agency, Gombe, Nigeria.
Joanna Rm SchellenbergDepartment of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Tanya MarchantDepartment of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImproving the quality of facility-based births is a critical strategy for reducing the high burden of maternal and neonatal mortality and morbidity across all settings. Accurate data on childbirth care is essential for monitoring progress. In northeastern Nigeria, we assessed the validity of childbirth care indicators in a rural primary health care context, as documented by health workers and reported by women at different recall periods.

methodsWe compared birth observations (gold standard) to: (i) facility exit interviews with observed women; (ii) household follow-up interviews 9-22 months after childbirth; and (iii) health worker documentation in the maternity register. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) to determine individual-level reporting accuracy. We calculated the inflation factor (IF) to determine population-level validity.

resultsTwenty-five childbirth care indicators were assessed to validate health worker documentation and women's self-reports. During exit interviews, women's recall had high validity (AUC≥0.70 and 0.75<IF<1.25) for 9 of 20 indicators assessed; six additional indicators met either AUC or IF criteria for validity. During follow-up interviews, women's recall had high validity for one of 15 indicators assessed, placing the newborn skin-to-skin; two additional indicators met IF criteria only. Health worker documentation had high validity for four of 10 indicators assessed; three additional indicators met AUC or IF criteria.

conclusionsIn addition to standard household surveys, monitoring of facility-based childbirth care should consider drawing from and linking multiple data sources, including routine health facility data and exit interviews with recently delivered women.

Indexed as

Primary Health CareRural Health ServicesAdolescentAdultDelivery, ObstetricDocumentationFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMedical RecordsMiddle AgedNigeriaPregnancyReproducibility of ResultsSelf ReportYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31360449
PMCPMC6657002

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.