ArticlePloS one2019
Data quality self-assessment of child health and sexual reproductive health indicators in Botswana, 2016-2017.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing routine health information quality and associated factors among health facilities in the eastern zone of Tigray, Ethiopia, 2019/20: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Global health data precarity: Safeguarding the Demographic and Health Survey program as a global public good.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Conducting household surveys on reproductive health in urban settings: lessons from Karachi, Pakistan.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is no published data on quality of administrative data for various health indicators in Botswana, yet such data are used for policy making and future planning. This article reports on quality of data on child health and sexual and reproductive health (SRH) indicators in Botswana. The main objective of the study was to assess the quality of administrative data from Expanded Immunization Program (EPI) and condom use, Depo-Provera uptake and domiciliary care attendance in Botswana. This was a retrospective study entailing a review of data retrieved from district health records and District Health Information System (DHIS). A total of 30 clinics and health posts were randomly selected from two cities, a town and three rural villages which makes up 6 districts commonly denoted urban, semi-urban and rural respectively. Through a stratified random sampling health facilities were selected. EPI data (Penta 3- third dose of pentavalent vaccine and Measles vaccine) and SRH data (condom use, Depo-Provera uptake and Domiciliary care) were assessed for completeness, discrepancies and verification factor using WHO Routine data quality (RDQA) assessment tool. A verification score of less than 90%% was considered as underreporting while more than 110% is over reporting. However, the score which is within +-10% is acceptable, reliable and a good indicator of data quality and reporting system. About 56% (9/16) SRH indicators had a verification factor score outside the accepted range and 87% (13/15) discrepancy value outside the accepted range. For immunization, 10% (1/10) had a verification factor score outside the accepted range and 33% (3/9) had a discrepancy value outside the accepted range. The level of completeness was high for both Penta3 and Measles coverage and it was lowest for condom. Our findings highlight a poorer data quality for SRH indicators compared to child health indicators. A comprehensive program review drawing lessons from the child health indicators is required to improve the quality of administrative data in Botswana.
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.