Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33557859›Full record

ArticlePopulation health metrics2021

Birthweight data completeness and quality in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study.

Gashaw Andargie Biks, Hannah Blencowe, Victoria Ponce Hardy, Bisrat Misganaw Geremew, Dessie Abebaw Angaw, Alemakef Wagnew, Solomon Mekonnen Abebe, Tadesse Guadu, Justiniano S D Martins, Ane Baerent Fisker and 8 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Population health metrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The Diversity in Tobacco Use Among Women of Reproductive Age (15-49 Years) in Pakistan: A Secondary Analysis of a Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2016-2018.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Birthweight: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021
    Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

18 authors at 7 institutions in 9 countries.

Gashaw Andargie Biks *Dabat Research Centre Health and Demographic Surveillance System, Dabat, Ethiopia.
Hannah Blencowe *Maternal, Adolescent, Reproductive & Child Health (MARCH) Centre, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK. hannah.blencowe@lshtm.ac.uk.
Victoria Ponce HardyMaternal, Adolescent, Reproductive & Child Health (MARCH) Centre, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Bisrat Misganaw GeremewDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Public Health, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Dessie Abebaw AngawDabat Research Centre Health and Demographic Surveillance System, Dabat, Ethiopia.
Alemakef WagnewDabat Research Centre Health and Demographic Surveillance System, Dabat, Ethiopia.
Solomon Mekonnen AbebeDabat Research Centre Health and Demographic Surveillance System, Dabat, Ethiopia.
Tadesse GuaduDabat Research Centre Health and Demographic Surveillance System, Dabat, Ethiopia.
Justiniano S D MartinsBandim Health Project, Bissau, Guinea-Bissau.
Ane Baerent FiskerBandim Health Project, Bissau, Guinea-Bissau.
Md Ali ImamHealth Systems and Population Studies Division, icddr,b, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Obed Ernest A NetteyKintampo Health Research Centre, Kintampo, Ghana.
Simon KasasaIgangaMayuge Health and Demographic Surveillance System, Iganga, Uganda.
Lydia Di StefanoMaternal, Adolescent, Reproductive & Child Health (MARCH) Centre, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Joseph AkuzeMaternal, Adolescent, Reproductive & Child Health (MARCH) Centre, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Doris KwesigaDept. of Health Policy, Planning and Management, Makerere University School of Public Health, Kampala, Uganda.
Joy E Lawn *Maternal, Adolescent, Reproductive & Child Health (MARCH) Centre, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Every Newborn-INDEPTH Study Collaborative Group
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversity of Gondar · ETBandim Health Project · GWInternational Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research · BDKintampo Health Research Centre · GHStatens Serum Institut · DKUppsala University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLow birthweight (< 2500 g) is an important marker of maternal health and is associated with neonatal mortality, long-term development and chronic diseases. Household surveys remain an important source of population-based birthweight information, notably Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) and UNICEF's Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS); however, data quality concerns remain. Few studies have addressed how to close these gaps in surveys.

methodsThe EN-INDEPTH population-based survey of 69,176 women was undertaken in five Health and Demographic Surveillance System sites (Matlab-Bangladesh, Dabat-Ethiopia, Kintampo-Ghana, Bandim-Guinea-Bissau, IgangaMayuge-Uganda). Responses to existing DHS/MICS birthweight questions on 14,411 livebirths were analysed and estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) associated with reporting weighing, birthweight and heaping reported. Twenty-eight focus group discussions with women and interviewers explored barriers and enablers to reporting birthweight.

resultsAlmost all women provided responses to birthweight survey questions, taking on average 0.2 min to answer. Of all babies, 62.4% were weighed at birth, 53.8% reported birthweight and 21.1% provided health cards with recorded birthweight. High levels of heterogeneity were observed between sites. Home births and neonatal deaths were less likely to be weighed at birth (home births aOR 0.03(95%CI 0.02-0.03), neonatal deaths (aOR 0.19(95%CI 0.16-0.24)), and when weighed, actual birthweight was less likely to be known (aOR 0.44(95%CI 0.33-0.58), aOR 0.30(95%CI 0.22-0.41)) compared to facility births and post-neonatal survivors. Increased levels of maternal education were associated with increases in reporting weighing and knowing birthweight. Half of recorded birthweights were heaped on multiples of 500 g. Heaping was more common in IgangaMayuge (aOR 14.91(95%CI 11.37-19.55) and Dabat (aOR 14.25(95%CI 10.13-20.3) compared to Bandim. Recalled birthweights were more heaped than those recorded by card (aOR 2.59(95%CI 2.11-3.19)). A gap analysis showed large missed opportunity between facility birth and known birthweight, especially for neonatal deaths. Qualitative data suggested that knowing their baby's weight was perceived as valuable by women in all sites, but lack of measurement and poor communication, alongside social perceptions and spiritual beliefs surrounding birthweight, impacted women's ability to report birthweight.

conclusionsSubstantial data gaps remain for birthweight data in household surveys, even amongst facility births. Improving the accuracy and recording of birthweights, and better communication with women, for example using health cards, could improve survey birthweight data availability and quality.

Indexed as

Infant, Low Birth WeightInfant MortalityBirth WeightData AccuracyFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornSurveys and QuestionnairesBirthweightData qualityHeapingHousehold surveyMeasurement

Identifiers

PMID33557859
PMCPMC7869202
OpenAlexW3127306652

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.