Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34083241›Full record

Observational studyBMJ global health2021

Accuracy of verbal autopsy, clinical data and minimally invasive autopsy in the evaluation of malaria-specific mortality: an observational study.

Natalia Rakislova, Dercio Jordao, Mamudo R Ismail, Alfredo Mayor, Pau Cisteró, Lorena Marimon, Melania Ferrando, Juan Carlos Hurtado, Lucilia Lovane, Carla Carrilho and 16 more

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ global health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Malaria-Associated Mortality in the 19th Century.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
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

26 authors.

Natalia RakislovaISGLOBAL, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Dercio JordaoDepartment of Pathology, Quelimane Central Hospital, Quelimane, Mozambique.
Mamudo R IsmailDepartment of Pathology, Maputo Central Hospital, Maputo, Mozambique.
Alfredo MayorISGLOBAL, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Pau CisteróISGLOBAL, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Lorena MarimonISGLOBAL, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Melania FerrandoISGLOBAL, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Juan Carlos HurtadoISGLOBAL, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-9519-6082
Lucilia LovaneDepartment of Pathology, Maputo Central Hospital, Maputo, Mozambique.
Carla CarrilhoDepartment of Pathology, Maputo Central Hospital, Maputo, Mozambique.
Cesaltina LorenzoniDepartment of Pathology, Maputo Central Hospital, Maputo, Mozambique.
Fabiola FernandesDepartment of Pathology, Maputo Central Hospital, Maputo, Mozambique.
Tacilta NhampossaCentro de Investigação em Saúde de Manhiça, Manhica, Mozambique.
Anelsio CossaCentro de Investigação em Saúde de Manhiça, Manhica, Mozambique.
Inacio MandomandoCentro de Investigação em Saúde de Manhiça, Manhica, Mozambique.ORCID 0000-0002-1078-2187
Mireia NavarroISGLOBAL, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Isaac CasasISGLOBAL, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Khatia MunguambeFaculty of Medicine, University Eduardo Mondlane, Maputo, Mozambique.
Maria MaixenchsISGLOBAL, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Llorenç QuintóISGLOBAL, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Eusebio MaceteCentro de Investigação em Saúde de Manhiça, Manhica, Mozambique.
Mikel MartinezISGLOBAL, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Robert W SnowPopulation and Health Unit, KEMRI - Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
Quique BassatISGLOBAL, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-0875-7596
Clara Menéndez *ISGLOBAL, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Jaume Ordi *ISGLOBAL, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain jordi@clinic.cat.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 203077Wellcome Trust 212176
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlobal malaria mortality estimates are hindered by the low reliability of the verbal autopsy (VA) and the clinical records, the most common sources of information used to estimate malaria-specific mortality. We aimed to determine the accuracy of these tools, as well as of the minimally invasive autopsy (MIA), a needle-based postmortem sampling method, to identify malaria-specific mortality in a large series of deceased patients from Mozambique, using complete autopsy as the gold standard.

methodsObservational study that included 264 deaths, occurring at a tertiary level hospital in Mozambique, from 1 November 2013 to 31 March 2015 (17 months-long period). Clinical data were abstracted, a computer coded VA was completed using the clinical data as source of information, and an MIA followed by a complete autopsy were performed. Screening for malaria infection was conducted postmortem to all participants using molecular and histological techniques (PCR and immunohistochemistry).

findingsMalaria infection was considered the cause of death in 6/264 (2.3%) cases: 2/54 children (3.7%, both less than 5 years old) and 4/57 (7.0%) maternal deaths. The sensitivity and specificity of the VA, the clinical data and the MIA to identify malaria-specific deaths were 33.3% and 96.1%, 66.7% and 96.1%, and 100% and 100%, respectively. In addition, malaria was identified as a possible contributor in 14 additional patients who died of other diseases. These cases were also accurately identified by the MIA (sensitivity 82.4%, specificity 100%).

interpretationThe high sensitivity and specificity of the MIA in identifying malaria may help to improve current estimates of malaria-specific mortality in endemic areas.

Indexed as

MalariaAutopsyCause of DeathChildChild, PreschoolHumansMozambiqueReproducibility of Resultsdiseasesdisordersinfectionsinjuriesmalaria

Identifiers

PMID34083241
PMCPMC8183227

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.