Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34446481›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2021

Methodological considerations for linking household and healthcare provider data for estimating effective coverage: a systematic review.

Emily D Carter, Hannah H Leslie, Tanya Marchant, Agbessi Amouzou, Melinda K Munos

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 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. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  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

5 authors.

Emily D CarterInternational Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA ecarter@jhu.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-1649-5274
Hannah H LeslieGlobal Health and Population, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7464-3645
Tanya MarchantDisease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Agbessi AmouzouInternational Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Melinda K MunosInternational Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1349-8026

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess existing knowledge related to methodological considerations for linking population-based surveys and health facility data to generate effective coverage estimates. Effective coverage estimates the proportion of individuals in need of an intervention who receive it with sufficient quality to achieve health benefit.

designSystematic review of available literature. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Carolina Population Health Center and Demographic and Health Survey publications and handsearch of related or referenced works of all articles included in full text review. The search included publications from 1 January 2000 to 29 March 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Publications explicitly evaluating (1) the suitability of data, (2) the implications of the design of existing data sources and (3) the impact of choice of method for combining datasets to obtain linked coverage estimates.

resultsOf 3805 papers reviewed, 70 publications addressed relevant issues. Limited data suggest household surveys can be used to identify sources of care, but their validity in estimating intervention need was variable. Methods for collecting provider data and constructing quality indices were diverse and presented limitations. There was little empirical data supporting an association between structural, process and outcome quality. Few studies addressed the influence of the design of common data sources on linking analyses, including imprecise household geographical information system data, provider sampling design and estimate stability. The most consistent evidence suggested under certain conditions, combining data based on geographical proximity or administrative catchment (ecological linking) produced similar estimates to linking based on the specific provider utilised (exact match linking).

conclusionsLinking household and healthcare provider data can leverage existing data sources to generate more informative estimates of intervention coverage and care. However, existing evidence on methods for linking data for effective coverage estimation are variable and numerous methodological questions remain. There is need for additional research to develop evidence-based, standardised best practices for these analyses.

Indexed as

Family CharacteristicsHealth PersonnelHealth FacilitiesHealth ServicesHumansInformation Storage and Retrievalpublic healthquality in healthcarestatistics & research methods

Identifiers

PMID34446481
PMCPMC8395298

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.