Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34511089›Full record

ReviewBMC health services research2021

A review of geospatial methods for population estimation and their use in constructing reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health service indicators.

Kristine Nilsen, Natalia Tejedor-Garavito, Douglas R Leasure, C Edson Utazi, Corrine W Ruktanonchai, Adelle S Wigley, Claire A Dooley, Zoe Matthews, Andrew J Tatem

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kristine NilsenWorldPop, School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. Kristine.nilsen@soton.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2009-4019
Natalia Tejedor-GaravitoWorldPop, School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Douglas R LeasureWorldPop, School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
C Edson UtaziWorldPop, School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Corrine W RuktanonchaiWorldPop, School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Adelle S WigleyWorldPop, School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Claire A DooleyWorldPop, School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Zoe MatthewsDepartment of Social Statistics and Demography, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Andrew J TatemWorldPop, School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
University of Southampton · GB

Funding

Johns Hopkins University ARCP009949
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHousehold survey data are frequently used to measure reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health (RMNCAH) service utilisation in low and middle income countries. However, these surveys are typically only undertaken every 5 years and tend to be representative of larger geographical administrative units. Investments in district health management information systems (DHMIS) have increased the capability of countries to collect continuous information on the provision of RMNCAH services at health facilities. However, reliable and recent data on population distributions and demographics at subnational levels necessary to construct RMNCAH coverage indicators are often missing. One solution is to use spatially disaggregated gridded datasets containing modelled estimates of population counts. Here, we provide an overview of various approaches to the production of gridded demographic datasets and outline their potential and their limitations. Further, we show how gridded population estimates can be used as alternative denominators to produce RMNCAH coverage metrics in combination with data from DHMIS, using childhood vaccination as examples.

methodsWe constructed indicators on the percentage of children one year old for diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus vaccine dose 3 (DTP3) and measles vaccine dose (MCV1) in Zambia and Nigeria at district levels. For the numerators, information on vaccines doses was obtained from each country's respective DHMIS. For the denominators, the number of children was obtained from 3 different sources including national population projections and aggregated gridded estimates derived using top-down and bottom-up geospatial methods.

resultsIn Zambia, vaccination estimates utilising the bottom-up approach to population estimation substantially reduced the number of districts with > 100% coverage of DTP3 and MCV1 compared to estimates using population projection and the top-down method. In Nigeria, results were mixed with bottom-up estimates having a higher number of districts > 100% and estimates using population projections performing better particularly in the South.

conclusionsGridded demographic data utilising traditional and novel data sources obtained from remote sensing offer new potential in the absence of up to date census information in the estimation of RMNCAH indicators. However, the usefulness of gridded demographic data is dependent on several factors including the availability and detail of input data.

Indexed as

Adolescent Health ServicesAdolescentChildFamilyHumansIncomeInfantInfant, NewbornMeasles VaccineVaccinationMeasles VaccineDenominatorsGeospatial modellingGridded data setsRMNCAHSubnational estimationUniversal coverage

Identifiers

PMID34511089
PMCPMC8436450
OpenAlexW3201542545

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.