ArticleJournal of global health2021
Validation of community health worker identification of maternal puerperal sepsis using a clinical diagnostic algorithm in Bangladesh and Pakistan.
Article in Journal of global health, 2021. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
- Global burden of female infertility attributable to sexually transmitted infections and maternal sepsis: 1990-2021 and projections to 2050.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 5 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPuerperal sepsis (PP sepsis) is a leading cause of maternal mortality globally. The majority of maternal sepsis cases and deaths occur at home and remain undiagnosed and under-reported. In this paper, we present findings from a nested case-control study in Bangladesh and Pakistan which sought to assess the validity of community health worker (CHW) identification of PP sepsis using a clinical diagnostic algorithm with physician assessment and classification used as the gold standard.
methodsUp to 300 postpartum women were enrolled in each of the 3 sites 1) Sylhet, Bangladesh (n = 278), 2) Karachi, Pakistan (n = 278) and 3) Matiari, Pakistan (n = 300). Index cases were women with suspected PP Sepsis as diagnosed by CHWs clinical assessment of one or more of the following signs and symptoms: temperature (recorded fever ≥38.1°C, reported history of fever, lower abdominal or pelvic pain, and abnormal or foul-smelling discharge. Each case was matched with 3 control women who were diagnosed by CHWs to have no infection. Cases and controls were assessed by trained physicians using the same algorithm implemented by the CHWs. Using physician assessment as the gold standard, Kappa statistics for reliability and diagnostic validity (sensitivity and specificity) are presented with 95% CI. Sensitivity and specificity were adjusted for verification bias.
resultsThe adjusted sensitivity and specificity of CHW identification of PP sepsis across all sites was 82% (Karachi: 78%, Matiari: 78%, Sylhet: 95%) and 90% (Karachi: 95%, Matiari: 85%, Sylhet: 90%) respectively. CHW-Physician agreement was highest for moderate and high fever (range across sites: K = 0.84-0.97) and lowest for lower abdominal pain (K = 0.30-0.34). The clinical signs and symptoms for other conditions were reported infrequently, however, the CHW-physician agreement was high for all symptoms except severe headache/ blurred vision (K = 0.13-0.38) and reported "lower abdominal pain without fever" (K = 0.39-0.57).
conclusionIn all sites, CHWs with limited training were able to identify signs and symptoms and to classify cases of PP sepsis with high validity. Integrating postpartum infection screening into existing community-based platforms and post-natal visits is a promising strategy to monitor women for PP sepsis - improving delivery of cohesive maternal and child health care in low resource settings.
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.