Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36206230›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Mixed-methods analysis of select issues reported in the 2016 World Health Organization verbal autopsy questionnaire.

Erin Nichols, Kristen Pettrone, Brent Vickers, Hermon Gebrehiwet, Clarissa Surek-Clark, Jordana Leitao, Agbessi Amouzou, Dianna M Blau, Debbie Bradshaw, El Marnissi Abdelilah and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

16 authors at 10 institutions in 5 countries.

Erin NicholsDivision of Vital Statistics, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevent, Hyattsville, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-4917-1412
Kristen PettroneDivision of Vital Statistics, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevent, Hyattsville, Maryland, United States of America.
Brent VickersCollaborating Center for Questionnaire Design and Evaluation Research, Division of Research and Methodology, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville, Maryland, United States of America.
Hermon GebrehiwetSchool of Nursing and Health Sciences, Public Health Program, Capella University, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of America.
Clarissa Surek-ClarkDepartments of English and Sociology, College of Arts and Sciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.
Jordana LeitaoWorld Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Agbessi AmouzouInstitute for International Programs, Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Dianna M BlauChild Health and Mortality Prevention Surveillance (CHAMPS), Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
Debbie BradshawBurden of Disease Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.
El Marnissi AbdelilahPlanning and Studies Division, Directorate of Planning and Financial Resources, Ministry of Health, Rabat, Morocco.
Pamela GroenewaldBurden of Disease Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.
Brian MunkombweDivision of Vital Statistics, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevent, Hyattsville, Maryland, United States of America.
Chomba MwangoBloomberg Data for Health Initiative, Lusaka, Zambia.
F Sam NotzonCDC Foundation, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
Steve Biko OdhiamboKenya Medical Research Institute, Centre for Global Health Research, Health and Demographic Surveillance System, Kisumu, Kenya.
Paul ScanlonCollaborating Center for Questionnaire Design and Evaluation Research, Division of Research and Methodology, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville, Maryland, United States of America.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · USNational Center for Health Statistics · USSouth African Medical Research Council · ZACapella University · USCDC Foundation · USJohns Hopkins University · USKenya Medical Research Institute · KEMinistère de la Santé · MAThe Ohio State University · USWorld Health Organization · CH

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUse of a standardized verbal autopsy (VA) questionnaire, such as the World Health Organization (WHO) instrument, can improve the consistency and reliability of the data it collects. Systematically revising a questionnaire, however, requires evidence about the performance of its questions. The purpose of this investigation was to use a mixed methods approach to evaluate the performance of questions related to 14 previously reported issues in the 2016 version of the WHO questionnaire, where there were concerns of potential confusion, redundancy, or inability of the respondent to answer the question. The results from this mixed methods analysis are discussed across common themes that may have contributed to the underperformance of questions and have been compiled to inform decisions around the revision of the current VA instrument.

methodsQuantitative analysis of 19,150 VAs for neonates, children, and adults from five project teams implementing VAs predominately in Sub-Saharan Africa included frequency distributions and cross-tabulations to evaluate response patterns among related questions. The association of respondent characteristics and response patterns was evaluated using prevalence ratios. Qualitative analysis included results from cognitive interviewing, an approach that provides a detailed understanding of the meanings and processes that respondents use to answer interview questions. Cognitive interviews were conducted among 149 participants in Morocco and Zambia. Findings from the qualitative and quantitative analyses were triangulated to identify common themes.

resultsFour broad themes contributing to the underperformance or redundancy within the instrument were identified: question sequence, overlap within the question series, questions outside the frame of reference of the respondent, and questions needing clarification. The series of questions associated with one of the 14 identified issues (the series of questions on injuries) related to question sequence; seven (tobacco use, sores, breast swelling, abdominal problem, vomiting, vaccination, and baby size) demonstrated similar response patterns among questions within each series capturing overlapping information. Respondent characteristics, including relationship to the deceased and whether or not the respondent lived with the deceased, were associated with differing frequencies of non-substantive responses in three question series (female health related issues, tobacco use, and baby size). An inconsistent understanding of related constructs was observed between questions related to sores/ulcers, birth weight/baby size, and diagnosis of dementia/presence of mental confusion. An incorrect association of the intended construct with that which was interpreted by the respondent was observed in the medical diagnosis question series.

conclusionsIn this mixed methods analysis, we identified series of questions which could be shortened through elimination of redundancy, series of questions requiring clarification due to unclear constructs, and the impact of respondent characteristics on the quality of responses. These changes can lead to a better understanding of the question constructs by the respondents, increase the acceptance of the tool, and improve the overall accuracy of the VA instrument.

Indexed as

AutopsyAdultChildFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMoroccoReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesWorld Health Organization

Identifiers

PMID36206230
PMCPMC9543875
OpenAlexW4303453573

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.