Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38066048›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Better individual-level risk models can improve the targeting and life-saving potential of early-mortality interventions.

Chad Hazlett, Antonio P Ramos, Stephen Smith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. 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
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  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

3 authors.

Chad HazlettProfessor, Department of Political Science and Department of Statistics and Data Science, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, USA.
Antonio P RamosResearch Scientist, Califonia Center for Population Research, University of California, Los Angeles, USA. tomramos@g.ucla.edu.
Stephen SmithPhD Candidate, Department of Statistics and Data Science, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Infant mortality remains high and uneven in much of sub-Saharan Africa. Even low-cost, highly effective therapies can only save lives in proportion to how successfully they can be targeted to those children who, absent the treatment, would have died. This places great value on maximizing the accuracy of any targeting or means-testing algorithm. Yet, the interventions that countries deploy in hopes of reducing mortality are often targeted based on simple models of wealth or income or a few additional variables. Examining 22 countries in sub-Saharan Africa, we illustrate the use of flexible (machine learning) risk models employing up to 25 generally available pre-birth variables from the Demographic and Health Surveys. Using these models, we construct risk scores such that the 10 percent of the population at highest risk account for 15-30 percent of infant mortality, depending on the country. Successful targeting in these models turned on several variables other than wealth, while models that employ only wealth data perform little or no better than chance. Consequently, employing such data and models to predict high-risk births in the countries studied flexibly could substantially improve the targeting and thus the life-saving potential of existing interventions.

Indexed as

IncomeInfant MortalityAfrica South of the SaharaChildFemaleHumansInfantParturitionPregnancyRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID38066048
PMCPMC10709389

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.