Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38287426›Full record

ArticleReproductive health2024

Exploring women's interpretations of survey questions on pregnancy and pregnancy outcomes: cognitive interviews in Iganga Mayuge, Uganda.

Doris Kwesiga, Mats Malqvist, Christopher Garimoi Orach, Leif Eriksson, Hannah Blencowe, Peter Waiswa

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Doris KwesigaDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. dknnkwesiga@gmail.com.
Mats MalqvistDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Christopher Garimoi OrachDepartment of Community Health and Behavioral Sciences, School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Leif ErikssonDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Hannah BlencoweMaternal, Adolescent, Reproductive and Child Health Centre (MARCH), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Peter WaiswaDepartment of Health Policy, Planning and Management, School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Uppsala University · SEKarolinska Institutet · SELondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBMakerere University · UG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2021, Uganda's neonatal mortality rate was approximately 19 deaths per 1000 live births, with an estimated stillbirth rate of 15.1 per 1000 total births. Data are critical for indicating areas where deaths occur and why, hence driving improvements. Many countries rely on surveys like Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), which face challenges with respondents' misinterpretation of questions. However, little is documented about this in Uganda. Cognitive interviews aim to improve questionnaires and assess participants' comprehension of items. Through cognitive interviews we explored women's interpretations of questions on pregnancy and pregnancy outcomes.

methodsIn November 2021, we conducted cognitive interviews with 20 women in Iganga Mayuge health and demographic surveillance system site in eastern Uganda. We adapted the reproductive section of the DHS VIII women's questionnaire, purposively selected questions and used concurrent verbal probing. Participants had secondary school education and were English speaking. Cognition was measured through comparing instructions in the DHS interviewers' manual to participants' responses and researcher's knowledge. A qualitative descriptive approach to analysis was undertaken.

resultsWe report findings under the cognitive aspect of comprehension. Some questions were correctly understood, especially those with less technical terms or without multiple sections. Most participants struggled with questions asking whether the woman has her living biological children residing with her or not. Indeed, some thought it referred to how many living children they had. There were comprehension difficulties with long questions like 210 that asks about miscarriages, newborn deaths, and stillbirths together. Participants had varying meanings for miscarriages, while many misinterpreted stillbirth, not linking it to gestational age. Furthermore, even amongst educated women some survey questions were misunderstood.

conclusionsPopulation surveys may misclassify, over or under report events around pregnancy and pregnancy outcomes. Interviewers should begin with a standard definition of key terms and ensure respondents understand these. Questions can be simplified through breaking up long sentences, while interviewer training should be modified to ensure they thoroughly understand key terms. We recommend cognitive interviews while developing survey tools, beyond basic pre-testing. Improving respondents' comprehension and thus response accuracy will increase reporting and data quality.

Indexed as

Abortion, SpontaneousStillbirthChildCognitionFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornPregnancySurveys and QuestionnairesUgandaCognitive interviewsDemographic and Health SurveySurveys

Identifiers

PMID38287426
PMCPMC10826263
OpenAlexW4391311726

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.