ArticlePLOS global public health2024
Comparison of causes of stillbirth and child deaths as determined by verbal autopsy and minimally invasive tissue sampling.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Causes of Death Among Stillbirths and Children Aged <5 Years in Africa and South Asia - Child Health and Mortality Prevention Surveillance, Seven Countries, 2016-2024.Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Surveillance summaries (Washington, D.C. : 2002) · 2026Article
- Article
- Correction: Comparison of causes of stillbirth and child deaths as determined by verbal autopsy and minimally invasive tissue sampling.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Causes of community deaths by verbal autopsy among persons with HIV in 33 districts in Zambia, 2020-2023.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
35 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In resource-limited settings where vital registration and medical death certificates are unavailable or incomplete, verbal autopsy (VA) is often used to attribute causes of death (CoD) and prioritize resource allocation and interventions. We aimed to determine the CoD concordance between InterVA and CHAMPS's method. The causes of death (CoDs) of children <5 were determined by two methods using data from seven low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) enrolled in the Child Health and Mortality Prevention Surveillance (CHAMPS) network. The first CoD method was from the DeCoDe panel using data from Minimally Invasive Tissue Sampling (MITS), whereas the second method used Verbal Autopsy (VA), which utilizes the InterVA software. This analysis evaluated the agreement between the two using Lin's concordance correlation coefficient. The overall concordance of InterVA4 and DeCoDe in assigning causes of death across surveillance sites, age groups, and causes of death was poor (0.75 with 95% CI: 0.73-0.76) and lacked precision. We found substantial differences in agreement by surveillance site, with Mali showing the lowest and Mozambique and Ethiopia the highest concordance. The InterVA4 assigned CoD agrees poorly in assigning causes of death for U5s and stillbirths. Because VA methods are relatively easy to implement, such systems could be more useful if algorithms were improved to more accurately reflect causes of death, for example, by calibrating algorithms to information from programs that used detailed diagnostic testing to improve the accuracy of COD determination.
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.