ArticleCadernos de saude publica2025
[Assessment of birth registration coverage in the Hospital Information System of the Brazilian Unified National Health System, by hospital of admission, Brazil, 2012-2020].
Article in Cadernos de saude publica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the national coverage of birth registration within the Brazilian Hospital Information System of the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SIH/SUS), according to the hospital of birth, and identify associated institutional characteristics. A descriptive ecological study was conducted using available data from the SIH/SUS, the Brazilian Information System on Live Births (SINASC), and the Brazilian National Registry of Health Establishments (CNES) from 2012 to 2020. Hospital admissions of women aged 10 to 49 for vaginal childbirth or cesarean section in the SIH/SUS were compared to live birth records from hospital deliveries in SUS-contracted establishments with more than 100 live births per year in SINASC. Coverage was measured by the proportion of admissions for childbirth (SIH/SUS) in relation to the total number of live births in SINASC. Supervised classification models, decision trees, and random forests were used to identify hospital characteristics predictive of coverage. Coverage in the SIH/SUS was estimated at 86.9%, and 80.6% after excluding hospitals with > 100% coverage. Higher coverage rates were observed in the North and Northeast regions, whereas lower rates were seen in the South and Central-West regions. National coverage increased from 77.9% to 82.3% during the period. The main predictive factors were the proportion of cesarean sections, the number of obstetric beds of SUS, the administrative sphere, and facility size, with lower coverage in services with a higher proportion of cesarean sections. Inconsistencies in CNES registration were identified in SINASC. Birth registration coverage in the SIH/SUS is high across the country, though lower in hospitals with a high proportion of cesarean sections. Strategies for continuous improvement of quality for information system records are necessary.
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.