ArticleBMJ public health2024
Using verbal and social autopsy approaches to understand why neonates die in rural settings: a case study of a remote rural district in Uganda.
Article in BMJ public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Neonatal mortality remains a formidable challenge in low-resource settings, such as Uganda, despite global health initiatives. This study employs a social and verbal autopsy approach to identify the causes, settings and health accessibility challenges surrounding neonatal deaths in the Luuka district from 1 January 2017 to 31 December 2019. Methods: We analysed data from 172 neonatal verbal and social autopsies (VASA) conducted over 3 years, as part of a maternal and neonatal demand and supply health system strengthening intervention. Cause-of-death coding was done by two independent medical officers using WHO-ICD-10 guidelines to ascertain the causes of death. VASA-coded data analysis of the causes of death was done in STATA V.14.0. In addition, 16 key informant interviews were conducted, including 2 community health workers,6 household members and 8 health workers, with qualitative data analysed through thematic content analysis. Results: Among the 172 neonate deaths, 95.9% occurred in the early neonatal period (0-6 days) and 4.1% in the late neonatal period (7-27 days). The primary causes of death were birth asphyxia (42.4%), low birth weight/prematurity (18.6%), other perinatal causes (12.8%) and neonatal sepsis (9.3%). Delays in getting appropriate care at the facility (delay 3) and delays in seeking care (delay 1) (51.2% and 44.2%, respectively) were linked to newborn mortality. Qualitative insights underscored inadequate awareness of neonatal danger signs, deficient referral systems, drug shortages, reliance on unskilled traditional birth attendants and insufficient neonatal care facilities as significant contributors. Conclusion: Addressing delays in both home-based care (delay 1) and timely access to appropriate care in healthcare facilities (delays 2 and 3) is pivotal in mitigating neonatal mortality. Comprehensive interventions targeting improved access to maternal services and enhanced quality of care in health facilities are imperative for advancing newborn survival in rural settings.
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.