ArticleBMJ global health2025
Measuring adult mortality from mobile phone surveys in Burkina Faso, Malawi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Article in BMJ global health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 2022-'23 Malawi rapid mortality mobile phone survey (RaMMPS) dataset.Data in brief · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In many low and middle-income countries, adult mortality estimates are derived from surveys and censuses conducted through face-to-face interviews. These interviews can be time-intensive and are often impractical during health crises or humanitarian emergencies. The expansion in cellphone ownership and network coverage has created new opportunities for collecting demographic data through mobile phone surveys, but our understanding of selection biases and reporting errors of such data remains incomplete. This study reports on adult mortality estimates obtained through mobile phone surveys conducted in Burkina Faso, Malawi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2021 and 2022. To mitigate respondent fatigue and network interruptions, we used a shortened version of the set of questions generally used in surveys to ask about the survival of respondents' siblings. Mortality estimates obtained from mobile phone interviews were lower than those from face-to-face demographic surveys. Mortality rates from the mobile phone surveys were also approximately half those expected from World Population Prospects (WPP) estimates. We attribute this underestimation primarily to reporting errors, including inaccuracies in the ages and timing of sibling deaths collected through the shortened instrument. Coverage biases due to mobile phone ownership likely played a secondary role in the reduced mortality estimates. After imputing ages and dates based on full sibling histories collected in previous face-to-face surveys, mortality rates were more consistent with WPP and Demographic and Health Survey estimates. However, estimates would be improved with more accurate age at death and time of death reports. Mobile phone surveys offer a promising alternative for monitoring adult mortality in settings where face-to-face data collection is not feasible, but they seem to be susceptible to more frequent reporting errors.
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.