Comparison of causes of stillbirth and child deaths as determined by verbal autopsy and minimally invasive tissue sampling

Nega Assefa, Anthony Scott, Lola Madrid, Merga Dheresa, Gezahegn Mengesha, Shabir Mahdi, Sana Mahtab, Ziyaad Dangor, Nellie Myburgh, Lesego Kamogelo Mothibi, Samba O. Sow, Karen L. Kotloff, Milagritos D. Tapia, Uma U. Onwuchekwa, Mahamane Djiteye, Rosauro Varo, Inacio Mandomando, Ariel Nhacolo, Charfudin Sacoor, Elisio Xerinda, Ikechukwu Ogbuanu, Solomon Samura, Babatunde Duduyemi, Alim Swaray-Deen, Abdulai Bah, Shams El Arifeen, Emily S Gurley, Mohammed Zahid Hossain, Afruna Rahman, Atique Iqbal Chowdhury, Bassat Quique, Portia Mutevedzi, Argeseanu Solveig, Dianna Blau, Cyndy Whitney
{"title":"Comparison of causes of stillbirth and child deaths as determined by verbal autopsy and minimally invasive tissue sampling","authors":"Nega Assefa, Anthony Scott, Lola Madrid, Merga Dheresa, Gezahegn Mengesha, Shabir Mahdi, Sana Mahtab, Ziyaad Dangor, Nellie Myburgh, Lesego Kamogelo Mothibi, Samba O. Sow, Karen L. Kotloff, Milagritos D. Tapia, Uma U. Onwuchekwa, Mahamane Djiteye, Rosauro Varo, Inacio Mandomando, Ariel Nhacolo, Charfudin Sacoor, Elisio Xerinda, Ikechukwu Ogbuanu, Solomon Samura, Babatunde Duduyemi, Alim Swaray-Deen, Abdulai Bah, Shams El Arifeen, Emily S Gurley, Mohammed Zahid Hossain, Afruna Rahman, Atique Iqbal Chowdhury, Bassat Quique, Portia Mutevedzi, Argeseanu Solveig, Dianna Blau, Cyndy Whitney","doi":"10.1101/2024.03.11.24304131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: 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), identify the distribution and trends of diseases, and prioritize resource allocation and interventions. However, VA findings can be non-specific, as this tool is based on family members’ recall of symptoms rather than objective diagnostic testing. We aimed to compare the CoD diagnoses obtained in stillbirths and children below five years of age (<5s) through two very different approaches; namely: 1) VA; and 2) the results obtained through the use of Minimally Invasive Tissue Sampling (MITS) and rigorous diagnostic testing, as part of the approach proposed by the Child Health and Mortality Prevention Surveillance (CHAMPS).\nMethods: CHAMPS identified stillbirths and deceased children <5s in real time between 2017 and 2021 in catchment areas in seven low- and middle-income countries (LMICs): Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Kenya, Mali, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, and South Africa. Deaths were eligible for MITS if identified <24 hours after death, legal concerns were not present, burial had not occurred, and parents consented. CHAMPS teams utilized information from MITS and VA to determine the causes of death (CoDs); if not eligible for MITS, the InterVA software utilized only VA information to determine the CoDs. CHAMPS attributed CoD using expert panels that reviewed clinical evidence microbiological, and histopathological results from MITS to derive the CoDs (Determination of Cause of Death [DeCoDe]). The InterVA4 package of OpenVA software automatically assigned the underlying CoDs using the Bayesian probabilistic modeling technique. These automatically assigned CoDs from OpenVA were compared to the gold-standard of the CHAMPS-attributed CoDs to evaluate both systems’ agreement, weaknesses, and strengths using Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient.\nResults: Data from 2852 deaths that underwent MITS were analysed. The most common age categories were stillbirths (n=1075, 37.7%) and neonatal deaths (n=1077, 37.8%). 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 among surveillance sites, with Mali showing the lowest and Mozambique and Ethiopia the highest concordance. Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient for children aged < 1 year was 0.69 (95%CI: 0.65 – 0.71), and for children aged 1-4 years was 0.28 (95%CI: 0.19 – 0.37)\nConclusion: The InterVA4 assigned CoD agrees poorly in assigning causes of death for under-fives 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.","PeriodicalId":501556,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.03.11.24304131","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: 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), identify the distribution and trends of diseases, and prioritize resource allocation and interventions. However, VA findings can be non-specific, as this tool is based on family members’ recall of symptoms rather than objective diagnostic testing. We aimed to compare the CoD diagnoses obtained in stillbirths and children below five years of age (<5s) through two very different approaches; namely: 1) VA; and 2) the results obtained through the use of Minimally Invasive Tissue Sampling (MITS) and rigorous diagnostic testing, as part of the approach proposed by the Child Health and Mortality Prevention Surveillance (CHAMPS). Methods: CHAMPS identified stillbirths and deceased children <5s in real time between 2017 and 2021 in catchment areas in seven low- and middle-income countries (LMICs): Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Kenya, Mali, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, and South Africa. Deaths were eligible for MITS if identified <24 hours after death, legal concerns were not present, burial had not occurred, and parents consented. CHAMPS teams utilized information from MITS and VA to determine the causes of death (CoDs); if not eligible for MITS, the InterVA software utilized only VA information to determine the CoDs. CHAMPS attributed CoD using expert panels that reviewed clinical evidence microbiological, and histopathological results from MITS to derive the CoDs (Determination of Cause of Death [DeCoDe]). The InterVA4 package of OpenVA software automatically assigned the underlying CoDs using the Bayesian probabilistic modeling technique. These automatically assigned CoDs from OpenVA were compared to the gold-standard of the CHAMPS-attributed CoDs to evaluate both systems’ agreement, weaknesses, and strengths using Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient. Results: Data from 2852 deaths that underwent MITS were analysed. The most common age categories were stillbirths (n=1075, 37.7%) and neonatal deaths (n=1077, 37.8%). 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 among surveillance sites, with Mali showing the lowest and Mozambique and Ethiopia the highest concordance. Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient for children aged < 1 year was 0.69 (95%CI: 0.65 – 0.71), and for children aged 1-4 years was 0.28 (95%CI: 0.19 – 0.37) Conclusion: The InterVA4 assigned CoD agrees poorly in assigning causes of death for under-fives 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.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过口述尸检和微创组织取样确定的死产和儿童死亡原因比较
背景:在资源有限的环境中,生命登记和医学死亡证明无法获得或不完整,口头尸检(VA)通常用于确定死亡原因(CoD)、确定疾病的分布和趋势,以及确定资源分配和干预措施的优先次序。然而,口头尸检的结果可能不具有特异性,因为这种工具是基于家庭成员对症状的回忆,而不是客观的诊断测试。我们的目的是通过两种截然不同的方法,即:1)VA;2)CoD:1)VA;2)通过使用微创组织采样(MITS)和严格诊断检测获得的结果,这是儿童健康和死亡率预防监测(CHAMPS)提出的方法的一部分:方法:CHAMPS 实时识别了 2017 年至 2021 年期间七个中低收入国家(LMICs)集水区的死产和死亡儿童(<5s):孟加拉国、埃塞俄比亚、肯尼亚、马里、莫桑比克、塞拉利昂和南非。如果在死亡 24 小时后确认死亡、不存在法律问题、未进行安葬且父母同意,则符合 MITS 条件。CHAMPS 小组利用 MITS 和退伍军人事务部的信息来确定死因(CoD);如果不符合 MITS 条件,则 InterVA 软件仅利用退伍军人事务部的信息来确定死因。CHAMPS 通过专家小组对来自 MITS 的临床证据、微生物学和组织病理学结果进行审查来确定死因(死因确定 [DeCoDe])。OpenVA 软件的 InterVA4 软件包采用贝叶斯概率建模技术自动分配基本死因。将 OpenVA 自动指定的死因与 CHAMPS 指定死因的黄金标准进行比较,使用 Lin's concordance 相关系数评估两个系统的一致性、缺点和优点:结果:分析了接受 MITS 的 2852 例死亡数据。最常见的年龄类别是死产(1075 例,37.7%)和新生儿死亡(1077 例,37.8%)。InterVA4 和 DeCoDe 在不同监测点、不同年龄组和不同死因的死因分配方面的总体一致性较差(0.75,95% CI:0.73 - 0.76),且缺乏精确性。我们发现不同监测点之间的一致性存在很大差异,马里的一致性最低,而莫桑比克和埃塞俄比亚的一致性最高。1岁及1岁以下儿童的林氏一致性相关系数为0.69(95%CI:0.65 - 0.71),1-4岁儿童的林氏一致性相关系数为0.28(95%CI:0.19 - 0.37):在确定五岁以下儿童和死胎的死因时,InterVA4 所指定的 CoD 的一致性较差。由于VA方法相对容易实施,如果能改进算法以更准确地反映死因,例如,根据使用详细诊断检测以提高死因判定准确性的项目所提供的信息来校准算法,那么这种系统会更有用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effect of Monitoring and Evaluation Systems on the Performance of Neonatal Intensive Care Unit at Yumbe Regional referral hospital; A Pre-post quasi-experimental study design Plaintiff experiences of the medico-legal environment in Ireland “We’re here to help them if they want to come”: A qualitative exploration of hospital staff perceptions and experiences with outpatient non-attendance Improving Access and Efficiency of Acute Ischemic Stroke Treatment Across Four Canadian Provinces: A Stepped-Wedge Trial I am a quarterback: A mixed methods study of death investigators' communication with family members of young sudden cardiac death victims from suspected heritable causes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1