Infant and Child Mortality in Afghanistan Wheat and Chaff

IF 2.1 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Health Science Reports Pub Date : 2025-01-22 DOI:10.1002/hsr2.70382
Salvatore Chirumbolo
{"title":"Infant and Child Mortality in Afghanistan Wheat and Chaff","authors":"Salvatore Chirumbolo","doi":"10.1002/hsr2.70382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>I read the contribution by Qamar et al., to this journal and I would like to forward some observations from mine, in order to expand the debate on this concern [<span>1</span>]. In brief, one could admit that the manuscript provides an extensive review of the factors contributing to high infant and child mortality rates in Afghanistan, with a particular focus on systemic challenges and possible interventions. Yet, the literature search primarily relies on Google Scholar and PubMed, with a focus on articles in English from the last decade. This might exclude important, relevant studies in other languages or older studies that could provide valuable historical context. Additionally, Afghanistan-specific studies may be underrepresented if they are not available in English or indexed in these databases.</p><p>In general, the study emphasizes findings consistent with high child mortality rates but does not critically examine counterfactual data (e.g., success stories, regions in Afghanistan with relatively better outcomes). This selective emphasis could give a skewed perspective on the situation and reduce understanding of successful interventions within Afghanistan. Moreover, sections discussing the Taliban's role might be perceived as politically biased, focusing more on political instability than on health issues directly. While relevant, the discussion could benefit from greater balance and context on the health-related impacts, as political aspects may not fully account for regional health disparities or the variability of services.</p><p>The authors sometimes implicitly suggest causative relationships, particularly between conflict and mortality rates, without direct evidence [<span>1</span>]. While conflict correlates with healthcare disruption, causation between specific healthcare shortcomings and mortality requires a clear pathway. I found particularly odd this assumption and furthermore, this study relies on secondary literature and reports, which introduces limitations in terms of data accuracy and completeness. It lacks any novel analysis or statistical evaluation, which diminishes the manuscript's contribution to the field [<span>1</span>]. I think that certain data points, such as the mortality rates, do not provide consistent statistical detail. Some statistics are presented with confidence intervals (CIs) and specific hazard ratios, but others lack CIs, potentially misleading readers about data certainty. In addition, terms like “collateral diuretics” appear in the manuscript, but they are not relevant to the study's focus and seem erroneously included. This indicates potential oversight in manuscript editing.</p><p>Again, the methods section does not fully describe the criteria for literature inclusion and exclusion or any quality control measures. A more rigorous explanation of the methodology, such as a quality assessment of the studies reviewed, would enhance credibility [<span>1</span>].</p><p>Many medical papers fail in statistical evaluation [<span>2</span>].</p><p>For example, in Qamar et al.'s paper, the analysis does not sufficiently control for confounding factors such as socioeconomic disparities, cultural norms, or regional health infrastructure variations within Afghanistan [<span>1</span>]. These variables could impact health outcomes independently of conflict, and the analysis would benefit from a multivariate perspective. Again, the manuscript discusses population-level statistics (e.g., nationwide mortality rates) without adequately addressing variability across different Afghan regions or socioeconomic groups. This broad-brush approach risks overlooking region-specific trends and nuances. There are no statistical tests or analyses beyond basic reported rates and hazard ratios from other studies. The manuscript could benefit from pooled data analyses, meta-analytic techniques, or subgroup comparisons that might reveal important trends in infant and child mortality in Afghanistan. The manuscript does not account for potential confounders like parental education level or rural versus urban healthcare access. A stratified analysis or adjustment using regression techniques would provide more accurate and nuanced insights [<span>1</span>].</p><p>However, Qamar et al.,'s contribution covers a broad range of factors that contribute to infant and child mortality in Afghanistan, including health system challenges, conflict, malnutrition, and sociocultural issues. This provides a well-rounded perspective that could be helpful for policy development [<span>1</span>].</p><p>Moreover, the comparison with other countries' mortality rates provides valuable context, emphasizing the severity of the situation in Afghanistan. This comparative framework reinforces the urgency of the issue and adds depth to the analysis. And, in particular, the manuscript offers actionable recommendations such as prioritizing surveillance, enhancing maternal education, and establishing more healthcare facilities in rural areas. These solutions are relevant and targeted to the key challenges identified [<span>1</span>].</p><p>Finally, the study lacks any primary data analysis or first-hand accounts, limiting its contribution to reiterating known information. Integrating primary data from surveys, interviews, or case studies could greatly enhance its value. Although the manuscript mentions sociocultural factors like male-dominated decision-making, it lacks depth in analyzing how these factors intersect with healthcare access and infant mortality. This is a missed opportunity to explore complex social determinants more thoroughly. Again, the manuscript mentions COVID-19's impact but does not fully explain its specific effects on Afghanistan's healthcare infrastructure, such as delayed immunizations or reduced maternal care due to pandemic restrictions. This section could be expanded to provide a clearer understanding of COVID-19's role. Assertions like the need for breastfeeding as an intervention are well-supported by general health literature but lack Afghanistan-specific data in this review. Including regional studies on breastfeeding practices would lend more credibility to such claims.</p><p>In conclusion, Qamar et al. provided a broad overview of the challenges and potential interventions for reducing infant and child mortality in Afghanistan. However, it has several limitations, including methodological biases, insufficient statistical analysis, and over-reliance on secondary data. Strengthening the methodology, incorporating primary data, and conducting a more nuanced analysis of confounding factors would enhance the manuscript's rigor and contribution to the field.</p><p>The author declares no conflicts of interest.</p><p>The paper is original and has never been submitted to the journal before.</p>","PeriodicalId":36518,"journal":{"name":"Health Science Reports","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11752134/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Science Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hsr2.70382","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

I read the contribution by Qamar et al., to this journal and I would like to forward some observations from mine, in order to expand the debate on this concern [1]. In brief, one could admit that the manuscript provides an extensive review of the factors contributing to high infant and child mortality rates in Afghanistan, with a particular focus on systemic challenges and possible interventions. Yet, the literature search primarily relies on Google Scholar and PubMed, with a focus on articles in English from the last decade. This might exclude important, relevant studies in other languages or older studies that could provide valuable historical context. Additionally, Afghanistan-specific studies may be underrepresented if they are not available in English or indexed in these databases.

In general, the study emphasizes findings consistent with high child mortality rates but does not critically examine counterfactual data (e.g., success stories, regions in Afghanistan with relatively better outcomes). This selective emphasis could give a skewed perspective on the situation and reduce understanding of successful interventions within Afghanistan. Moreover, sections discussing the Taliban's role might be perceived as politically biased, focusing more on political instability than on health issues directly. While relevant, the discussion could benefit from greater balance and context on the health-related impacts, as political aspects may not fully account for regional health disparities or the variability of services.

The authors sometimes implicitly suggest causative relationships, particularly between conflict and mortality rates, without direct evidence [1]. While conflict correlates with healthcare disruption, causation between specific healthcare shortcomings and mortality requires a clear pathway. I found particularly odd this assumption and furthermore, this study relies on secondary literature and reports, which introduces limitations in terms of data accuracy and completeness. It lacks any novel analysis or statistical evaluation, which diminishes the manuscript's contribution to the field [1]. I think that certain data points, such as the mortality rates, do not provide consistent statistical detail. Some statistics are presented with confidence intervals (CIs) and specific hazard ratios, but others lack CIs, potentially misleading readers about data certainty. In addition, terms like “collateral diuretics” appear in the manuscript, but they are not relevant to the study's focus and seem erroneously included. This indicates potential oversight in manuscript editing.

Again, the methods section does not fully describe the criteria for literature inclusion and exclusion or any quality control measures. A more rigorous explanation of the methodology, such as a quality assessment of the studies reviewed, would enhance credibility [1].

Many medical papers fail in statistical evaluation [2].

For example, in Qamar et al.'s paper, the analysis does not sufficiently control for confounding factors such as socioeconomic disparities, cultural norms, or regional health infrastructure variations within Afghanistan [1]. These variables could impact health outcomes independently of conflict, and the analysis would benefit from a multivariate perspective. Again, the manuscript discusses population-level statistics (e.g., nationwide mortality rates) without adequately addressing variability across different Afghan regions or socioeconomic groups. This broad-brush approach risks overlooking region-specific trends and nuances. There are no statistical tests or analyses beyond basic reported rates and hazard ratios from other studies. The manuscript could benefit from pooled data analyses, meta-analytic techniques, or subgroup comparisons that might reveal important trends in infant and child mortality in Afghanistan. The manuscript does not account for potential confounders like parental education level or rural versus urban healthcare access. A stratified analysis or adjustment using regression techniques would provide more accurate and nuanced insights [1].

However, Qamar et al.,'s contribution covers a broad range of factors that contribute to infant and child mortality in Afghanistan, including health system challenges, conflict, malnutrition, and sociocultural issues. This provides a well-rounded perspective that could be helpful for policy development [1].

Moreover, the comparison with other countries' mortality rates provides valuable context, emphasizing the severity of the situation in Afghanistan. This comparative framework reinforces the urgency of the issue and adds depth to the analysis. And, in particular, the manuscript offers actionable recommendations such as prioritizing surveillance, enhancing maternal education, and establishing more healthcare facilities in rural areas. These solutions are relevant and targeted to the key challenges identified [1].

Finally, the study lacks any primary data analysis or first-hand accounts, limiting its contribution to reiterating known information. Integrating primary data from surveys, interviews, or case studies could greatly enhance its value. Although the manuscript mentions sociocultural factors like male-dominated decision-making, it lacks depth in analyzing how these factors intersect with healthcare access and infant mortality. This is a missed opportunity to explore complex social determinants more thoroughly. Again, the manuscript mentions COVID-19's impact but does not fully explain its specific effects on Afghanistan's healthcare infrastructure, such as delayed immunizations or reduced maternal care due to pandemic restrictions. This section could be expanded to provide a clearer understanding of COVID-19's role. Assertions like the need for breastfeeding as an intervention are well-supported by general health literature but lack Afghanistan-specific data in this review. Including regional studies on breastfeeding practices would lend more credibility to such claims.

In conclusion, Qamar et al. provided a broad overview of the challenges and potential interventions for reducing infant and child mortality in Afghanistan. However, it has several limitations, including methodological biases, insufficient statistical analysis, and over-reliance on secondary data. Strengthening the methodology, incorporating primary data, and conducting a more nuanced analysis of confounding factors would enhance the manuscript's rigor and contribution to the field.

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

The paper is original and has never been submitted to the journal before.

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
阿富汗小麦和谷壳的婴儿和儿童死亡率。
我读了Qamar等人对本刊的贡献,我想把我的一些看法转发给大家,以扩大对这一问题的讨论。简而言之,我们可以承认,该手稿广泛审查了导致阿富汗婴儿和儿童死亡率高的因素,特别侧重于系统性挑战和可能的干预措施。然而,文献搜索主要依赖于谷歌Scholar和PubMed,重点是近十年来的英文文章。这可能会排除其他语言的重要的、相关的研究,或者可能提供有价值的历史背景的较早的研究。此外,阿富汗特有的研究如果没有英文版本或没有在这些数据库中编入索引,可能代表性不足。总的来说,该研究强调与高儿童死亡率相一致的结果,但没有严格审查反事实数据(例如,成功案例,阿富汗结果相对较好的地区)。这种选择性的强调可能使人们对局势产生偏差,并减少对阿富汗境内成功干预的理解。此外,讨论塔利班作用的部分可能被认为有政治偏见,更多地关注政治不稳定,而不是直接关注健康问题。虽然相关,但讨论可能受益于对与健康有关的影响的更大平衡和背景,因为政治方面可能无法充分解释区域健康差异或服务的可变性。作者有时会在没有直接证据的情况下暗示因果关系,特别是冲突和死亡率之间的因果关系。虽然冲突与医疗保健中断相关,但特定医疗保健缺陷与死亡率之间的因果关系需要明确的途径。我觉得这个假设特别奇怪,而且这个研究依赖于二手文献和报告,这在数据的准确性和完整性方面存在局限性。它缺乏任何新颖的分析或统计评估,这削弱了手稿对该领域的贡献。我认为某些数据点,如死亡率,没有提供一致的统计细节。一些统计数据以置信区间(ci)和特定的风险比呈现,但其他统计数据没有ci,可能会误导读者对数据的确定性。此外,手稿中出现了“侧支利尿剂”等术语,但它们与研究的重点无关,似乎被错误地包括在内。这表明在手稿编辑中可能存在疏忽。同样,方法部分没有完全描述文献纳入和排除的标准或任何质量控制措施。对研究方法进行更严格的解释,例如对所审查的研究进行质量评估,将提高可信性。许多医学论文在统计评价方面失败。例如,在Qamar等人的论文中,分析没有充分控制诸如社会经济差异、文化规范或阿富汗地区卫生基础设施差异等混杂因素。这些变量可能独立于冲突影响健康结果,从多变量角度分析将受益。同样,手稿讨论了人口层面的统计数据(例如全国死亡率),但没有充分处理阿富汗不同地区或社会经济群体之间的差异。这种笼统的做法可能会忽视特定区域的趋势和细微差别。除了其他研究报告的基本比率和风险比之外,没有统计测试或分析。该手稿可能受益于汇总数据分析、荟萃分析技术或亚组比较,这可能揭示阿富汗婴儿和儿童死亡率的重要趋势。该手稿没有考虑到潜在的混杂因素,如父母的教育水平或农村与城市的医疗保健获取情况。使用回归技术的分层分析或调整将提供更准确和细致入微的见解。然而,Qamar等人的贡献涵盖了导致阿富汗婴儿和儿童死亡率的广泛因素,包括卫生系统挑战、冲突、营养不良和社会文化问题。这提供了一个全面的视角,可能有助于政策制定。此外,与其他国家死亡率的比较提供了有价值的背景,强调了阿富汗局势的严重性。这种比较框架加强了问题的紧迫性,并增加了分析的深度。特别是,该手稿提出了可行的建议,如优先监测、加强孕产妇教育和在农村地区建立更多的医疗保健设施。这些解决方案与2010年确定的主要挑战相关且有针对性。 最后,该研究缺乏任何原始数据分析或第一手资料,限制了其对重申已知信息的贡献。整合来自调查、访谈或案例研究的原始数据可以极大地提高其价值。虽然手稿提到了社会文化因素,如男性主导的决策,但它缺乏深度分析这些因素如何与医疗保健获取和婴儿死亡率相交。这是一个错失的更彻底地探索复杂社会决定因素的机会。该手稿再次提到了COVID-19的影响,但没有完全解释其对阿富汗医疗基础设施的具体影响,例如由于大流行限制而推迟免疫接种或减少孕产妇保健。本节可以进行扩展,以便更清楚地了解COVID-19的作用。像母乳喂养作为干预措施的必要性这样的主张得到了一般卫生文献的充分支持,但在本综述中缺乏阿富汗的具体数据。包括对母乳喂养做法的区域研究将使这种说法更可信。总之,Qamar等人提供了阿富汗降低婴儿和儿童死亡率的挑战和潜在干预措施的广泛概述。然而,它有一些局限性,包括方法偏差,统计分析不足,以及过度依赖二手数据。加强方法学,结合原始数据,并对混杂因素进行更细致的分析,将提高手稿的严谨性和对该领域的贡献。作者声明无利益冲突。这篇论文是原创的,以前从未提交给该杂志。
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
Health Science Reports
Health Science Reports Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
458
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Establishment of Age-Specific Reference Intervals for 16 Coagulation Parameters in Chinese Children Using Sysmex CN-6000 Analyzer: A Cross-Sectional Study. Golf-Related Injuries in Adolescent Golfers: A Scoping Review. Hypertension as a Predictor of Ovarian Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Primary Barbed Suture Versus T-Tube Drainage After Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Regarding Infection Prevention Among Healthcare Professionals and Their Predictors at a Tertiary Hospital in Ethiopia: A Cross-Sectional Study.
×
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:604180095
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