A comparison of approaches to measuring maternal mortality in Bangladesh, Mozambique, and Bolivia.

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Population Health Metrics Pub Date : 2022-01-15 DOI:10.1186/s12963-022-00281-8
Kavita Singh, Qingfeng Li, Karar Zunaid Ahsan, Sian Curtis, William Weiss
{"title":"A comparison of approaches to measuring maternal mortality in Bangladesh, Mozambique, and Bolivia.","authors":"Kavita Singh,&nbsp;Qingfeng Li,&nbsp;Karar Zunaid Ahsan,&nbsp;Sian Curtis,&nbsp;William Weiss","doi":"10.1186/s12963-022-00281-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many low- and middle-income countries cannot measure maternal mortality to monitor progress against global and country-specific targets. While the ultimate goal for these countries is to have complete civil registrations systems, other interim strategies are needed to provide timely estimates of maternal mortality.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective is to inform on potential options for measuring maternal mortality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This paper uses a case study approach to compare methodologies and estimates of pregnancy-related mortality ratio (PRMR)/maternal mortality ratio (MMR) obtained from four different data sources from similar time periods in Bangladesh, Mozambique, and Bolivia-national population census; post-census mortality survey; household sample survey; and sample vital registration system (SVRS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For Bangladesh, PRMR from the 2011 census falls closely in line with the 2010 household survey and SVRS estimates, while SVRS' MMR estimates are closer to the PRMR estimates obtained from the household survey. Mozambique's PRMR from household survey method is comparable and shows an upward trend between 1994 and 2011, whereas the post-census mortality survey estimated a higher MMR for 2007. Bolivia's DHS and post-census mortality survey also estimated comparable MMR during 1998-2003.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall all these data sources presented in this paper have provided valuable information on maternal mortality in Bangladesh, Mozambique, and Bolivia. It also outlines recommendations to estimate maternal mortality based on the advantages and disadvantages of several approaches.</p><p><strong>Contribution: </strong>Recommendations in this paper can help health administrators and policy planners in prioritizing investment for collecting reliable and contemporaneous estimates of maternal mortality while progressing toward a complete civil registration system.</p>","PeriodicalId":51476,"journal":{"name":"Population Health Metrics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8760829/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Population Health Metrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-022-00281-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Many low- and middle-income countries cannot measure maternal mortality to monitor progress against global and country-specific targets. While the ultimate goal for these countries is to have complete civil registrations systems, other interim strategies are needed to provide timely estimates of maternal mortality.

Objective: The objective is to inform on potential options for measuring maternal mortality.

Methods: This paper uses a case study approach to compare methodologies and estimates of pregnancy-related mortality ratio (PRMR)/maternal mortality ratio (MMR) obtained from four different data sources from similar time periods in Bangladesh, Mozambique, and Bolivia-national population census; post-census mortality survey; household sample survey; and sample vital registration system (SVRS).

Results: For Bangladesh, PRMR from the 2011 census falls closely in line with the 2010 household survey and SVRS estimates, while SVRS' MMR estimates are closer to the PRMR estimates obtained from the household survey. Mozambique's PRMR from household survey method is comparable and shows an upward trend between 1994 and 2011, whereas the post-census mortality survey estimated a higher MMR for 2007. Bolivia's DHS and post-census mortality survey also estimated comparable MMR during 1998-2003.

Conclusions: Overall all these data sources presented in this paper have provided valuable information on maternal mortality in Bangladesh, Mozambique, and Bolivia. It also outlines recommendations to estimate maternal mortality based on the advantages and disadvantages of several approaches.

Contribution: Recommendations in this paper can help health administrators and policy planners in prioritizing investment for collecting reliable and contemporaneous estimates of maternal mortality while progressing toward a complete civil registration system.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
衡量孟加拉国、莫桑比克和玻利维亚产妇死亡率的方法比较。
背景:许多低收入和中等收入国家无法衡量孕产妇死亡率,以监测实现全球和具体国家目标的进展情况。虽然这些国家的最终目标是建立完整的民事登记制度,但需要其他临时战略来及时提供孕产妇死亡率估计数。目的:目的是介绍衡量产妇死亡率的可能办法。方法:本文采用案例研究方法,比较了从孟加拉国、莫桑比克和玻利维亚国家人口普查的四个不同数据来源中获得的妊娠相关死亡率(PRMR)/孕产妇死亡率(MMR)的方法和估计值;人口普查后死亡率调查;住户抽样调查;和样本生命登记系统(SVRS)。结果:对孟加拉国而言,2011年人口普查所得的PRMR与2010年住户调查和SVRS估算值非常接近,而SVRS的MMR估算值更接近住户调查所得的PRMR估算值。莫桑比克家庭调查方法所得的产妇死亡率具有可比性,并显示1994年至2011年期间的上升趋势,而人口普查后死亡率调查估计2007年产妇死亡率较高。玻利维亚的国土安全部和人口普查后死亡率调查也估计了1998-2003年期间可比较的产妇死亡率。结论:总体而言,本文提供的所有这些数据来源都提供了关于孟加拉国、莫桑比克和玻利维亚孕产妇死亡率的宝贵信息。它还概述了根据几种方法的优缺点估计产妇死亡率的建议。贡献:本文的建议可以帮助卫生管理人员和政策规划者确定投资的优先顺序,以收集可靠的和同步的孕产妇死亡率估计,同时逐步建立完整的民事登记制度。
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
Population Health Metrics
Population Health Metrics PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
29 weeks
期刊介绍: Population Health Metrics aims to advance the science of population health assessment, and welcomes papers relating to concepts, methods, ethics, applications, and summary measures of population health. The journal provides a unique platform for population health researchers to share their findings with the global community. We seek research that addresses the communication of population health measures and policy implications to stakeholders; this includes papers related to burden estimation and risk assessment, and research addressing population health across the full range of development. Population Health Metrics covers a broad range of topics encompassing health state measurement and valuation, summary measures of population health, descriptive epidemiology at the population level, burden of disease and injury analysis, disease and risk factor modeling for populations, and comparative assessment of risks to health at the population level. The journal is also interested in how to use and communicate indicators of population health to reduce disease burden, and the approaches for translating from indicators of population health to health-advancing actions. As a cross-cutting topic of importance, we are particularly interested in inequalities in population health and their measurement.
期刊最新文献
Deriving disability weights for the Netherlands: findings from the Dutch disability weights measurement study. Quantifying the magnitude of the general contextual effect in a multilevel study of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Ontario, Canada: application of the median rate ratio in population health research. Standardised reporting of burden of disease studies: the STROBOD statement. Population age structure dependency of the excess mortality P-score. Automated mortality coding for improved health policy in the Philippines.
×
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