Birth, stillbirth and death registration data completeness, quality and utility in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study.
Birth, stillbirth and death registration data completeness, quality and utility in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12963-020-00231-2
复制
发表时间：
2021-02-08
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Every Newborn-INDEPTH Study Collaborative Group
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kasasa S;Natukwatsa D;Galiwango E;Nareeba T;Gyezaho C;Fisker AB;Mengistu MY;Dzabeng F;Haider MM;Yargawa J;Akuze J;Baschieri A;Cappa C;Jackson D;Lawn JE;Blencowe H;Kajungu D;Every Newborn-INDEPTH Study Collaborative Group
出生登记是儿童的首要权利。活产、死产和死亡登记是国家规划的基础。在低收入和中等收入国家，活产出生登记的完整性是通过基于人口的调查来衡量的，目前不包括死产或死亡登记的完整性。EN-INDEPTH基于人口的育龄妇女调查在孟加拉国、埃塞俄比亚、加纳、几内亚比绍和乌干达的五个卫生和人口监测系统站点进行（2017-2018年）。在四个非洲研究中心，我们纳入了关于1177例死产和11,881例活产（1333例新生儿死亡和10,548例新生儿存活期）登记的新问题/修改问题。使用描述性统计量评价问题的回答完整性、数据质量、给药时间和注册完整性估计值。出生登记的时间，与非登记相关的因素和报告的障碍进行了评估，使用描述性统计和逻辑回归。几乎所有的妇女，无论其婴儿的生存，回答登记问题，平均不到1分钟。据报告，新生儿期存活婴儿的出生登记完整率为30.7%（6.1-53.5%），而新生儿死亡率为1.7%（0.4-5.7%）。93.6%的婴儿出生登记时，妇女能够报告年龄。在家中出生的儿童（aOR 1.43（95% CI 1.27-1.60））和Dabat（埃塞俄比亚）（aOR 4.11（95% CI 3.37-5.01））中，新生儿期存活婴儿的未登记率显著较高。与未登记相关的其他社会人口因素包括母亲年龄较小、生育次数较多、教育程度低或没有教育以及社会经济地位较低。新生儿死亡登记问题是可行的（100%的妇女回答;只有1%的妇女不知道），表明完整性极低，只有1.2%的新生儿死亡报告为登记。尽管超过70%的死产发生在设施中，但只有2.5%被报告为登记。关于出生、死产和死亡登记的问题在家庭调查中是可行的。在所有四个地点，出生登记的完整性都很低，但死产和新生儿死亡登记率很低。缩小设施出生登记差距可以增加活产和设施死亡（包括死产）的登记，但需要民事登记系统与往往超负荷的卫生部门之间的协调。需要投资和创新来记录设施和社区系统中的出生，特别是死亡。
Birth registration is a child’s first right. Registration of live births, stillbirths and deaths is foundational for national planning. Completeness of birth registration for live births in low- and middle-income countries is measured through population-based surveys which do not currently include completeness of stillbirth or death registration. The EN-INDEPTH population-based survey of women of reproductive age was undertaken in five Health and Demographic Surveillance System sites in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau and Uganda (2017–2018). In four African sites, we included new/modified questions regarding registration for 1177 stillbirths and 11,881 livebirths (1333 neonatal deaths and 10,548 surviving the neonatal period). Questions were evaluated for completeness of responses, data quality, time to administer and estimates of registration completeness using descriptive statistics. Timing of birth registration, factors associated with non-registration and reported barriers were assessed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression. Almost all women, irrespective of their baby’s survival, responded to registration questions, taking an average of < 1 min. Reported completeness of birth registration was 30.7% (6.1-53.5%) for babies surviving the neonatal period, compared to 1.7% for neonatal deaths (0.4–5.7%). Women were able to report age at birth registration for 93.6% of babies. Non-registration of babies surviving the neonatal period was significantly higher for home-born children (aOR 1.43 (95% CI 1.27–1.60)) and in Dabat (Ethiopia) (aOR 4.11 (95% CI 3.37–5.01)). Other socio-demographic factors associated with non-registration included younger age of mother, more prior births, little or no education, and lower socio-economic status. Neonatal death registration questions were feasible (100% women responded; only 1% did not know), revealing extremely low completeness with only 1.2% of neonatal deaths reported as registered. Despite > 70% of stillbirths occurring in facilities, only 2.5% were reported as registered. Questions on birth, stillbirth and death registration were feasible in a household survey. Completeness of birth registration is low in all four sites, but stillbirth and neonatal death registration was very low. Closing the registration gap amongst facility births could increase registration of both livebirths and facility deaths, including stillbirths, but will require co-ordination between civil registration systems and the often over-stretched health sector. Investment and innovation is required to capture birth and especially deaths in both facility and community systems.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3
作者：
Amo-Adjei, Joshua;Annim, Samuel Kobina
通讯作者：
Annim, Samuel Kobina
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Liu, Li;Kalter, Henry D.;Black, Robert E.
通讯作者：
Black, Robert E.
影响因子：
5
作者：
Hunter, Wendy;Brill, Robert
通讯作者：
Brill, Robert
影响因子：
3
作者：
Dake FAA;Fuseini K
通讯作者：
Fuseini K
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Mohanty I;Gebremedhin TA
通讯作者：
Gebremedhin TA