Abstract

BackgroundIn the absence of routine death registration, the InterVA model is a new methodology being used as a physician alternative method to interpret verbal autopsy (VA) data in resource-poor settings. However, various studies indicate that there are significant discrepancies between the two approaches in assigning causes of deaths. This study evaluated the role of recall period and characteristics that were specific to the deceased and the respondent in affecting the level of agreement between the approaches.MethodsA population-based cross-sectional study was conducted from March to April, 2012. All adults aged ≥14 years and died between 01 January, 2010, and 15 February, 2012, were included in the study. Data were collected by using a pre-tested and modified WHO designed verbal autopsy questionnaire. The verbal autopsy interviews were reviewed by the InterVA-4 model and the physicians. Cohen’s kappa statistic with 95% CI was applied to compare the strength of the agreement between the model and the physician review.ResultsA total of 408 VA interviews were successfully completed and reviewed by the InterVA model and the physicians. Both approaches showed an overall agreement in 294 (72.1%) of the cases [kappa = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.42 - 0.60]. The level of agreement between the approaches was low [kappa ≤0.40] when the deceased was female, 50 and above years old, single, illiterate, rural dweller, belonged to a family of 1–4 people living together, and died at home. This was also true when the recall period was ≤1 year, and the respondent was a relative other than parent/marital partner, lived with the deceased, and had medical information.ConclusionThis study identified important variables affecting the strength of agreement between the InterVA-4 model and the physician in assigning causes of death. The results are believed to significantly contribute to the process of identifying the actual underlying causes of deaths in the population, and may thus serve to promote informed health policy decisions in resource-poor settings.

Highlights

  • In the absence of routine death registration, the InterVA model is a new methodology being used as a physician alternative method to interpret verbal autopsy (VA) data in resource-poor settings

  • This study is designed to evaluate the role of recall period and characteristics specific to the deceased and the respondent in affecting the level of agreement between the InterVA model and the physician

  • A direct comparison of the cause of death (COD) assigned by the physician to the CODs assigned by the InterVA model showed that there was an overall agreement in 294 (72.1%) cases [kappa = 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.42 - 0.60]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In the absence of routine death registration, the InterVA model is a new methodology being used as a physician alternative method to interpret verbal autopsy (VA) data in resource-poor settings. This study evaluated the role of recall period and characteristics that were specific to the deceased and the respondent in affecting the level of agreement between the approaches. The role of recall period and characteristics specific to the deceased and the respondent in affecting the level of agreement between the two approaches have not been assessed. This study is designed to evaluate the role of recall period and characteristics specific to the deceased and the respondent in affecting the level of agreement between the InterVA model and the physician. The study results are believed to significantly contribute to the process of identifying the actual underlying CODs in the population, and may serve to promote informed health policy decisions in resource-poor settings

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call