Abstract

Background: Pregnancy identification and follow-up surveillance can enhance the reporting of pregnancy outcomes, including stillbirths and perinatal and early postnatal mortality. This paper reviews pregnancy surveillance methods used in Health and Demographic Surveillance Systems (HDSSs) in low- and middle-income countries. Methods: We searched articles containing information about pregnancy identification methods used in HDSSs published between January 2002 and October 2019 using PubMed and Google Scholar. A total of 37 articles were included through literature review and 22 additional articles were identified via manual search of references. We reviewed the gray literature, including websites, online reports, data collection instruments, and HDSS protocols from the Child Health and Mortality Prevention Study (CHAMPS) Network and the International Network for the Demographic Evaluation of Populations and Their Health (INDEPTH). In total, we reviewed information from 52 HDSSs described in 67 sources. Results: Substantial variability exists in pregnancy surveillance approaches across the 52 HDSSs, and surveillance methods are not always clearly documented. 42% of HDSSs applied restrictions based on residency duration to identify who should be included in surveillance. Most commonly, eligible individuals resided in the demographic surveillance area (DSA) for at least three months. 44% of the HDSSs restricted eligibility for pregnancy surveillance based on a woman's age, with most only monitoring women 15-49 years. 10% had eligibility criteria based on marital status, while 11% explicitly included unmarried women in pregnancy surveillance. 38% allowed proxy respondents to answer questions about a woman's pregnancy status in her absence. 20% of HDSSs supplemented pregnancy surveillance with investigations by community health workers or key informants and by linking HDSS data with data from antenatal clinics. Conclusions: Methodological guidelines for conducting pregnancy surveillance should be clearly documented and meticulously implemented, as they can have implications for data quality and accurately informing maternal and child health programs.

Highlights

  • Reduction in neonatal mortality is a key target of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals[1]

  • We investigate variation in pregnancy surveillance methods across Health and Demographic Surveillance Systems (HDSSs) and identify the components that may be linked with data completeness and quality in capturing stillbirths and neonatal deaths

  • We reviewed the websites of two networks: the Child Health and Mortality Prevention Study (CHAMPS) Network is a network of HDSSs in six countries that are focused on identifying the main causes of under-5 mortality (Cunningham, 2019); the International Network for the Demographic Evaluation of Populations and their Health (INDEPTH) is a network of 49 independent HDSSs and 7 associate HDSSs in Africa, Asia, and Oceania[11], for online data reports, data collection instruments and field protocols of HDSSs within CHAMPS and INDEPTH

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Reduction in neonatal mortality is a key target of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals[1]. Efforts to accelerate the pace of reduction are hindered by a lack of accurate and timely data on child deaths in the regions where they are most prevalent. Such information is crucial to guiding resource allocation and evaluating the effectiveness of interventions[3,4]. We reviewed the gray literature, including websites, online reports, data collection instruments, and HDSS protocols from the Child Health and Mortality Prevention Study (CHAMPS) Network and the International Network for the Demographic Evaluation of Populations and Their Health (INDEPTH). 44% of the HDSSs restricted eligibility for pregnancy surveillance based on a woman’s age, with most only monitoring women 15-49 years. Eligible individuals resided in the demographic surveillance area (DSA) for at least three months. 44% of the HDSSs restricted eligibility for pregnancy surveillance based on a woman’s age, with most only monitoring women 15-49 years. 10% had eligibility criteria based on marital status, while 11% explicitly included unmarried women in pregnancy surveillance. 38% allowed proxy respondents to answer questions about a woman’s pregnancy status in her absence. 20% of HDSSs supplemented pregnancy surveillance with investigations by community health workers or key informants and by linking HDSS data with data from antenatal clinics

Objectives
Methods
Results
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