Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

BioMed Central, BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 1(16), 2016

DOI: 10.1186/s12884-016-1040-7

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Classification systems for causes of stillbirth and neonatal death, 2009–2014: an assessment of alignment with characteristics for an effective global system

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Additional file 1: 81 included systems and selected features. ; Additional file 2: Variables used to assess system alignment with expert-identified characteristics for an effective global classification system for causes of stillbirth and neonatal death. ; Additional file 3: Sensitivity analyses. ; BACKGROUND : To reduce the burden of 5.3 million stillbirths and neonatal deaths annually, an understanding of causes of deaths is critical. A systematic review identified 81 systems for classification of causes of stillbirth (SB) and neonatal death (NND) between 2009 and 2014. The large number of systems hampers efforts to understand and prevent these deaths. This study aimed to assess the alignment of current classification systems with expert-identified characteristics for a globally effective classification system. METHODS : Eighty-one classification systems were assessed for alignment with 17 characteristics previously identified through expert consensus as necessary for an effective global system. Data were extracted independently by two authors. Systems were assessed against each characteristic and weighted and unweighted scores assigned to each. Subgroup analyses were undertaken by system use, setting, type of death included and type of characteristic. RESULTS : None of the 81 systems were aligned with more than 9 of the 17 characteristics; most (82 %) were aligned with four or fewer. On average, systems were aligned with 19 % of characteristics. The most aligned system (Frøen 2009-Codac) still had an unweighted score of only 9/17. Alignment with individual characteristics ranged from 0 to 49 %. Alignment was somewhat higher for widely used as compared to less used systems (22 % v 17 %), systems used only in high income countries as compared to only in low and middle income countries (20 % vs 16 %), and systems including both SB and NND (23 %) as compared to NND-only (15 %) and SB-only systems (13 %). Alignment was higher with characteristics assessing structure (23 %) than function (15 %). CONCLUSIONS : There is an unmet need for a system exhibiting all the characteristics of a globally effective system as defined by experts in the use of systems, as none of the 81 contemporary classification systems assessed was highly aligned with these characteristics. A particular concern in terms of global effectiveness is the lack of alignment with “ease of use” among all systems, including even the most-aligned. A system which meets the needs of users would have the potential to become the first truly globally effective classification system. ; The Mater Research Institute of the University of Queensland, Australia, provided partial funding for VF, HR, AW, TZ, and SHL to undertake this study. ; http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcpregnancychildbirth ; am2016 ; Paediatrics and Child Health