MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2069307833 · doi:10.2471/blt.09.071001

WHO maternal death and near-miss classifications

2009· editorial· en· W2069307833 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert Pattinson, Lale Say, João Paulo Souza, Nynke van den Broek, C. Rooney

Notice bibliographique

RevueBulletin of the World Health Organization · 2009
Typeeditorial
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMaternal and fetal healthcare
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesUnited States Agency for International Development
Mots-clésMedicineMaternal deathPublic healthPopulationConfidentialityCause of deathHaemolytic diseaseDeveloping countryMedical emergencyFamily medicineComparabilityPediatricsDiseaseEnvironmental healthPregnancyNursingEconomic growthPolitical sciencePathology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reducing maternal mortality is Millennium Development Goal 5. To reach this goal, countries need an accurate picture of the causes and levels of maternal deaths. Recent systematic reviews have shown that there are many inconsistencies in the way maternal deaths are classified due to a lack of standard definitions and criteria for maternal deaths and near misses.1,2 WHO established a technical working group of obstetricians, midwives, epidemiologists and public health professionals from developing and developed countries to develop a maternal death classification system. The group established three principles for its work. First, the classification must be practical and understood by its users (clinicians, epidemiologists and programme managers), Second, underlying causes must be exclusive of all other conditions; as in the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD), the underlying cause is the disease or injury which initiated the sequence of events leading directly to death, or the circumstances of the accident or violence which produced the fatal injury. Third, the new classification system should be compatible with and contribute to the 11th revision of the ICD. Incorporating this maternal death classification into the ICD will encourage consistent use in both death certificates and confidential enquiries into maternal deaths, and improve the comparability of data. The proposed maternal death classification system was sent to more than 40 individual reviewers and the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and national professional organizations including the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Canadian College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Revised after this feedback, the second version was tested on eight databases of maternal deaths: national databases from Colombia, Jamaica and South Africa, other databases from Kenya, Malawi and Zimbabwe and verbal autopsy data from Afghanistan and Nigeria. All sites found the classification workable and useful. The new WHO classification of cause of maternal death has a simple structure to facilitate tabulation: group, disease category and individual underlying causes. The group includes three categories: direct maternal deaths, indirect maternal deaths and “unanticipated complications of management”. This addition makes it possible to track trends in iatrogenic disease as, for example, related to caesarean sections. Underlying causes are clearly separated from conditions contributing to fatal outcomes. Finally, the working group decided to classify suicide in pregnancy, deaths from puerperal psychosis and postpartum depression in the category of direct maternal deaths.3 The working group reached consensus on how to define maternal near miss – “a woman who nearly died but survived a complication that occurred during pregnancy, childbirth or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy”.4 Signs of organ dysfunction that follow life-threatening conditions are used to identify maternal near misses so that the same classification of underlying causes is used for both maternal deaths and near misses. This consistency also enables assessments of the quality of care provided to pregnant women. The WHO technical working group recommends that the new maternal death classification system be adopted by all countries and the maternal near-miss approach be considered in national plans for improving maternal health. By using the same classifications, reliable comparisons can be made within and between countries and regions. Applying this classification should help to identify the health system shortfalls that countries need to address in order to reduce complications and fatal outcomes of pregnancy and childbirth. ■

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,034
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,067

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,027
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,002
Bibliométrie0,0170,011
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,002
Science ouverte0,0030,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0140,004

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,012
Tête enseignante GPT0,293
Écart entre enseignants0,280 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations224
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBulletin of the World Health OrganizationMême sujetMaternal and fetal healthcareTravaux en français237 207