MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3186851142 · doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(21)00263-1

Causes and circumstances of maternal death: a secondary analysis of the Community-Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia (CLIP) trials cohort

2021· article· en· W3186851142 sur OpenAlexafffund
Annet M. Aukes, Kristina Arion, Jeffrey N. Bone, Jing Li, Marianne Vidler, Mrutyunjaya B. Bellad, Umesh Charantimath, Shivaprasad S. Goudar, Zahra Hoodbhoy, Geetanjali Katageri, Salésio Macuácua, Ashalata Mallapur, Khátia Munguambe, Rahat Qureshi, Charfudin Sacoor, Esperança Sevene, Sana Sheikh, Anifa Valá, Gwyneth Lewis, Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Peter von Dadelszen, Laura A. Magee, Mai‐Lei Woo Kinshella, Hubert Wong, Faustino Vilanculo, Ugochi V Ukah, Domena Tu, Lehana Thabane, Corsino Tchavana, Jim Thornton, John Sotunsa, Joel Singer, Sumedha Sharma, Nadine Schuurman, Diane Sawchuck, Amit Revankar, Farrukh Raza, Umesh Y Ramdurg, Rosa Pires, Beth A. Payne, Vivalde Nobela, Cláudio Nkumbula, Ariel Nhancolo, Zefanias Nhamirre, Geetanjali I Mungarwadi, Dulce Mulungo, Craig Mitton, Mario Merialdi, Javed Memon, Analisa Matavele, Sphoorthi S Mastiholi, Ernesto Mandlate, Sónia Maculuve, Eusébio Macete, Marta Macamo, Mansun Lui, Simon Lewin, Tang Lee, Ana Langer, Uday S Kudachi, Bhalachandra S. Kodkany, Marian Knight, Gudadayya S Kengapur, Avinash Kavi, Chirag Kariya, Chandrappa C Karadiguddi, Namdev A Kamble, Anjali Joshi, Eileen K. Hutton, Amjad Hussain, Narayan V Honnungar, William A. Grobman, Emília Gonçálves, Tabassum Firoz, Veronique Fillipi, Paulo Filimone, Susheela Engelbrecht, Dustin Dunsmuir, Guy A. Dumont, Sharla Drebit, France Donnay, Shafik Dharamsi, Vaibhav B Dhamanekar, Richard J. Derman, Brian A. Darlow, Silvestre Cutana, Keval S Chougala, Rogério Chiaú, Romano Byaruhanga, Helena Boene, Ana Ilda Biz, Cassimo Bique, Ana Pilar Betrán, Shashidhar G Bannale, Orvalho Augusto, J. Mark Ansermino, Felizarda Amose, Imran Ahmed, Olalekan O. Adetoro

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Lancet Global Health · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Établissements canadiensUniversity of British ColumbiaHospital for Sick ChildrenChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British ColumbiaIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreCentre for Global Health ResearchDalhousie UniversityBC Children's Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesUniversity of British ColumbiaBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Mots-clésEclampsiaPsychological interventionCohortMedicineCohort studyObstetricsDemographyPregnancyPsychiatryInternal medicineSociology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Incomplete vital registration systems mean that causes of death during pregnancy and childbirth are poorly understood in low-income and middle-income countries. To inform global efforts to reduce maternal mortality, we compared physician review and computerised analysis of verbal autopsies (interpreting verbal autopsies [InterVA] software), to understand their agreement on maternal cause of death and circumstances of mortality categories (COMCATs) in the Community-Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia (CLIP) cluster randomised trials. METHODS: The CLIP trials took place in India, Pakistan, and Mozambique, enrolling pregnant women aged 12-49 years between Nov 1, 2014, and Feb 28, 2017. 69 330 pregnant women were enrolled in 44 clusters (36 008 in the 22 intervention clusters and 33 322 in the 22 control clusters). In this secondary analysis of maternal deaths in CLIP, we included women who died in any of the 22 intervention clusters or 22 control clusters. Trained staff administered the WHO 2012 verbal autopsy after maternal deaths. Two physicians (and a third for consensus, if needed) reviewed trial surveillance data and verbal autopsies, and, in intervention clusters, community health worker-led visit data. They determined cause of death according to the WHO International Classification of Diseases-Maternal Mortality (ICD-MM). Verbal autopsies were also analysed by InterVA computer models (versions 4 and 5) to generate cause of death. COMCAT analysis was provided by InterVA-5 and, in India, by physician review of Maternal Newborn Health Registry data. Causes of death and COMCATs assigned by physician review, Inter-VA-4, and InterVA-5 were compared, with agreement assessed with Cohen's κ coefficient. FINDINGS: Of 61 988 pregnancies with successful follow-up in the CLIP trials, 143 maternal deaths were reported (16 deaths in India, 105 in Pakistan, and 22 in Mozambique). The maternal death rate was 231 (95% CI 193-268) per 100 000 identified pregnancies. Most deaths were attributed to direct maternal causes (rather than indirect or undetermined causes as per ICD-MM classification), with fair to good agreement between physician review and InterVA-4 (κ=0·56 [95% CI 0·43-0·66]) or InterVA-5 (κ=0·44 [0·30-0·57]), and InterVA-4 and InterVA-5 (κ=0·72 [0·60-0·84]). The top three causes of death were the same by physician review, InterVA-4, and InterVA-5 (ICD-MM categories obstetric haemorrhage, non-obstetric complications, and hypertensive disorders); however, attribution of individual patient deaths to obstetric haemorrhage varied more between methods (physician review, 38 [27%] deaths; InterVA-4, 69 [48%] deaths; and InterVA-5, 82 [57%] deaths), than did attribution to non-obstetric causes (physician review, 39 [27%] deaths; InterVA-4, 37 [26%] deaths; and InterVA-5, 28 [20%] deaths) or hypertensive disorders (physician review, 23 [16%] deaths; InterVA-4, 25 [17%] deaths; and InterVA-5, 24 [17%] deaths). Agreement for all nine ICD-MM categories was fair for physician review versus InterVA-4 (κ=0·48 [0·38-0·58]), poor for physician review versus InterVA-5 (κ=0·36 [0·27-0·46]), and good for InterVA-4 versus InterVA-5 (κ=0·69 [0·59-0·79]). The most commonly assigned COMCATs by InterVA-5 were emergencies (68 [48%] of 143 deaths) and health systems (62 [43%] deaths), and by physician review (India only) were health systems (seven [44%] of 16 deaths) and inevitability (five [31%] deaths); agreement between InterVA-5 and physician review (India data only) was poor (κ=0·04 [0·00-0·15]). INTERPRETATION: Our findings indicate that InterVA-5 is less accurate than InterVA-4 at ascertaining causes and circumstances of maternal death, when compared with physician review. Our results suggest a need to improve the next iteration of InterVA, and for researchers and clinicians to preferentially use InterVA-4 when recording maternal deaths. FUNDING: University of British Columbia (grantee of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation).

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)0,012
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,012
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,064

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0120,021
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,004
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0080,001

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 Opus0,169
Tête enseignante GPT0,456
Écart entre enseignants0,286 · 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'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

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

En bref

Citations28
Publié2021
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Lancet Global HealthMême sujetGlobal Maternal and Child HealthTravaux en français237 207