Completeness and accuracy of data transfer of routine maternal health services data in the greater Accra region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High quality routine health system data is essential for tracking progress towards attainment of the Millennium Development Goals 4 & 5. This study aimed to determine the completeness and accuracy of transfer of routine maternal health service data at health facility, district and regional levels of the Greater Accra Region of Ghana.A cross sectional study was conducted using secondary data comprised of routine health information data collected at facility level for the first quarter of 2012. Twelve health facilities were selected using a multistage sampling method. Data relating to antenatal care and delivery were assessed for completeness and accuracy of data transfer. Primary source data from health facility level (registers and record notebooks where health information data are initially entered) , used as the reference data, were counted, collated, and compared with aggregate data on aggregate forms compiled from these sources by health facility staff. The primary source data was also compared with data in the district health information management system (DHIMS-II), a web-based data collation and reporting system. Percentage completeness and percentage error in data transfer were estimated.Data for all 5,537 antenatal registrants and 3, 466 deliveries recorded into the primary source for the first quarter of 2012 were assessed. Completeness was best for age data, followed by data on parity and hemoglobin at registration. Mean completeness of the facility level aggregate data for the data sampled, was 94.3% (95% CI = 90.6% - 98.0%) and 100.0% respectively for the aggregate form and DHIMS-II database. Mean error in data transfer was 1.0% (95% CI = 0.8% - 1.2%). Percentage error comparing aggregate form data and DHIMS-II data respectively to the primary source data ranged from 0.0% to 4.9% respectively, while percentage error comparing the DHIMS-II data to aggregate form data, was generally very low or 0.0%.Routine maternal health services data in the Greater Accra region, available at the district level through the DHIMS-II system is complete when compared to facility level primary source data and reliable for use.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.042 | 0.121 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".