"What gets measured better gets done better": The landscape of validation of global maternal and newborn health indicators through key informant interviews

被引:32
作者
Benova, Lenka [1 ,2 ]
Moller, Ann-Beth [3 ]
Moran, Allisyn C. [4 ]
机构
[1] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Fac Epidemiol & Populat Hlth, London, England
[2] Inst Trop Med, Dept Publ Hlth, Antwerp, Belgium
[3] World Hlth Org, Dept Reprod Hlth & Res, World Bank Special Programme Res Dev & Res Traini, UNDP,UNFPA,UNICEF, Geneva, Switzerland
[4] World Hlth Org, Dept Maternal Newborn Child & Adolescent Hlth, Geneva, Switzerland
基金
比尔及梅琳达.盖茨基金会;
关键词
QUALITY;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0224746
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background A large number of indicators are currently used to monitor the state of maternal and newborn health, including those capturing dimensions of health system and input, care access and availability, care quality and safety, coverage and outcomes, and impact. Validity of these indicators is a key issue in the process of assessing indicator performance and suitability. This paper aims to understand the meaning of indicator validity in the field of maternal and newborn health, and to identify key recommendations for future research. Methods This qualitative study used purposive sampling to identify key informants until thematic saturation was achieved. We interviewed 32 respondents from a variety of backgrounds using semi-structured interviews covering five themes: the meaning of indicator validity, methodological approaches to assessing validity, acceptable levels of indicator validity, gaps in validation research, and recommendations for addressing these gaps. Interview transcripts were analysed data using thematic content approach. Results Three conceptually different definitions of indicator validity were described by respondents. They considered indicator validity to encompass meaning and potential to spur action, going beyond diagnostic validity. Indicator validation was seen as an ongoing process of building and synthesising a wide range of evidence rather than a one-size-fits-all cut-off in diagnostic validity tests. Gaps identified included assessing validity of indicators of quality of care and indicators based on facility-level data, as well as expanding studies to a broader range of global settings. The key recommendation was to develop a coordinated approach to summarising and evaluating research on indicator validity, including capacity building in appraising and communicating the available evidence for country-specific needs. Conclusion The findings will inform future recommendations around indicator testing and validation.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]  
Al-Yateem Nabeel, 2012, Nurse Res, V19, P31
[2]   Global, regional, and national levels and trends in maternal mortality between 1990 and 2015, with scenario-based projections to 2030: a systematic analysis by the UN Maternal Mortality Estimation Inter-Agency Group [J].
Alkema, Leontine ;
Chou, Doris ;
Hogan, Daniel ;
Zhang, Sanqian ;
Moller, Ann-Beth ;
Gemmill, Alison ;
Fat, Doris Ma ;
Boerma, Ties ;
Temmerman, Marleen ;
Mathers, Colin ;
Say, Lale .
LANCET, 2016, 387 (10017) :462-474
[3]   Measuring postnatal care contacts for mothers and newborns: An analysis of data from the MICS and DHS surveys [J].
Amouzou, Agbessi ;
Mehra, Vrinda ;
Carvajal-Aguirre, Liliana ;
Khan, Shane M. ;
Sitrin, Deborah ;
Vaz, Lara .
JOURNAL OF GLOBAL HEALTH, 2017, 7 (02)
[4]  
[Anonymous], MEASURING COVERAGE M
[5]  
[Anonymous], MEAS EV CRIT GUID EV
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2014, 90 90 90 AMB TREATM
[7]  
[Anonymous], J GLOB HEALTH
[8]  
[Anonymous], [No title captured]
[9]  
[Anonymous], 2016, The First Global Integrated Marine Assessment (World Ocean Assessment I) retrieved on the 10th of January 2020 via from
[10]  
[Anonymous], IMPROVING COVERAGE M