Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Population Health Metrics
Published in: Population Health Metrics 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research

Multiple-bias analysis as a technique to address systematic error in measures of abortion-related mortality

Authors: Caitlin Gerdts, Jennifer Ahern

Published in: Population Health Metrics | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have brought heightened global attention to the measurement of maternal mortality. It is imperative that new and novel approaches be used to measure maternal mortality and to better understand existing data. In this paper we present one approach: an epidemiologic framework for identifying the identification and quantification of systematic error (multiple-bias analysis), outline the necessary steps for investigators interested in conducting multiple-bias analyses in their own data, and suggest approaches for reporting such analyses in the literature.

Methods

To conceptualize the systematic error present in studies of abortion-related deaths, we propose a bias framework. We posit that selection bias and misclassification are present in both verbal autopsy studies and facility-based studies. The multiple-bias analysis framework provides a relatively simple, quantitative strategy for assessing systematic error and resulting bias in any epidemiologic study.

Results

In our worked example of multiple-bias analysis on a study reporting 20.6 % of maternal deaths to be abortion related, after adjustment for selection bias, misclassification, and random error, the median increased, on average, to 0.308, approximately 20 % greater than the reported proportion of abortion-related deaths.

Conclusions

Reporting results of multiple-bias analyses in estimates of abortion-related mortality, predictors of unsafe abortion, and other reproductive health questions that suffer from similar biases would not only improve reporting practices in the field, but might also provide a more accurate understanding of the range of potential impact of policies and programs that target the underlying causes of unsafe abortion and abortion-related mortality.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Bryce J, Daelmans B, Dwivedi A, Fauveau V, Lawn JE, Mason E, Newby H, Requejo J, Salama P, Shankar A. Countdown to 2015 for maternal, newborn, and child survival: the 2008 report on tracking coverage of interventions. Lancet. 2008;371(9620):1247–58.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Sachs JD. From millennium development goals to sustainable development goals. Lancet. 2012;379(9832):2206–11.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Organization WH. Sustainable development goals: Goal 3. Target 3.1: By 2030, reduce the global maternal mortality ratio to less than 70 per 100,000 live births [poster]. 2016.
4.
Gülmezoglu AM, Say L, Betrán AP, Villar J, Piaggio G. WHO systematic review of maternal mortality and morbidity: methodological issues and challenges. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2004;4:16.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
6.
Grahm WJ, Foster LB. Measuring progress in reducing maternal mortality. Best Practice Res Clin Obstetrics Gynaecol. 2008;22(3):425–45.CrossRef
7.
Cross S, Bell JS, Graham WJ. What you count is what you target: the implications of maternal death classification for tracking progress towards reducing maternal mortality in developing countries. Bull World Health Organ. 2010;88(2):147–53.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Hill K, Thomas K, AbouZahr C, Walker N, Say L, Inoue M, Suzuki E. Estimates of maternal mortality worldwide between 1990 and 2005: an assessment of available data. Lancet. 2007;370(9595):1311–9.CrossRefPubMed
9.
10.
Benson JAK, Samandari G. Reductions in abortion-related mortality following policy reform: evidence from Romania South Africa and Bangladesh. Reproductive Health. 2011;8(1):39.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Singh S, Deirdre W, Rubina H, Akinrinola B, Gilda S. Abortion Worldwide: A decade of Uneven Progress. New York: Guttmacher Institute; 2009.
12.
Sedgh GH S, Singh S, Bankole A, Drescher J. Legal Abortion Worldwide: Incidence and Recent Trends. International Family Planning Perspectives. 2007;33(3):106–16.CrossRef
13.
Rasch VK R. Unsafe abortion in urban and rural Tanzania: method, provider and consequences. Tropical Medicine International Health. 2009;14(9):1128–33.CrossRef
14.
Kaye D, Mirembe F, Bantebya G, Johansson A, Ekstrom A. Domestic violence as risk factor for unwanted pregnancy and induced abortion in Mulago Hospital, Kampala Uganda. Trop Med Int Health. 2006;11(1):90–101.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Grimes D, Benson J, Singh S, Romero M, Ganatra B, Okonofua F, Shah I. Unsafe abortion: the preventable pandemic. Lancet. 2006;368(9550):1908–19.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Glasier AGl A, Schmid G, Garcia Moreno C, Van Look P. Sexual and reproductive health: a matter of life and death. Lancet. 2006;368(4):1595–607.CrossRef
17.
Cates WS J, Rochat R, Grimes D. Mortality from abortion and childbirth: are the statistics biased? JAMA. 1982;248:192–6.CrossRef
18.
Garenne M, Mbaye K, Bah MD, Correa P. Risk factors for maternal mortality: a case-control study in Dakar hospitals (Senegal). Afr J Reprod Health. 1997;1:14–24.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Sedgh G, Singh S, Shah IH, Åhman E, Henshaw SK, Bankole A. Induced abortion: incidence and trends worldwide from 1995 to 2008. Lancet. 2012;379(9816);625-632.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Shah IA E. Unsafe Abortion: Global and Regional Incidence, Trends, Consequences, and Challenges. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2009;31(12):1149–58.CrossRef
21.
Rothman K, Greenland. Modern Epidemiology. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008.
22.
Lash TL, Silliman RA. A sensitivity analysis to separate bias due to confounding from bias due to predicting misclassification by a variable that does both. Epidemiology. 2000;11(5):544.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Phillips C. Quantifying and Reporting Uncertainty from Systematic Errors. Epidemiology. 2003;14(4):459–66.PubMed
24.
Lash TL, Fink AK, Fox MP. Multidimensional bias analysis. In Applying Quantitative Bias Analysis to Epidemiologic Data (pp. 109-116). New York: Springer; 2009.
25.
Fox MP. Creating a demand for bias analysis in epidemiological research. J Epidemiol COmmunity Health. 2009;63(2):91.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Chu H, Wang Z, Cole SR, Greenland S. Sensitivity analysis of misclassification: a graphical and a Bayesian approach. Ann Epidemiol. 2006;16(11):834–41.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Singh S, Remez L, Tartaglione A. Methodologies for estimating abortion incidence and abortion-related morbidity: a review. Guttmacher Institute; 2010.
28.
Fox MP, Lash TL, Greenland S. A method to automate probabilistic sensitivity analyses of misclassified binary variables. Int J Epidemiol. 2005;34(6):1370–6.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Fantahun M, Fottrell E, Berhane Y, Wall S, Högberg U, Byass P. Assessing a new approach to verbal autopsy interpretation in a rural Ethiopian community: the InterVA model. Bull World Health Organ. 2006;84(3):204–10.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
31.
Mwanyangala MA, Urassa HM, Rutashobya JC, Mahutanga CC, Lutambi AM, Maliti DV, Lema RN. Verbal autopsy completion rate and factors associated with undetermined cause of death in a rural resource-poor setting of Tanzania. Popul Health Metr. 2011;9(41):172–8.
32.
Zahr CA. Verbal autopsy standards: ascertaining and attributing cause of death. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2007.
33.
Murray CJL, Lopez AD, Black R, Ahuja R, Ali SM, Baqui A, Dandona L, Dantzer E, Das V, Dhingra U. Population Health Metrics Research Consortium gold standard verbal autopsy validation study: design, implementation, and development of analysis datasets. Population Health Metrics. 2011;9(1):27.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
Oyieke JBO, Obore S, Kigondu CS. Millennium development goal 5: a review of maternal mortality at the Kenyatta National Hospital, Nairobi. East Afr Med J. 2006;83(1):4–9.CrossRefPubMed
35.
36.
Chandramohan D, Rodrigues LC, Maude GH, Hayes RJ. The validity of verbal autopsies for assessing the causes of institutional maternal death. Stud Fam Plan. 1998:414-422.
37.
Chandramohan D, Maude GH, Rodrigues LC, Hayes RJ. Verbal autopsies for adult deaths: their development and validation in a multicentre study. Trop Med Int Health. 1998;3(6):436–46.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Chandramohan D, Setel P, Quigley M. Effect of misclassification of causes of death in verbal autopsy: can it be adjusted? Int J Epidemiol. 2001;30(3):509–14.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Quigley MA, Chandramohan D, Rodrigues LC. Diagnostic accuracy of physician review, expert algorithms and data-derived algorithms in adult verbal autopsies. Int J Epidemiol. 1999;28(6):1081–7.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Fottrell E, Byass P, Ouedraogo TW, Tamini C, Gbangou A, Sombié I, Högberg U, Witten KH, Bhattacharya S, Desta T. Revealing the burden of maternal mortality: a probabilistic model for determining pregnancy-related causes of death from verbal autopsies. Population Health Metrics. 2007;5(1):1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
41.
R Development Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2011. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://​www.​R-project.​org/​.
42.
43.
Greenland S. Bayesian perspectives for epidemiologic research: III. Bias analysis via missing-data methods. Int J Epidemiol. 2009;38(6):1662–73.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Multiple-bias analysis as a technique to address systematic error in measures of abortion-related mortality
Authors
Caitlin Gerdts
Jennifer Ahern
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Population Health Metrics / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1478-7954
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-016-0075-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Population Health Metrics 1/2016 Go to the issue

Research

Improving the measurement of maternal mortality in Thailand using multiple data sources

Research

Trends, causes, and risk factors of mortality among children under 5 in Ethiopia, 1990–2013: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013

Research

Rapid assessment of disability in the Philippines: understanding prevalence, well-being, and access to the community for people with disabilities to inform the W-DARE project

Research

Causes of death in Vanuatu

Research

Future healthy life expectancy among older adults in the US: a forecast based on cohort smoking and obesity history

Research

A quantitative evidence base for population health: applying utilization-based cluster analysis to segment a patient population