Unknown

Dataset Information

0

Performance of four computer-coded verbal autopsy methods for cause of death assignment compared with physician coding on 24,000 deaths in low- and middle-income countries.


ABSTRACT:

Background

Physician-coded verbal autopsy (PCVA) is the most widely used method to determine causes of death (CODs) in countries where medical certification of death is uncommon. Computer-coded verbal autopsy (CCVA) methods have been proposed as a faster and cheaper alternative to PCVA, though they have not been widely compared to PCVA or to each other.

Methods

We compared the performance of open-source random forest, open-source tariff method, InterVA-4, and the King-Lu method to PCVA on five datasets comprising over 24,000 verbal autopsies from low- and middle-income countries. Metrics to assess performance were positive predictive value and partial chance-corrected concordance at the individual level, and cause-specific mortality fraction accuracy and cause-specific mortality fraction error at the population level.

Results

The positive predictive value for the most probable COD predicted by the four CCVA methods averaged about 43% to 44% across the datasets. The average positive predictive value improved for the top three most probable CODs, with greater improvements for open-source random forest (69%) and open-source tariff method (68%) than for InterVA-4 (62%). The average partial chance-corrected concordance for the most probable COD predicted by the open-source random forest, open-source tariff method and InterVA-4 were 41%, 40% and 41%, respectively, with better results for the top three most probable CODs. Performance generally improved with larger datasets. At the population level, the King-Lu method had the highest average cause-specific mortality fraction accuracy across all five datasets (91%), followed by InterVA-4 (72% across three datasets), open-source random forest (71%) and open-source tariff method (54%).

Conclusions

On an individual level, no single method was able to replicate the physician assignment of COD more than about half the time. At the population level, the King-Lu method was the best method to estimate cause-specific mortality fractions, though it does not assign individual CODs. Future testing should focus on combining different computer-coded verbal autopsy tools, paired with PCVA strengths. This includes using open-source tools applied to larger and varied datasets (especially those including a random sample of deaths drawn from the population), so as to establish the performance for age- and sex-specific CODs.

SUBMITTER: Desai N 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3912488 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Performance of four computer-coded verbal autopsy methods for cause of death assignment compared with physician coding on 24,000 deaths in low- and middle-income countries.

Desai Nikita N   Aleksandrowicz Lukasz L   Miasnikof Pierre P   Lu Ying Y   Leitao Jordana J   Byass Peter P   Tollman Stephen S   Mee Paul P   Alam Dewan D   Rathi Suresh Kumar SK   Singh Abhishek A   Kumar Rajesh R   Ram Faujdar F   Jha Prabhat P  

BMC medicine 20140204


<h4>Background</h4>Physician-coded verbal autopsy (PCVA) is the most widely used method to determine causes of death (CODs) in countries where medical certification of death is uncommon. Computer-coded verbal autopsy (CCVA) methods have been proposed as a faster and cheaper alternative to PCVA, though they have not been widely compared to PCVA or to each other.<h4>Methods</h4>We compared the performance of open-source random forest, open-source tariff method, InterVA-4, and the King-Lu method to  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC3912516 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC10795603 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC3160942 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC2833201 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC535898 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5553780 | biostudies-other
| S-EPMC4416334 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6595581 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC9172014 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC3555991 | biostudies-literature