Dataset Information

What is meant by validity in maternal and newborn health measurement? A conceptual framework for understanding indicator validation.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Rigorous monitoring supports progress in achieving maternal and newborn mortality and morbidity reductions. Recent work to strengthen measurement for maternal and newborn health highlights the existence of a large number of indicators being used for this purpose. The definitions and data sources used to produce indicator estimates vary and challenges exist with completeness, accuracy, transparency, and timeliness of data. The objective of this study is to create a conceptual overview of how indicator validity is defined and understood by those who develop and use maternal and newborn health indicators. METHODS:A conceptual framework of validity was developed using mixed methods. We were guided by principles for conceptual frameworks and by a review of the literature and key maternal and newborn health indicator guidance documents. We also conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with 32 key informants chosen through purposive sampling. RESULTS:We categorised indicator validity into three main types: criterion, convergent, and construct. Criterion or diagnostic validity, comparing a measure with a gold standard, has predominantly been used to assess indicators of care coverage and content. Studies assessing convergent validity quantify the extent to which two or more indicator measurement approaches, none of which is a gold-standard, relate. Key informants considered construct validity, or the accuracy of the operationalisation of a concept or phenomenon, a critical part of the overall assessment of indicator validity. CONCLUSION:Given concerns about the large number of maternal and newborn health indicators currently in use, a more consistent understanding of validity can help guide prioritization of key indicators and inform development of new indicators. All three types of validity are relevant for evaluating the performance of maternal and newborn health indicators. We highlight the need to establish a common language and understanding of indicator validity among the various global and local stakeholders working within maternal and newborn health.

SUBMITTER: Benova L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7259779 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

What is meant by validity in maternal and newborn health measurement? A conceptual framework for understanding indicator validation.

Benova Lenka L Moller Ann-Beth AB Hill Kathleen K Vaz Lara M E LME Morgan Alison A Hanson Claudia C Semrau Katherine K Al Arifeen Shams S Moran Allisyn C AC

PloS one 20200529 5

<h4>Background</h4>Rigorous monitoring supports progress in achieving maternal and newborn mortality and morbidity reductions. Recent work to strengthen measurement for maternal and newborn health highlights the existence of a large number of indicators being used for this purpose. The definitions and data sources used to produce indicator estimates vary and challenges exist with completeness, accuracy, transparency, and timeliness of data. The objective of this study is to create a conceptual o ...[more]

PMID: 32470019

Similar Datasets

Project description:Policy Points: Strengthening accountability through better measurement and reporting is vital to ensure progress in improving quality primary health care (PHC) systems and achieving universal health coverage (UHC). The Primary Health Care Performance Initiative (PHCPI) provides national decision makers and global stakeholders with opportunities to benchmark and accelerate performance improvement through better performance measurement. Results from the initial PHC performance assessments in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are helping guide PHC reforms and investments and improve the PHCPI's instruments and indicators. Findings from future assessment activities will further amplify cross-country comparisons and peer learning to improve PHC. New indicators and sources of data are needed to better understand PHC system performance in LMICs.ContextThe Primary Health Care Performance Initiative (PHCPI), a collaboration between the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, The World Bank, and the World Health Organization, in partnership with Ariadne Labs and Results for Development, was launched in 2015 with the aim of catalyzing improvements in primary health care (PHC) systems in 135 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), in order to accelerate progress toward universal health coverage. Through more comprehensive and actionable measurement of quality PHC, the PHCPI stimulates peer learning among LMICs and informs decision makers to guide PHC investments and reforms. Instruments for performance assessment and improvement are in development; to date, a conceptual framework and 2 sets of performance indicators have been released.MethodsThe PHCPI team developed the conceptual framework through literature reviews and consultations with an advisory committee of international experts. We generated 2 sets of performance indicators selected from a literature review of relevant indicators, cross-referenced against indicators available from international sources, and evaluated through 2 separate modified Delphi processes, consisting of online surveys and in-person facilitated discussions with experts.FindingsThe PHCPI conceptual framework builds on the current understanding of PHC system performance through an expanded emphasis on the role of service delivery. The first set of performance indicators, 36 Vital Signs, facilitates comparisons across countries and over time. The second set, 56 Diagnostic Indicators, elucidates underlying drivers of performance. Key challenges include a lack of available data for several indicators and a lack of validated indicators for important dimensions of quality PHC.ConclusionsThe availability of data is critical to assessing PHC performance, particularly patient experience and quality of care. The PHCPI will continue to develop and test additional performance assessment instruments, including composite indices and national performance dashboards. Through country engagement, the PHCPI will further refine its instruments and engage with governments to better design and finance primary health care reforms.

Project description:BackgroundRespectful maternal and newborn care (RMNC) is an important component of high-quality care but progress is impeded by critical measurement gaps for women and newborns. The Every Newborn Birth Indicators Research Tracking in Hospitals (EN-BIRTH) study was an observational study with mixed methods assessing measurement validity for coverage and quality of maternal and newborn indicators. This paper reports results regarding the measurement of respectful care for women and newborns.MethodsAt one EN-BIRTH study site in Pokhara, Nepal, we included additional questions during exit-survey interviews with women about their experiences (July 2017-July 2018). The questionnaire was based on seven mistreatment typologies: Physical; Sexual; or Verbal abuse; Stigma/discrimination; Failure to meet professional standards of care; Poor rapport between women and providers; and Health care denied due to inability to pay. We calculated associations between these typologies and potential determinants of health - ethnicity, age, sex, mode of birth - as possible predictors for reporting poor care.ResultsAmong 4296 women interviewed, none reported physical, sexual, or verbal abuse. 15.7% of women were dissatisfied with privacy, and 13.0% of women reported their birth experience did not meet their religious and cultural needs. In descriptive analysis, adjusted odds ratios and multivariate analysis showed primiparous women were less likely to report respectful care (β = 0.23, p-value < 0.0001). Women from Madeshi (a disadvantaged ethnic group) were more likely to report poor care (β = - 0.34; p-value 0.037) than women identifying as Chettri/Brahmin. Women who had caesarean section were less likely to report poor care during childbirth (β = - 0.42; p-value < 0.0001) than women with a vaginal birth. However, babies born by caesarean had a 98% decrease in the odds (aOR = 0.02, 95% CI, 0.01-0.05) of receiving skin-to-skin contact than those with vaginal births.ConclusionsMeasurement of respectful care at exit interview after hospital birth is challenging, and women generally reported 100% respectful care for themselves and their baby. Specific questions, with stratification by mode of birth, women's age and ethnicity, are important to identify those mistreated during care and to prioritise action. More research is needed to develop evidence-based measures to track experience of care, including zero separation for the mother-newborn pair, and to improve monitoring.

Project description:BackgroundPostnatal bonding constitutes a major process during the postpartum period, and there is evidence that bonding difficulties have negative consequences for parents' mental health and the child's development. However, the conceptualization of postnatal bonding presents inconsistencies, as well as problems in having instruments that encompasses the father figure. The objective was to adapt the maternal postnatal attachment scale (MPAS) and the paternal postnatal attachment scale (PPAS) to Spanish, to evaluate its validity and reliability and to analyze the construct dimensionality of both questionnaires from a gender perspective.MethodsInstrumental design. In 2016-2017, a sample of 571 mothers and 376 fathers, with children between 6 and 11 months of age, responded to the Spanish version of MPAS and PPAS, respectively. After a process of translation-back-translation of the instrument, we empirically analyzed the internal consistency (Cronbach alpha, composite reliability (CR)) construct and concurrent validity (with regard to postpartum depression and dyadic adjustment). Additionally, we studied the instrument's content validity, using the Delphi methodology; and the differential analysis in both samples (mothers and fathers), examining the invariance.ResultsA short version of 15 items was obtained, common for mothers and fathers. The results of the Delphi methodology showed a 100% inter-judge agreement, highlighting the absence of differences in the adequacy of the items as a function of the parents' gender. Confirmatory factor analysis showed a good fit of three original factors proposed by the authors. The global Cronbach alpha coefficients in the total sample were adequate (mothers, 0.70; fathers, 0.78); and Cronbach alpha of each dimension in the case of mothers was 0.50 (Quality of bonding), 0.55 (Absence of hostility), and 0.60 (Pleasure in interaction); in the case of fathers, it was respectively 0.54, 0.64, and 0.72. CR of each dimension were: quality of bonding, 0.74 in mothers and 0.80 in fathers; absence of hostility, 0.93 in mothers and 0.94 in fathers; pleasure in interaction, 0.83 in mothers and 0.90 in fathers. With regard to the analysis of group invariance, the results revealed empirical evidence of configural and metric invariance. Concurrent validity showed moderate negative correlations for postnatal depression (mothers, r = -0.41, p < 0.001; fathers, r = -0.38, p < 0.001), and positive correlations for dyadic adjustment (mothers, r = 0.39, p < 0.001; fathers, r = 0.44, p < 0.001).DiscussionA new version of the instrument was generated, with good psychometric properties, adequate for use both with mothers and with fathers. This scale helps evaluate postnatal maternal and paternal bonding, allowing to study it from within the family system, a necessary step forward to advance perinatal mental health.

Dataset Information

What is meant by validity in maternal and newborn health measurement? A conceptual framework for understanding indicator validation.

Publications

What is meant by validity in maternal and newborn health measurement? A conceptual framework for understanding indicator validation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets