Dataset Information

Levels and potential drivers of under-five mortality sex ratios in low- and middle-income countries.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Non-biological childhood mortality sex ratios may reflect community sex preferences and gender discrimination in health care.

Objective

We assessed the association between contextual factors and gender bias in under-five mortality rates (U5MR) in low- and middle-income countries.

Methods

Full birth histories available from Demographic and Health Surveys and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (2010-2018) in 80 countries were used to estimate U5MR male-to-female sex ratios. Expected sex ratios and their residuals (difference of observed and expected) were derived from a linear regression model, adjusted for overall mortality. Negative residuals indicate more likelihood of discrimination against girls, and we refer to this as a measure of potential gender bias. Associations between residuals and national development and gender inequality indices and with survey-derived child health care indicators were tested using Spearman's correlation.

Results

Mortality residuals for under-five mortality were not associated with national development, education, religion, or gender inequality indices. Negative residuals were more common in countries where boys were more likely to be taken to health services than girls (rho -0.24, 95% confidence interval -0.45, -0.01).

Conclusions

Countries where girls were more likely to die than boys, accounting for overall mortality levels, were also countries where boys were more likely to receive health care than girls. Further research is needed to understand which national characteristics explain the presence of gender bias, given that the analyses of development levels and gender equality did not discriminate between countries with or without excess mortality of girls. Reporting on child mortality separately by sex is required to enable such advances.

SUBMITTER: Costa JC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8453971 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe progress to achieve the fourth Millennium Development Goal in reducing mortality rate in children younger than 5 years since 1990 has been remarkable. However, work remains to be done in the Sustainable Development Goal era. Estimates of under-5 mortality rates at the national level can hide disparities within countries. We assessed disparities in under-5 mortality rates by household economic status in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).MethodWe estimated country-year-specific under-5 mortality rates by wealth quintile on the basis of household wealth indices for 137 LMICs from 1990 to 2016, using a Bayesian statistical model. We estimated the association between quintile-specific and national-level under-5 mortality rates. We assessed the levels and trends of absolute and relative disparity in under-5 mortality rate between the poorest and richest quintiles, and among all quintiles.FindingsIn 2016, for all LMICs (excluding China), the aggregated under-5 mortality rate was 64·6 (90% uncertainty interval [UI] 61·1-70·1) deaths per 1000 livebirths in the poorest households (first quintile), 31·3 (29·5-34·2) deaths per 1000 livebirths in the richest households (fifth quintile), and in between those outcomes for the middle quintiles. Between 1990 and 2016, the largest absolute decline in under-5 mortality rate occurred in the two poorest quintiles: 77·6 (90% UI 71·2-82·6) deaths per 1000 livebirths in the poorest quintile and 77·9 (72·0-82·2) deaths per 1000 livebirths in the second poorest quintile. The difference in under-5 mortality rate between the poorest and richest quintiles decreased significantly by 38·8 (90% UI 32·9-43·8) deaths per 1000 livebirths between 1990 and 2016. The poorest to richest under-5 mortality rate ratio, however, remained similar (2·03 [90% UI 1·94-2·11] in 1990, 1·99 [1·91-2·08] in 2000, and 2·06 [1·92-2·20] in 2016). During 1990-2016, around half of the total under-5 deaths occurred in the poorest two quintiles (48·5% in 1990 and 2000, 49·5% in 2016) and less than a third were in the richest two quintiles (30·4% in 1990, 30·5% in 2000, 29·9% in 2016). For all regions, differences in the under-5 mortality rate between the first and fifth quintiles decreased significantly, ranging from 20·6 (90% UI 15·9-25·1) deaths per 1000 livebirths in eastern Europe and central Asia to 59·5 (48·5-70·4) deaths per 1000 livebirths in south Asia. In 2016, the ratios of under-5 mortality rate in the first quintile to under-5 mortality rate in the fifth quintile were significantly above 2·00 in two regions, with 2·49 (90% UI 2·15-2·87) in east Asia and Pacific (excluding China) and 2·41 (2·05-2·80) in south Asia. Eastern and southern Africa had the smallest ratio in 2016 at 1·62 (90% UI 1·48-1·76). Our model suggested that the expected ratio of under-5 mortality rate in the first quintile to under-5 mortality rate in the fifth quintile increases as national-level under-5 mortality rate decreases.InterpretationFor all LMICs (excluding China) combined, the absolute disparities in under-5 mortality rate between the poorest and richest households have narrowed significantly since 1990, whereas the relative differences have remained stable. To further narrow the rich-and-poor gap in under-5 mortality rate on the relative scale, targeted interventions that focus on the poorest populations are needed.FundingNational University of Singapore, UN Children's Fund, United States Agency for International Development, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundThe UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) call for stratification of social indicators by ethnic groups; however, no recent multicountry analyses on ethnicity and child survival have been done in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).MethodsWe used data from Demographic and Health Surveys and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys collected between 2010 and 2016, from LMICs that provided birth histories and information on ethnicity or a proxy variable. We calculated neonatal (age 0-27 days), post-neonatal (age 28-364 days), child (age 1-4 years), and under-5 mortality rates (U5MRs) for each ethnic group within each country. We assessed differences in mortality between ethnic groups using a likelihood ratio test, Theil's index, and between-group variance. We used multivariable analyses of U5MR by ethnicity to adjust for household wealth, maternal education, and urban-rural residence.FindingsWe included data from 36 LMICs, which included 2 812 381 livebirths among 415 ethnic groups. In 25 countries, significant differences in U5MR by ethnic group were identified (all p<0·05 likelihood ratio test). In these countries, the median mortality ratio between the ethnic groups with the highest and lowest U5MRs was 3·3 (IQR 2·1-5·2; range 1·5-8·5), whereas among the remaining 11 countries, the median U5MR ratio was 1·9 (IQR 1·7-2·5; range 1·4-10·0). Ethnic gaps were wider for child mortality than for neonatal or post-neonatal mortality. In nearly all countries, adjustment for wealth, education, and place of residence did not affect ethnic gaps in mortality, with the exception of Guatemala, India, Laos, and Nigeria. The largest ethnic group did not have the lowest U5MR in any of the countries studied.InterpretationSignificant ethnic disparities in child survival were identified in more than two-thirds of the countries studied. Regular analyses of ethnic disparities are essential for monitoring trends, targeting, and assessing the impact of health interventions. Such analyses will contribute to the effort towards leaving no one behind, which is at the centre of the SDGs.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation, UNICEF, Wellcome Trust, Associação Brasileira de Saúde Coletiva.

Project description:BackgroundIn the 21st century, increases in immunisation coverage and decreases in under-5 mortality have substantially reduced the global burden of measles mortality. However, the assessment of measles mortality burden is highly dependent on estimates of case-fatality ratios for measles, which can vary according to geography, health systems infrastructure, prevalence of underlying risk factors, and measles endemicity. With imprecise case-fatality ratios, there is continued uncertainty about the burden of measles mortality and the effect of measles vaccination. In this study, we aimed to update the estimations of case-fatality ratios for measles, to develop a prediction model to estimate case-fatality ratios across heterogeneous groupings, and to project future case-fatality ratios for measles up to 2030.MethodsWe did a review of the literature to identify studies examining measles cases and deaths in low-income and middle-income countries in all age groups from 1980 to 2016. We extracted data on case-fatality ratios for measles overall and by age, where possible. We developed and examined several types of generalised linear models and determined the best-fit model according to the Akaike information criterion. We then selected a best-fit model to estimate measles case-fatality ratios from 1990 to 2015 and projected future case-fatality ratios for measles up to 2030.FindingsWe selected 124 peer-reviewed journal articles published between Jan 1, 1980, and Dec 31, 2016, for inclusion in the final review-85 community-based studies and 39 hospital-based studies. We selected a log-linear prediction model, resulting in a mean case-fatality ratio of 2·2% (95% CI 0·7-4·5) in 1990-2015. In community-based settings, the mean case-fatality ratio was 1·5% (0·5-3·1) compared with 2·9% (0·9-6·0) in hospital-based settings. The mean projected case-fatality ratio in 2016-2030 was 1·3% (0·4-3·7).InterpretationCase-fatality ratios for measles have seen substantial declines since the 1990s. Our study provides an updated estimation of case-fatality ratios that could help to refine assessment of the effect on mortality of measles control and elimination programmes.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation.