Abstract
Abstract
Background
Reliable mortality data are essential for the development of public health policies. In Brazil, although there is a well-consolidated universal system for mortality data, the quality of information on causes of death (CoD) is not even among Brazilian regions, with a high proportion of ill-defined CoD. Verbal autopsy (VA) is an alternative to improve mortality data. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of an adapted and reduced version of VA in identifying the underlying causes of non-forensic deaths, in São Paulo, Brazil. This is the first time that a version of the questionnaire has been validated considering the autopsy as the gold standard.
Methods
The performance of a physician-certified verbal autopsy (PCVA) was evaluated considering conventional autopsy (macroscopy plus microscopy) as gold standard, based on a sample of 2060 decedents that were sent to the Post-Mortem Verification Service (SVOC-USP). All CoD, from the underlying to the immediate, were listed by both parties, and ICD-10 attributed by a senior coder. For each cause, sensitivity and chance corrected concordance (CCC) were computed considering first the underlying causes attributed by the pathologist and PCVA, and then any CoD listed in the death certificate given by PCVA. Cause specific mortality fraction accuracy (CSMF-accuracy) and chance corrected CSMF-accuracy were computed to evaluate the PCVA performance at the populational level.
Results
There was substantial variability of the sensitivities and CCC across the causes. Well-known chronic diseases with accurate diagnoses that had been informed by physicians to family members, such as various cancers, had sensitivities above 40% or 50%. However, PCVA was not effective in attributing Pneumonia, Cardiomyopathy and Leukemia/Lymphoma as underlying CoD. At populational level, the PCVA estimated cause specific mortality fractions (CSMF) may be considered close to the fractions pointed by the gold standard. The CSMF-accuracy was 0.81 and the chance corrected CSMF-accuracy was 0.49.
Conclusions
The PCVA was efficient in attributing some causes individually and proved effective in estimating the CSMF, which indicates that the method is useful to establish public health priorities.
Funder
Ministério da Saúde
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
Melbourne Research, University of Melbourne
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Reference29 articles.
1. Mathers CD, Fat DM, Inoue M, Rao C, Lopez AD. Counting the dead and what they died from: an assessment of the global status of cause of death data. Bull World Health Organ. 2005;83(3):171–7 Epub 2005/03/31. doi: /S0042-96862005000300009. PubMed PMID: 15798840; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC2624200.
2. Mahapatra P, Shibuya K, Lopez AD, Coullare F, Notzon FC, Rao C, et al. Civil registration systems and vital statistics: successes and missed opportunities. Lancet. 2007;370(9599):1653–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(07)61308-7 PubMed PMID: 18029006. Epub 2007/11/22.
3. King G, Lu Y, Shibuya K. Designing verbal autopsy studies. Popul Health Metrics. 2010;8:19. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-7954-8-19 PubMed PMID: 20573233; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC2909171. Epub 2010/06/25.
4. Flaxman AD, Vahdatpour A, Green S, James SL, Murray CJL. Random forests for verbal autopsy analysis: multisite validation study using clinical diagnostic gold standards. Popul Health Metrics. 2011;9:29. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-7954-9-29.
5. Chandramohan D, Maude GH, Rodrigues LC, Hayes RJ. Verbal autopsies for adult deaths: their development and validation in a multicentre study. Tropical Med Int Health. 1998;3(6):436–46. Epub 1998/07/10. PubMed PMID: 9657505.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献