Search

Competing Interests: We declare no competing interests. This work is supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-038624 and OPP1172551 to LL and REB). FV acknowledges funding from the Spanish State Research Agency under the Ramón y Cajal programme (RYC2021-033979-I).

Background: Reliable and rigorously collected sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent (SRMNCAH) data from humanitarian settings are often sparse and variable in quality across different settings due to the lack of a standardised set of indicators across the different agencies working in humanitarian settings. This paper aims to summarise a WHO-led global initiative to develop and scale up an SRMNCAH monitoring and evaluation framework for humanitarian settings., Methods: This research revolved around three phases. The first and the last phase involved global consultations with lead international agencies active in SRMNCAH in humanitarian settings. The second phase tested the feasibility of the proposed indicators in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Jordan, using different qualitative research methods (interviews with 92 key informants, 26 focus group discussions with 142 key stakeholders, facility assessments and observations at 25 health facilities or sites)., Results: Among the 73 proposed indicators, 47 were selected as core indicators and 26 as additional indicators. Generally, there were no major issues in collecting the proposed indicators, except for those indicators that relied on death reviews or population-level data. Service availability and morbidity indicators were encouraged. Abortion and SGBV indicators were challenging to collect due to political and sociocultural reasons. The HIV and PMTCT indicators were considered as core indicators, despite potential sensitivity in some settings. Existing data collection and reporting systems across the four assessed humanitarian settings were generally fragmented and inconsistent, mainly attributed to the lack of coordination among different agencies., Interpretation: Implementing agencies need to collaborate effectively to scale up this agreed-upon set of SRMNCAH framework to enhance accountability and transparency in humanitarian settings., (© 2022 Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: There are currently no global recommendations on a parsimonious and robust set of indicators that can be measured routinely or periodically to monitor quality of hospital care for children and young adolescents. We describe a systematic methodology used to prioritize and define a core set of such indicators and their metadata for progress tracking, accountability, learning and improvement, at facility, (sub) national, national, and global levels., Methods: We used a deductive methodology which involved the use of the World Health Organization Standards for improving the quality-of-care for children and young adolescents in health facilities as the organizing framework for indicator development. The entire process involved 9 complementary steps which included: a rapid literature review of available evidence, the application of a peer-reviewed systematic algorithm for indicator systematization and prioritization, and multiple iterative expert consultations to establish consensus on the proposed indicators and their metadata., Results: We derived a robust set of 25 core indicators and their metadata, representing all 8 World Health Organization quality standards, 40 quality statements and 520 quality measures. Most of these indicators are process-related (64%) and 20% are outcome/impact indicators. A large proportion (84%) of indicators were proposed for measurement at both outpatient and inpatient levels. By virtue of being a parsimonious set and given the stringent criteria for prioritizing indicators with "quality measurement" attributes, the recommended set is not evenly distributed across the 8 quality standards., Conclusions: To support ongoing global and national initiatives around paediatric quality-of-care programming at country level, the recommended indicators can be adopted using a tiered approach that considers indicator measurability in the short-, medium-, and long-terms, within the context of the country's health information system readiness and maturity. However, there is a need for further research to assess the feasibility of implementing these indicators across contexts, and the need for their validation for global common reporting., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Nurturing care encompasses five components that are crucial for supporting early childhood development: good health, adequate nutrition, opportunities for early learning, responsive caregiving, and safety and security. While there has been increasing attention in global public health towards designing and delivering programs, services, and policies to promote nurturing care, measurement has focused more on the components of health and nutrition, with less attention to early learning, responsive caregiving, and safety and security. We conducted a scoping review to identify articles that measured at least one nurturing care outcome in a sample of caregivers and/or children under-5 years of age in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We systematically searched five electronic bibliographic databases for peer-reviewed articles published from database inception until November 30, 2020. We first classified outcomes to their respective nurturing care component, and then applied an inductive approach to organize key constructs within each nurturing care component and the specific measures and indicators used across studies. We identified 239 total articles representing more than 50 LMICs for inclusion in the review. The majority of included studies reported a measure of nutrition (N = 166), early learning (N = 140), and health (N = 102), followed by responsive caregiving (N = 78) and lastly safety and security (N = 45). For each nurturing care component, we uncovered multiple constructs relevant to children under-5: nutrition (e.g., anthropometry, complementary feeding), early learning (e.g., stimulation practices, early childhood education), health (e.g., birth outcomes, morbidity), responsive caregiving (e.g., parental responsivity, parent-child interactions), and safety and security (e.g., discipline, inadequate supervision). Particularly for outcomes of early learning and responsive caregiving, there was greater variability with regards to the measures used, reported indicators, and analytic construction of variables than the other three nurturing care components. This study provides a comprehensive review of the current state of measurement of nurturing care. Additional research is needed in order to establish the most optimal measures and indicators for assessing nurturing care, especially for early learning and responsive caregiving., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2022 Jeong et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Investments in the survival of older children and adolescents (aged 5-19 years) bring triple dividends for now, their future, and the next generation. However, 1·5 million deaths occurred in this age group globally in 2019, nearly all from preventable causes. To better focus the attention of the global community on improving survival of children and adolescents and to guide effective policy and programmes, sound and timely cause of death data are crucial, but often scarce., Methods: In this systematic analysis, we provide updated time-series for 2000-19 of national, regional, and global cause of death estimates for 5-19-year-olds with age-sex disaggregation. We estimated separately for countries with high versus low mortality, by data availability, and for four age-sex groups (5-9-year-olds [both sexes], 10-14-year-olds [both sexes], 15-19-year-old females, and 15-19-year-old males). Only studies reporting at least two causes of death were included in our analysis. We obtained empirical cause of death data through systematic review, known investigator tracing, and acquisition of known national and subnational cause of death studies. We adapted the Bayesian Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator approach to address data scarcity, enhance covariate selection, produce more robust estimates, offer increased flexibility, allow country random effects, propagate coherent uncertainty, and improve model stability. We harmonised all-cause mortality estimates with the UN Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation and systematically integrated single cause estimates as needed from WHO and UNAIDS., Findings: In 2019, the global leading specific causes of death were road traffic injuries (115 843 [95% uncertainty interval 110 672-125 054] deaths; 7·8% [7·5-8·1]); neoplasms (95 401 [90 744-104 812]; 6·4% [6·1-6·8]); malaria (81 516 [72 150-94 477]; 5·5% [4·9-6·2]); drowning (77 460 [72 474-85 952]; 5·2% [4·9-5·5]); and diarrhoea (72 679 [66 599-82 002], 4·9% [4·5-5·3]). The leading causes varied substantially across regions. The contribution of communicable, maternal, perinatal, and nutritional conditions declined with age, whereas the number of deaths associated with injuries increased. The leading causes of death were diarrhoea (51 630 [47 206-56 235] deaths; 10·0% [9·5-10·5]) in 5-9-year-olds; malaria (31 587 [23 940-43 116]; 8·6% [6·6-10·4]) in 10-14-year-olds; self-harm (32 646 [29 530-36 416]; 13·4% [12·6-14·3]) in 15-19-year-old females; and road traffic injuries (48 757 [45 692-52 625]; 13·9% [13·3-14·3]) in 15-19-year-old males. Widespread declines in cause-specific mortality were estimated across age-sex groups and geographies in 2000-19, with few exceptions like collective violence., Interpretation: Child and adolescent survival needs focused attention. To translate the vision into actions, more investments in the health information infrastructure for cause of death and in the related life-saving interventions are needed., Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and WHO., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests LL, FV, DY, JP, and REB report grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Causes of mortality are a crucial input for health systems for identifying appropriate interventions for child survival. We present an updated series of cause-specific mortality for neonates and children younger than 5 years from 2000 to 2019., Methods: We updated cause-specific mortality estimates for neonates and children aged 1-59 months, stratified by level (low, moderate, or high) of mortality. We made a substantial change in the statistical methods used for previous estimates, transitioning to a Bayesian framework that includes a structure to account for unreported causes in verbal autopsy studies. We also used systematic covariate selection in the multinomial framework, gave more weight to nationally representative verbal autopsy studies using a random effects model, and included mortality due to tuberculosis., Findings: In 2019, there were 5·30 million deaths (95% uncertainty range 4·92-5·68) among children younger than 5 years, primarily due to preterm birth complications (17·7%, 16·1-19·5), lower respiratory infections (13·9%, 12·0-15·1), intrapartum-related events (11·6%, 10·6-12·5), and diarrhoea (9·1%, 7·9-9·9), with 49·2% (47·3-51·9) due to infectious causes. Vaccine-preventable deaths, such as for lower respiratory infections, meningitis, and measles, constituted 21·7% (20·4-25·6) of under-5 deaths, and many other causes, such as diarrhoea, were preventable with low-cost interventions. Under-5 mortality has declined substantially since 2000, primarily because of a decrease in mortality due to lower respiratory infections, diarrhoea, preterm birth complications, intrapartum-related events, malaria, and measles. There is considerable variation in the extent and trends in cause-specific mortality across regions and for different strata of all-cause under-5 mortality., Interpretation: Progress is needed to improve child health and end preventable deaths among children younger than 5 years. Countries should strategize how to reduce mortality among this age group using interventions that are relevant to their specific causes of death., Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; WHO., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), set in 2015 by the UN General Assembly, call for all countries to reach an under-5 mortality rate (U5MR) of at least as low as 25 deaths per 1000 livebirths and a neonatal mortality rate (NMR) of at least as low as 12 deaths per 1000 livebirths by 2030. We estimated levels and trends in under-5 mortality for 195 countries from 1990 to 2019, and conducted scenario-based projections of the U5MR and NMR from 2020 to 2030 to assess country progress in, and potential for, reaching SDG targets on child survival and the potential under-5 and neonatal deaths over the next decade., Methods: Levels and trends in under-5 mortality are based on the UN Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation (UN IGME) database on under-5 mortality, which contains around 18 000 country-year datapoints for 195 countries-nearly 10 000 of those datapoints since 1990. The database includes nationally representative mortality data from vital registration systems, sample registration systems, population censuses, and household surveys. As with previous sets of national UN IGME estimates, a Bayesian B-spline bias-reduction model (B3) that considers the systematic biases associated with the different data source types was fitted to these data to generate estimates of under-5 (age 0-4 years) mortality with uncertainty intervals for 1990-2019 for all countries. Levels and trends in the neonatal mortality rate (0-27 days) are modelled separately as the log ratio of the neonatal mortality rate to the under-5 mortality rate using a Bayesian model. Estimated mortality rates are combined with livebirths data to calculate the number of under-5 and neonatal deaths. To assess the regional and global burden of under-5 deaths in the present decade and progress towards SDG targets, we constructed several scenario-based projections of under-5 mortality from 2020 to 2030 and estimated national, regional, and global under-5 mortality trends up to 2030 for each scenario., Findings: The global U5MR decreased by 59% (90% uncertainty interval [UI] 56-61) from 93·0 (91·7-94·5) deaths per 1000 livebirths in 1990 to 37·7 (36·1-40·8) in 2019, while the annual number of global under-5 deaths declined from 12·5 (12·3-12·7) million in 1990 to 5·2 (5·0-5·6) million in 2019-a 58% (55-60) reduction. The global NMR decreased by 52% (90% UI 48-55) from 36·6 (35·6-37·8) deaths per 1000 livebirths in 1990, to 17·5 (16·6-19·0) in 2019, and the annual number of global neonatal deaths declined from 5·0 (4·9-5·2) million in 1990, to 2·4 (2·3-2·7) million in 2019, a 51% (47-54) reduction. As of 2019, 122 of 195 countries have achieved the SDG U5MR target, and 20 countries are on track to achieve the target by 2030, while 53 will need to accelerate progress to meet the target by 2030. 116 countries have reached the SDG NMR target with 16 on track, leaving 63 at risk of missing the target. If current trends continue, 48·1 million under-5 deaths are projected to occur between 2020 and 2030, almost half of them projected to occur during the neonatal period. If all countries met the SDG target on under-5 mortality, 11 million under-5 deaths could be averted between 2020 and 2030., Interpretation: As a result of effective global health initiatives, millions of child deaths have been prevented since 1990. However, the task of ending all preventable child deaths is not done and millions more deaths could be averted by meeting international targets. Geographical and economic variation demonstrate the possibility of even lower mortality rates for children under age 5 years and point to the regions and countries with highest mortality rates and in greatest need of resources and action., Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, US Agency for International Development., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Effective coverage measures aim to estimate the proportion of a population in need of a service that received a positive health outcome. In 2020, the Effective Coverage Think Tank Group recommended using a 'coverage cascade' for maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health and nutrition (MNCAHN), which organises components of effective coverage in a stepwise fashion, with each step accounting for different aspects of quality of care (QoC), applied at the population level. The cascade outlines six steps that increase the likelihood that the population in need experience the intended health benefit: 1) the population in need (target population) who contact a health service; 2) that has the inputs available to deliver the service; 3) who receive the health service; 4) according to quality standards; 5) and adhere to prescribed medication(s) or health workers instructions; and 6) experience the expected health outcome. We examined how effective coverage of life-saving interventions from childbirth to children aged nine has been defined and assessed which steps of the cascade are captured by existing measures., Methods: We undertook a rapid systematic review. Seven scientific literature databases were searched covering the period from May 1, 2017 to July, 8 2021. Reference lists from reviews published in 2018 and 2019 were examined to identify studies published prior to May 2017. Eligible studies reported population-level contact coverage measures adjusted for at least one dimension of QoC., Results: Based on these two search approaches this review includes literature published from 2010 to 2021. From 16 662 records reviewed, 33 studies were included, reporting 64 effective coverage measures. The most frequently examined measures were for childbirth and immediate newborn care (n = 24). No studies examined measures among children aged five to nine years. Definitions of effective coverage varied across studies. Key sources of variability included (i) whether a single effective coverage measure was reported for a package of interventions or separate measures were calculated for each intervention; (ii) the number and type of coverage cascade steps applied to adjust for QoC; and (iii) the individual items included in the effective coverage definition and the methods used to generate a composite quality measure., Conclusion: In the MNCAHN literature there is substantial heterogeneity in both definitions and construction of effective coverage, limiting the comparability of measures over time and place. Current measurement approaches are not closely aligned with the proposed cascade. For widespread adoption, there is a need for greater standardisation of indicator definitions and transparency in reporting, so governments can use these measures to improve investments in MNACHN and implement life-saving health policies and programs., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors completed the ICMJE Unified Competing Interest form (available upon request from the corresponding author), and declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved.)