Search

The negative influence of professional hierarchies between health cadres can silence nurse-midwives and junior medical staff,6 and may even demotivate personnel from participating in MPDSR. Maternal and perinatal death surveillance and response (MPDSR) is a health systems process entailing the continuous cycle of identification, notification and review of maternal and perinatal deaths (Surveillance), followed by actions to improve service delivery and quality of care (Response).1 Before the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there were an estimated 4.6 million maternal and neonatal deaths and stillbirths each year.2 During the pandemic, maternal and perinatal health outcomes have worsened, especially in low- and middle-income countries,3 highlighting the urgent need to galvanise MPDSR to end preventable mortality and strengthen health systems. Overcoming the blame culture that currently impedes MPDSR implementation requires action at all levels of the health system. 1 Therefore, dual national prioritisation on the value of systems learning and quality improvement that MPDSR encompasses needs to be matched with political priority for health system investment to implement I response i , deliver improved health outcomes and reduce the number of preventable deaths. [Extracted from the article]

Abstract Objectives: To assess the attitudes and perceived knowledge of health professionals regarding the food product judgemental-labelling reform that began in January 2020 in Israel. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Settings: An online survey among health professionals working in the Israeli health system. Participants: 456 participants (118 physicians, 207 nurses, 131 nutritionists). Results: Most respondents (89·9 %) were women, 36 % had over 20 years of professional experience. All nutritionists, 96·6 % of physicians and 94·7 % of nurses reported hearing about the reform, and most (88·9 % of nurses, 76·3 % of physicians and 75·6 % of nutritionists) claimed supporting the reform to a great or very great extent. Most respondents believe they should discuss issues related to healthy eating with their patients (91·8 % of nurses, 94·9 % of physicians and all nutritionists), but only about half (47·5 % of physicians and 57·0 % of nurses) reported that they have sufficient knowledge in this field, particularly about food labelling. Almost two-thirds of nutritionists (60·3 %) reported instructing patients to change their food intake according to labelling v. 40·1 % and 34·7 % of nurses and physicians, respectively. Only some respondents felt that they could influence their patients’ nutrition habits. Most participants believe that additional regulatory measures should also be used to promote healthy nutrition. Conclusions: There is a gap between the desire of physicians and nurses to provide nutritional guidance to the public and their actual knowledge about the labels’ meaning as well as their competencies in providing nutrition counselling. When formulating a reform, policymakers should provide clear guidelines about the expectations of implementing it in therapeutic practice.

Despite efforts to reduce stillbirths and neonatal deaths, inconsistent definitions and reporting practices continue to hamper global progress. Existing data frequently being limited in terms of quality and comparability across countries. This paper addresses this critical issue by outlining the new International Classification of Disease (ICD-11) recommendations for standardized recording and reporting of perinatal deaths to improve data accuracy and international comparison. Key advancements in ICD-11 include using gestational age as the primary threshold to for reporting, clearer guidance on measurement and recording of gestational age, and reporting mortality rates by gestational age subgroups to enable country comparisons to include similar populations (e.g., all births from 154 days [22 +0 weeks] or from 196 days [28 +0 weeks]). Furthermore, the revised ICD-11 guidance provides further clarification around the exclusion of terminations of pregnancy (induced abortions) from perinatal mortality statistics. Implementing standardized recording and reporting methods laid out in ICD-11 will be crucial for accurate global data on stillbirths and perinatal deaths. Such high-quality data would both allow appropriate regional and international comparisons to be made and serve as a resource to improve clinical practice and epidemiological and health surveillance, enabling focusing of limited programmatic and research funds towards ending preventable deaths and improving outcomes for every woman and every baby, everywhere., (© 2024 The Author(s). International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.)

This article offers four key lessons learned from a set of seven studies undertaken as part of the collection entitled, "Improving Maternal Health Measurement to Support Efforts toward Ending Preventable Maternal Mortality". These papers were aimed at validating ten of the Ending Preventable Maternal Mortality initiative indicators that capture information on distal causes of maternal mortality. These ten indicators were selected through an inclusive consultative process, and the research designs adhere to global recommendations on conducting indicator validation studies. The findings of these papers are timely and relevant given growing recognition of the role of macro-level social, political, and economic factors in maternal and newborn survival. The four key lessons include: 1) Strengthen efforts to capture maternal and newborn health policies to enable global progress assessments while reducing multiple requests to countries for similar data; 2) Monitor indicator "bundles" to understand degree of policy implementation, inconsistencies between laws and practices, and responsiveness of policies to individual and community needs; 3) Promote regular monitoring of a holistic set of human resource metrics to understand how to effectively strengthen the maternal and newborn health workforce; and 4) Develop and disseminate clear guidance for countries on how to assess health system as well as broader social and political determinants of maternal and newborn health. These lessons are consistent with the Kirkland principles of focus, relevance, innovation, equity, global leadership, and country ownership. They stress the value of indicator sets to understand complex phenomenon related to maternal and newborn health, including small groupings of complementary indicators for measuring policy implementation and health workforce issues. They also stress the fundamental ethos that maternal and newborn health indicators should only be tracked if they can drive actions at global, regional, national, or sub-national levels that improve lives., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Requejo 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.)

The reduction of maternal mortality and the promotion of maternal health and wellbeing are complex tasks. This Series paper analyses the distal and proximal determinants of maternal health, as well as the exposures, risk factors, and micro-correlates related to maternal mortality. This paper also examines the relationship between these determinants and the gradual shift over time from a pattern of high maternal mortality to a pattern of low maternal mortality (a phenomenon described as the maternal mortality transition). We conducted two systematic reviews of the literature and we analysed publicly available data on indicators related to the Sustainable Development Goals, specifically, estimates prepared by international organisations, including the UN and the World Bank. We considered 23 frameworks depicting maternal health and wellbeing as a multifactorial process, with superdeterminants that broadly affect women's health and wellbeing before, during, and after pregnancy. We explore the role of social determinants of maternal health, individual characteristics, and health-system features in the production of maternal health and wellbeing. This paper argues that the preventable deaths of millions of women each decade are not solely due to biomedical complications of pregnancy, childbirth, and the postnatal period, but are also tangible manifestations of the prevailing determinants of maternal health and persistent inequities in global health and socioeconomic development. This paper underscores the need for broader, multipronged actions to improve maternal health and wellbeing and accelerate sustainable reductions in maternal mortality. For women who have pregnancy, childbirth, or postpartum complications, the health system provides a crucial opportunity to interrupt the chain of events that can potentially end in maternal death. Ultimately, expanding the health sector ecosystem to mitigate maternal health determinants and tailoring the configuration of health systems to counter the detrimental effects of eco-social forces, including though increased access to quality-assured commodities and services, are essential to improve maternal health and wellbeing and reduce maternal mortality., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This is an Open Access article published under the CC BY 3.0 IGO license which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In any use of this article, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organisation, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article's original URL.)

Background: Preterm birth is the leading cause of neonatal mortality and is associated with long-term physical, neurodevelopmental, and socioeconomic effects. This study updated national preterm birth rates and trends, plus novel estimates by gestational age subgroups, to inform progress towards global health goals and targets, and aimed to update country, regional, and global estimates of preterm birth for 2020 in addition to trends between 2010 and 2020., Methods: We systematically searched population-based, nationally representative data on preterm birth from Jan 1, 2010, to Dec 31, 2020 and study data (26 March-14 April, 2021) for countries and areas with no national-level data. The analysis included 679 data points (86% nationally representative administrative data [582 of 679 data points]) from 103 countries and areas (62% of countries and areas having nationally representative administrative data [64 of 103 data points]). A Bayesian hierarchical regression was used for estimating country-level preterm rates, which incoporated country-specific intercepts, low birthweight as a covariate, non-linear time trends, and bias adjustments based on a data quality categorisation, and other indicators such as method of gestational age estimation., Findings: An estimated 13·4 million (95% credible interval [CrI] 12·3-15·2 million) newborn babies were born preterm (<37 weeks) in 2020 (9·9% of all births [95% CrI 9·1-11·2]) compared with 13·8 million (12·7-15·5 million) in 2010 (9·8% of all births [9·0-11·0]) worldwide. The global annual rate of reduction was estimated at -0·14% from 2010 to 2020. In total, 55·6% of total livebirths are in southern Asia (26·8% [36 099 000 of 134 767 000]) and sub-Saharan Africa (28·7% [38 819 300 of 134 767 000]), yet these two regions accounted for approximately 65% (8 692 000 of 13 376 200) of all preterm births globally in 2020. Of the 33 countries and areas in the highest data quality category, none were in southern Asia or sub-Saharan Africa compared with 94% (30 of 32 countries) in high-income countries and areas. Worldwide from 2010 to 2020, approximately 15% of all preterm births occurred at less than 32 weeks of gestation, requiring more neonatal care (<28 weeks: 4·2%, 95% CI 3·1-5·0, 567 800 [410 200-663 200 newborn babies]); 28-32 weeks: 10·4% [9·5-10·6], 1 392 500 [1 274 800-1 422 600 newborn babies])., Interpretation: There has been no measurable change in preterm birth rates over the last decade at global level. Despite increasing facility birth rates and substantial focus on routine health data systems, there remain many missed opportunities to improve preterm birth data. Gaps in national routine data for preterm birth are most marked in regions of southern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, which also have the highest estimated burden of preterm births. Countries need to prioritise programmatic investments to prevent preterm birth and to ensure evidence-based quality care when preterm birth occurs. Investments in improving data quality are crucial so that preterm birth data can be improved and used for action and accountability processes., Funding: The Children's Investment Fund Foundation and the UNDP, United Nations Population Fund-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This is an Open Access article published under the CC BY 3.0 IGO license which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In any use of this article, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organisation, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article's original URL.)

Background: The extent to which a favorable policy environment influences health care utilization and outcomes for pregnant and postpartum women is largely unknown. In this study, we aimed to describe the maternal health policy environment and examines its relationship with maternal health service utilization in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)., Methods: We used data from World Health Organization's 2018-2019 sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health (SRMNCAH) policy survey linked with key contextual variables from global databases, as well as UNICEF data on antenatal care (ANC), institutional delivery, and postnatal care (PNC) utilization in 113 LIMCs. We grouped maternal health policy indicators into four categories - national supportive structures and standards, service access, clinical guidelines, and reporting and review systems. For each category and overall, we calculated summative scores accounting for available policy indicators in each country. We explored variations of policy indicators by World Bank income group using χ 2 tests and fitted logistic regression models for ≥85% coverage for each of four or more antenatal care visits (ANC4+), institutional delivery, PNC for the mothers, and for all ANC4+, institutional delivery, and PNC for mothers, adjusting for policy scores and contextual variables., Results: The average scores for the four policy categories were as follows: 3 for national supportive structures and standards (score range = 0-4), 5.5 for service access (score range = 0-7), 6. for clinical guidelines (score range = 0-10), and 5.7 for reporting and review systems (score range = 0-7), for an average total policy score of 21.1 (score range = 0-28) across LMICs. After adjusting for country context variables, for each unit increase in the maternal health policy score, the odds of ANC4+>85% increased by 37% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.13-1.64) and the odds of all ANC4+, institutional deliveries and PNC>85% by 31% (95% CI = 1.07-1.60)., Conclusions: Despite the availability of supportive structures and free maternity service access policies, there is a dire need for stronger policy support for clinical guidelines and practice regulations, as well as national reporting and review systems for maternal health. A more favorable policy environment for maternal health can improve adoption of evidence-based interventions and increase utilization of maternal health services in LMICs., Competing Interests: Disclosure of interest: The authors completed the ICMJE Disclosure of Interest Form (available upon request from the corresponding author) and disclose no relevant interests., (Copyright © 2023 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: We have read and understood BMJ policy on declaration of interests and declare KK is a consultant for the World Health Organization. The views are those of the authors and they do not necessarily represent the views, decisions, or policies of the institutions with which they are affiliated.

Background: We aimed to describe the availability of newborn health policies across the continuum of care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and to assess the relationship between the availability of newborn health policies and their achievement of global Sustainable Development Goal and Every Newborn Action Plan (ENAP) neonatal mortality and stillbirth rate targets in 2019., Methods: We used data from World Health Organization's 2018-2019 sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health (SRMNCAH) Policy Survey and extracted key newborn health service delivery and cross-cutting health systems policies that align with the WHO health system building blocks. We constructed composite measures to represent packages of newborn health policies for five components along the continuum of care: antenatal care (ANC), childbirth, postnatal care (PNC), essential newborn care (ENC), and management of small and sick newborns (SSNB). We used descriptive analyses to present the differences in the availability of newborn health service delivery policies by World Bank income group in 113 LMICs. We employed logistic regression analysis to assess the relationship between the availability of each composite newborn health policy package and achievement of global neonatal mortality and stillbirth rate targets by 2019., Results: In 2018, most LMICs had existing policies regarding newborn health across the continuum of care. However, policy specifications varied widely. While the availability of the ANC, childbirth, PNC, and ENC policy packages was not associated with having achieved global NMR targets by 2019, LMICs with existing policy packages on the management of SSNB were 4.4 times more likely to have reached the global NMR target (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 4.40; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.09-17.79) after controlling for income group and supporting health systems policies., Conclusions: Given the current trajectory of neonatal mortality in LMICs, there is a dire need for supportive health systems and policy environments for newborn health across the continuum of care. Adoption and implementation of evidence-informed newborn health policies will be a crucial step in putting LMICs on track to meet global newborn and stillbirth targets by 2030., Competing Interests: Disclosure of interest: The authors completed the ICMJE Disclosure of Interest Form (available upon request from the corresponding author) and disclose no relevant interests., (Copyright © 2023 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved.)

Background: Political, social, economic, and health system determinants play an important role in creating an enabling environment for maternal and newborn health. This study assesses changes in health systems and policy indicators for maternal and newborn health across 78 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) during 2008-2018, and examines contextual factors associated with policy adoption and systems changes., Methods: We compiled historical data from WHO, ILO, and UNICEF surveys and databases to track changes in ten maternal and newborn health systems and policy indicators prioritized for tracking by global partnerships. Logistic regression was used to examine the odds of systems and policy change based on indicators of economic growth, gender equality, and country governance with available data from 2008 to 2018., Results: From 2008 to 2018, many LMICs (44/76; 57·9%) substantially strengthened systems and policies for maternal and newborn health. The most frequently adopted policies were national guidelines for kangaroo mother care, national guidelines for use of antenatal corticosteroids, national policies for maternal death notification and review, and the introduction of priority medicines in Essential Medicines Lists. The odds of policy adoption and systems investments were significantly greater in countries that experienced economic growth, had strong female labor participation, and had strong country governance (all p < 0·05)., Conclusions: The widespread adoption of priority policies over the past decade is a notable step in creating an environment supportive for maternal and newborn health, but continued leadership and resources are needed to ensure robust implementation that translates into improved health outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Performance of maternal death surveillance and response (MDSR) relies on the system's ability to identify and notify all maternal deaths and its ability to review all maternal deaths by a committee. Unified definitions for indicators to assess these functions are lacking. We aim to estimate notification and review coverage rates in 30 countries between 2015 and 2019 using standardised definitions., Design: Repeat cross-sectional surveys provided the numerators for the coverage indicators; United Nations (UN)-modelled expected country maternal deaths provided the denominators., Setting: 30 low-income and middle-income countries responding to the Maternal Health Thematic Fund annual surveys conducted by the UN Population Fund between 2015 and 2019., Outcome Measures: Notification coverage rate ([Formula: see text]) was calculated as the proportion of expected maternal deaths that were notified at the national level annually; review coverage rate ([Formula: see text]) was calculated as the proportion of expected maternal deaths that were reviewed annually., Results: The average annual [Formula: see text] for all countries increased from 17% in 2015 to 28% in 2019; the average annual [Formula: see text] increased from 8% to 13%. Between 2015 and 2019, 22 countries (73%) reported increases in the [Formula: see text]-with an average increase of 20 (SD 18) percentage points-and 24 countries (80%) reported increases in [Formula: see text] by 7 (SD 11) percentage points. Low values of [Formula: see text] contrasts with country-published review rates, ranging from 46% to 51%., Conclusion: MDSR systems that count and review all maternal deaths can deliver real-time information that could prompt immediate actions and may improve maternal health. Consistent and systematic documentation of MDSR efforts may improve national and global monitoring. Assessing the notification and review functions using coverage indicators is feasible, not affected by fluctuations in data completeness and reporting, and can objectively capture progress., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

High quality postnatal care is key for the health and wellbeing of women after childbirth and their newborns. In 2022, the World Health Organization (WHO) published global recommendations on maternal and newborn care for a positive postnatal care experience in a new WHO PNC guideline. Evidence regarding appropriate measures to monitor implementation of postnatal care (PNC) according to the WHO PNC guideline is lacking. This scoping review aims to document the measures used to assess the quality of postnatal care and their validity. The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Five electronic bibliographic databases were searched together with a grey literature search. Two reviewers independently screened and appraised identified articles. All data on PNC measures were extracted and mapped to the 2022 WHO PNC recommendations according to three categories: i) maternal care, ii) newborn care, iii) health system and health promotion interventions. We identified 62 studies providing measures aligning with the WHO PNC recommendations. For most PNC recommendations there were measures available and the highest number of recommendations were found for breastfeeding and the assessment of the newborn. No measures were found for recommendations related to sedentary behavior, criteria to be assessed before discharge, retention of staff in rural areas and use of digital communication. Measure validity assessment was described in 24 studies (39%), but methods were not standardized. Our review highlights a gap in existing PNC measures for several recommendations in the WHO PNC guideline. Assessment of the validity of PNC measures was limited. Consensus on how the quality of PNC should be measured is needed, involving a selection of priority measures and the development of new measures as appropriate., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Galle 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.)

Objectives: While service integration has gained prominence as an objective of many global initiatives, there is no widely recognised single definition of integration nor a clear understanding of how programmes are integrated into health systems to achieve improved health outcomes. This study aims to review measurement approaches for integrated antenatal care (ANC) services, propose and operationalise indicators for measuring ANC service integration and inform an integrated ANC indicator recommendation for use in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs)., Design: Feasibility study., Setting: Burkina Faso, Kenya, Malawi, Senegal and Sierra Leone., Methods: Our six-step approach included: (1) conceptualise ANC service integration models; (2) conduct a targeted literature review on measurement of ANC service integration; (3) develop criteria for ANC service integration indicators; (4) propose indicators for ANC service integration; (5) use extant data to operationalise the indicators; and (6) synthesise information to make an integrated ANC indicator recommendation for use in LMICs., Results: Given the multidimensionality of integration, we outlined three models for conceptualising ANC service integration: integrated health systems, continuity of care and coordinated care. Looking across ANC service integration estimates, there were large differences between estimates for ANC service integration depending on the model used, and in some countries, the ANC integration indicator definition within a model. No one integrated ANC indicator was consistently the highest estimate for ANC service integration. However, continuity of care was consistently the lowest estimate for ANC service integration., Conclusions: Integrated ANC services are foundational to ensuring universal health coverage. However, our findings demonstrate the complexities in monitoring indicators of ANC service quality using extant data in LMICs. Given the challenges, it is recommended that countries focus on monitoring measures of service quality. In addition, efforts should be made to improve data collection tools and routine health information systems to better capture measures of service integration., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Data from national health information systems are essential for routinely tracking progress, programmatic decision-making and to improve quality of services. Understanding the data elements captured in patient registers which are building blocks of national HMIS indicators, enables us to standardize data collection and measurement of key indicators for tracking progress towards achieving maternal and newborn health goals. This analysis was done through a review of antenatal care (ANC), childbirth and postnatal care (PNC) registers from 21 countries across five geographic regions. Between July and October 2020, country-based maternal and newborn experts, implementing agencies, program managers, and ministry of health personnel were asked to share the registers in use. Both paper-based and electronic registers were obtained. Twenty ANC registers, eighteen childbirth and thirteen PNC were available and analyzed. Both longitudinal and cross-sectional ANC and PNC registers were obtained, while the childbirth registers included in the analysis were all cross-sectional. Fifty-five percent (11/20) ANC registers and 54% (7/13) PNC registers were longitudinal. In four countries, the registers were electronic, while the rest were paper-based (17 countries). Sub-analysis of registers from four countries (Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, and Zambia) where the 2017/2018 and 2019/2020 registers were available showed that the latest versions included 21/27 (78%) of data elements that are critical in the computation of key maternal and newborn care indicators. This analysis highlights some areas in where there are data gaps in data on pregnancy and childbirth. Program managers and health workers should use data gathered routinely to monitor the performance of their national health system and to guide the continuous improvement of health care services for women and newborns. The findings can help to inform the standardization of pregnancy and childbirth registers, and provide information for other countries seeking to introduce indicators in their health systems., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Kabue 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: 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.)

The Sustainable Development Goals prioritize maternal mortality reduction, with a global average target of < 70 per 100,000 live births by 2030. Current pace of reduction is far short of what is needed to achieve the global target. It is estimated that globally there are 300,000 maternal deaths, 2.4 million newborn deaths and 2 million stillbirths annually. Majority of these deaths occur in low-and-middle-income countries. Global initiatives like, Ending Preventable Maternal Mortality (EPMM) and Every Newborn Action Plan (ENAP), have outlined the broad strategies for maternal and newborn health programmes. A set of coverage targets and ten milestones were launched to support low-and-middle-income countries in accelerating progress in improving maternal, perinatal and newborn health and wellbeing. WHO, UNICEF and UNFPA, undertook a scoping review to understand how country strategies evolved in different contexts over the past two decades to improve maternal survival and wellbeing, and how countries in similar settings could accelerate progress considering the changing epidemiology and demography. Case studies were conducted to inform countries in similar settings and various global initiatives. Six countries were selected based on standard criteria-Cambodia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Georgia, Guatemala, Pakistan and Sierra Leone representing different stages of the obstetric transition. A conceptual framework, encapsulating the interrelated factors impacting maternal health outcomes, was used to organize data collection and analysis. While all six countries made remarkable progress in improving maternal and perinatal health, the pace of progress and the factors influencing the successes and challenges varied across the countries. The context, opportunities and challenges varied from country to country. Two strategic directions were identified for next steps including the need to implement and evaluate innovative service delivery models using an updated obstetric transition as an organizing framework and expanding our vision to address equity and well-being., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Syed, Kinney, Pestvenidze, Vandy, Slowing, Kayita, Lewis, Kenneh, Moses, Aabroo, Thom, Uzma, Zaka, Rattana, Cheang, Kanke, Kini, Epondo and Moran.)

Background: Maternal and perinatal death surveillance and response (MPDSR) is a system of identifying, analysing and learning lessons from such deaths in order to respond and prevent future deaths, and has been recommended by WHO and implemented in many low-and-middle income settings in recent years. However, there is limited documentation of experience with MPDSR in humanitarian settings. A meeting on MPDSR in humanitarian settings was convened by WHO, UNICEF, CDC and Save the Children, UNFPA and UNHCR on 17th-18th October 2019, informed by semi-structured interviews with a range of professionals, including expert attendees., Consultation Findings: Interviewees revealed significant obstacles to full implementation of the MPDSR process in humanitarian settings. Many obstacles were familiar to low resource settings in general but were amplified in the context of a humanitarian crisis, such as overburdened services, disincentives to reporting, accountability gaps, a blame approach, and politicisation of mortality. Factors more unique to humanitarian contexts included concerns about health worker security and moral distress. There are varying levels of institutionalisation and implementation capacity for MPDSR within humanitarian organisations. It is suggested that if poorly implemented, particularly with a punitive or blame approach, MPDSR may be counterproductive. Nevertheless, successes in MPDSR were described whereby the process led to concrete actions to prevent deaths, and where death reviews have led to improved understanding of complex and rectifiable contextual factors leading to deaths in humanitarian settings., Conclusions: Despite the challenges, examples exist where the lessons learnt from MPDSR processes have led to improved access and quality of care in humanitarian contexts, including successful advocacy. An adapted approach is required to ensure feasibility, with varying implementation being possible in different phases of crises. There is a need for guidance on MPDSR in humanitarian contexts, and for greater documentation and learning from experiences., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Competing Interests: We declare no competing interests.

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.)

Introduction: In 2019, over 70 million people were forcibly displaced worldwide. Women and girls comprise nearly half of this population and are at heightened risk of negative sexual and reproductive health outcomes. With the collapse of health systems, reduced resources and increased vulnerabilities from displacement, there is a need to strengthen current practices and ensure the delivery of comprehensive sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health (SRMNCAH) services. Recognising the need for consistency in data collection, analysis and use, the WHO developed a list of core SRMNCAH monitoring and evaluation indicators for services and outcomes in humanitarian settings. This research will explore the feasibility of collecting this core set of SRMNCAH indicators in displacement contexts., Methods and Analysis: We will undertake a multimethods qualitative study in seven humanitarian settings: Afghanistan, Albania, Bangladesh, Cameroon, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iraq and Jordan. We selected sites that reflect diversity in geographic region, sociocultural characteristics, primary location(s) of displaced persons and nature and phase of the crisis. Our study consists of four components: key informant interviews, facility assessments, observational sessions at select facilities and focus group discussions with front-line healthcare personnel. We will analyse our data using descriptive statistics and for content and themes. We will begin by analysing data from each setting separately and will then combine these data to explore concordant and discordant results, triangulate findings and develop global recommendations., Ethics and Dissemination: The University of Ottawa's Research Ethics Board and the Research Project Review Panel (RP 2) of the World Health Organization-Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health as well as local IRBs of PIs' research institutions reviewed and approved this protocol. We intend to disseminate findings through workshops at the WHO country, regional and headquarter levels, as well as through local, national and international conferences, workshops, peer-reviewed publications, and reports., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Preterm birth is a leading cause of death among children under five years. Previous estimates indicated global preterm birth rate of 10.6% (14.8 million neonates) in 2014. We aim to update preterm birth estimates at global, regional, and national levels for the period 2010 to 2019., Methods: Preterm birth is defined as a live birth occurring before 37 completed gestational weeks, or <259 days since a woman's last menstrual period. National administrative data sources for WHO Member States with facility birth rates of ≥80% in the most recent year for which data is available will be searched. Administrative data identified for these countries will be considered if ≥80% of UN estimated live births include gestational age information to define preterm birth. For countries without eligible administrative data, a systematic review of studies will be conducted. Research studies will be eligible if the reported outcome is derived from an observational or intervention study conducted at national or sub-national level in population- or facility-based settings. Risk of bias assessments will focus on gestational age measurement method and coverage, and inclusion of special subgroups in published estimates. Covariates for inclusion will be selected a priori based on a conceptual framework of plausible associations with preterm birth, data availability, and quality of covariate data across many countries and years. Global, regional and national preterm birth rates will be estimated using a Bayesian multilevel-mixed regression model., Discussion: Accurate measurement of preterm birth is challenging in many countries given incomplete or unavailable data from national administrative sources, compounded by limited gestational age assessment during pregnancy to define preterm birth. Up-to-date modelled estimates will be an important resource to measure the global burden of preterm birth and to inform policies and programs especially in settings with a high burden of neonatal mortality., Trial Registration: PROSPERO registration: CRD42021237861., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Stillbirths are a major public health issue and a sensitive marker of the quality of care around pregnancy and birth. The UN Global Strategy for Women's, Children's and Adolescents' Health (2016-30) and the Every Newborn Action Plan (led by UNICEF and WHO) call for an end to preventable stillbirths. A first step to prevent stillbirths is obtaining standardised measurement of stillbirth rates across countries. We estimated stillbirth rates and their trends for 195 countries from 2000 to 2019 and assessed progress over time., Methods: For a systematic assessment, we created a dataset of 2833 country-year datapoints from 171 countries relevant to stillbirth rates, including data from registration and health information systems, household-based surveys, and population-based studies. After data quality assessment and exclusions, we used 1531 datapoints to estimate country-specific stillbirth rates for 195 countries from 2000 to 2019 using a Bayesian hierarchical temporal sparse regression model, according to a definition of stillbirth of at least 28 weeks' gestational age. Our model combined covariates with a temporal smoothing process such that estimates were informed by data for country-periods with high quality data, while being based on covariates for country-periods with little or no data on stillbirth rates. Bias and additional uncertainty associated with observations based on alternative stillbirth definitions and source types, and observations that were subject to non-sampling errors, were included in the model. We compared the estimated stillbirth rates and trends to previously reported mortality estimates in children younger than 5 years., Findings: Globally in 2019, an estimated 2·0 million babies (90% uncertainty interval [UI] 1·9-2·2) were stillborn at 28 weeks or more of gestation, with a global stillbirth rate of 13·9 stillbirths (90% UI 13·5-15·4) per 1000 total births. Stillbirth rates in 2019 varied widely across regions, from 22·8 stillbirths (19·8-27·7) per 1000 total births in west and central Africa to 2·9 (2·7-3·0) in western Europe. After west and central Africa, eastern and southern Africa and south Asia had the second and third highest stillbirth rates in 2019. The global annual rate of reduction in stillbirth rate was estimated at 2·3% (90% UI 1·7-2·7) from 2000 to 2019, which was lower than the 2·9% (2·5-3·2) annual rate of reduction in neonatal mortality rate (for neonates aged <28 days) and the 4·3% (3·8-4·7) annual rate of reduction in mortality rate among children aged 1-59 months during the same period. Based on the lower bound of the 90% UIs, 114 countries had an estimated decrease in stillbirth rate since 2000, with four countries having a decrease of at least 50·0%, 28 having a decrease of 25·0-49·9%, 50 having a decrease of 10·0-24·9%, and 32 having a decrease of less than 10·0%. For the remaining 81 countries, we found no decrease in stillbirth rate since 2000. Of these countries, 34 were in sub-Saharan Africa, 16 were in east Asia and the Pacific, and 15 were in Latin America and the Caribbean., Interpretation: Progress in reducing the rate of stillbirths has been slow compared with decreases in the mortality rate of children younger than 5 years. Accelerated improvements are most needed in the regions and countries with high stillbirth rates, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. Future prevention of stillbirths needs increased efforts to raise public awareness, improve data collection, assess progress, and understand public health priorities locally, all of which require investment., Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 World Health Organization; licensee Elsevier. This is an Open Access article published under the CC BY 3.0 IGO license which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In any use of this article, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organisation, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article's original URL.)

The 2030 Sustainable Development Goals agenda calls for health data to be disaggregated by age. However, age groupings used to record and report health data vary greatly, hindering the harmonisation, comparability, and usefulness of these data, within and across countries. This variability has become especially evident during the COVID-19 pandemic, when there was an urgent need for rapid cross-country analyses of epidemiological patterns by age to direct public health action, but such analyses were limited by the lack of standard age categories. In this Personal View, we propose a recommended set of age groupings to address this issue. These groupings are informed by age-specific patterns of morbidity, mortality, and health risks, and by opportunities for prevention and disease intervention. We recommend age groupings of 5 years for all health data, except for those younger than 5 years, during which time there are rapid biological and physiological changes that justify a finer disaggregation. Although the focus of this Personal View is on the standardisation of the analysis and display of age groups, we also outline the challenges faced in collecting data on exact age, especially for health facilities and surveillance data. The proposed age disaggregation should facilitate targeted, age-specific policies and actions for health care and disease management., Competing Interests: We declare no competing interests., (© 2021 World Health Organization; licensee Elsevier. This is an Open Access article published under the CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 IGO license.)

Background: Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is a leading cause of preventable maternal mortality worldwide. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends uterotonic administration for every woman after birth to prevent PPH. There are no standardised data collected in large-scale measurement platforms. The Every Newborn Birth Indicators Research Tracking in Hospitals (EN-BIRTH) is an observational study to assess the validity of measurement of maternal and newborn indicators, and this paper reports findings regarding measurement of coverage and quality for uterotonics., Methods: The EN-BIRTH study took place in five hospitals in Bangladesh, Nepal and Tanzania, from July 2017 to July 2018. Clinical observers collected tablet-based, time-stamped data. We compared observation data for uterotonics to routine hospital register-records and women's report at exit-interview survey. We analysed the coverage and quality gap for timing and dose of administration. The register design was evaluated against gap analyses and qualitative interview data assessing the barriers and enablers to data recording and use., Results: Observed uterotonic coverage was high in all five hospitals (> 99%, 95% CI 98.7-99.8%). Survey-report underestimated coverage (79.5 to 91.7%). "Don't know" replies varied (2.1 to 14.4%) and were higher after caesarean (3.7 to 59.3%). Overall, there was low accuracy in survey data for details of uterotonic administration (type and timing). Register-recorded coverage varied in four hospitals capturing uterotonics in a specific column (21.6, 64.5, 97.6, 99.4%). The average coverage measurement gap was 18.1% for register-recorded and 6.0% for survey-reported coverage. Uterotonics were given to 15.9% of women within the "right time" (1 min) and 69.8% within 3 min. Women's report of knowing the purpose of uterotonics after birth ranged from 0.4 to 64.9% between hospitals. Enabling register design and adequate staffing were reported to improve routine recording., Conclusions: Routine registers have potential to track uterotonic coverage - register data were highly accurate in two EN-BIRTH hospitals, compared to consistently underestimated coverage by survey-report. Although uterotonic coverage was high, there were gaps in observed quality for timing and dose. Standardisation of register design and implementation could improve data quality and data flow from registers into health management information reporting systems, and requires further assessment.

Background: Respectful 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., Methods: At 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., Results: Among 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., Conclusions: Measurement 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.

Background: Strengthening the capacity of midwives to deliver high-quality maternal and newborn health services has been highlighted as a priority by global health organisations. To support low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) in their decisions about investments in health, we aimed to estimate the potential impact of midwives on reducing maternal and neonatal deaths and stillbirths under several intervention coverage scenarios., Methods: For this modelling study, we used the Lives Saved Tool to estimate the number of deaths that would be averted by 2035, if coverage of health interventions that can be delivered by professional midwives were scaled up in 88 countries that account for the vast majority of the world's maternal and neonatal deaths and stillbirths. We used four scenarios to assess the effects of increasing the coverage of midwife-delivered interventions by a modest amount (10% every 5 years), a substantial amount (25% every 5 years), and the amount needed to reach universal coverage of these interventions (ie, to 95%); and the effects of coverage attrition (a 2% decrease every 5 years). We grouped countries in three equal-sized groups according to their Human Development Index. Group A included the 30 countries with the lowest HDI, group B included 29 low-to-medium HDI countries, and group C included 29 medium-to-high HDI countries., Findings: We estimated that, relative to current coverage, a substantial increase in coverage of midwife-delivered interventions could avert 41% of maternal deaths, 39% of neonatal deaths, and 26% of stillbirths, equating to 2·2 million deaths averted per year by 2035. Even a modest increase in coverage of midwife-delivered interventions could avert 22% of maternal deaths, 23% of neonatal deaths, and 14% of stillbirths, equating to 1·3 million deaths averted per year by 2035. Relative to current coverage, universal coverage of midwife-delivered interventions would avert 67% of maternal deaths, 64% of neonatal deaths, and 65% of stillbirths, allowing 4·3 million lives to be saved annually by 2035. These deaths averted would be particularly concentrated in the group B countries, which currently account for a large proportion of the world's population and have high mortality rates compared with group C., Interpretation: Midwives can help to substantially reduce maternal and neonatal mortality and stillbirths in LMICs. However, to realise this potential, midwives need to have skills and competencies in line with recommendations from the International Confederation of Midwives, to be part of a team of sufficient size and skill, and to work in an enabling environment. Our study highlights the potential of midwives but there are many challenges to the achievement of this potential. If increased coverage of midwife-delivered interventions can be achieved, health systems will be better able to provide effective coverage of essential sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn, and adolescent health interventions., Funding: New Venture Fund., (© 2021 This is an Open Access article published under the CC BY 3.0 IGO license which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In any use of this article, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organisation, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article's original URL.)

The worst rates of preventable mortality and morbidity among women and children occur in humanitarian settings. Reliable, easy-to-use, standardized, and efficient tools for data collection are needed to enable different organizations to plan and act in the most effective way. In 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) commissioned a review of tools for data collection on the health of women and children in humanitarian emergencies. An update of this review was conducted to investigate whether the recommendations made were taken forward and to identify newly developed tools. Fifty-three studies and 5 new tools were identified. Only 1 study used 1 of the tools identified in our search. Little has been done in terms of the previous recommendations. Authors may not be aware of the availability of such tools and of the importance of documenting their data using the same methods as other researchers. Currently used tools may not be suitable for use in humanitarian settings or may not include the domains of the authors' interests. The development of standardized instruments should be done with all key workers in the area and could be coordinated by the WHO.

Objectives: To map the integration of existing maternal tetanus immunization programmes within antenatal care (ANC) services for pregnant women in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and to identify and understand the challenges, barriers and facilitators associated with high performance maternal vaccine service delivery., Design: A mixed methods, cross sectional study with four data collection phases including a desk review, online survey, telephone and face-to-face interviews and in country visits was undertaken between 2016 and 2018. Associations of different service delivery process components with protection at birth (PAB) and with country groups were established. PAB was defined as the proportion of neonates protected at birth against neonatal tetanus. Regression analysis and structural equation modelling was used to assess associations of different variables with maternal tetanus immunization coverage. Latent class analysis (LCA), was used to group country performance for maternal immunization, and to address the problem of multicollinearity., Setting: LMICs., Results: The majority of LMICs had a policy on recommended number of ANC visits, however most were yet to implement the WHO guidelines recommending eight ANC contacts. Countries that recommended > 4 ANC contacts were more likely to have high PAB > 90%. Passive disease surveillance was the most common form of disease surveillance performed but the maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality indicators recorded differed between countries. The presence of user fees for antenatal care and maternal immunization was significantly associated with lower PAB (<90%)., Conclusions: Recommendations include implementing the current WHO ANC guideline to facilitate increased opportunities for vaccination during each pregnancy. Improved utilisation of ANC services by increasing the demand side by increasing the quality of services, reducing any associated costs and supporting user fee exemptions, or the supply side can also enhance utilisation of ANC services which are positioned as an ideal platform for delivery of maternal vaccines., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Monitoring the implementation and impact of routine antenatal care (ANC), as described in the new World Health Organization (WHO) ANC model, requires indicators that go beyond the previously used global benchmark indicator of four or more ANC visits. To enable consistent monitoring of ANC content and care processes and to provide guidance to countries and health facilities, WHO developed an ANC monitoring framework. This framework builds on a conceptual framework for quality ANC and a scoping review of ANC indicators that mapped existing indicators related to recommendations in the new WHO ANC model. Based on the scoping review and following an iterative and consultative process, we developed a monitoring framework consisting of core indicators recommended for monitoring ANC recommendations in all settings, as well as a menu of additional measures. Finally, a research agenda highlights areas where ANC recommendations exist, but measures require further development. Nine core indicators can already be monitored globally and/or nationally, depending on the preferred data sources. Two core indicators (experience of care, ultrasound scan before 24 weeks) are included as placeholders requiring priority by the research agenda. Six context-specific indicators are appropriate for national and subnational monitoring in various settings based on specific guidance. Thirty-five additional indicators may be relevant and desirable for monitoring, depending on programme priorities. Monitoring implementation of the new WHO ANC model and the outcomes of routine ANC require greater attention to the measurement of ANC content and care processes as well as women's experience of ANC., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (©World Health Organization 2020. Licensee BMJ.)

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., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Intervention coverage-the proportion of the population with a health-care need who receive care-does not account for intervention quality and potentially overestimates health benefits of services provided to populations. Effective coverage introduces the dimension of quality of care to the measurement of intervention coverage. Many definitions and methodological approaches to measuring effective coverage have been developed, resulting in confusion over definition, calculation, interpretation, and monitoring of these measures. To develop a consensus on the definition and measurement of effective coverage for maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health and nutrition (MNCAHN), WHO and UNICEF convened a group of experts, the Effective Coverage Think Tank Group, to make recommendations for standardising the definition of effective coverage, measurement approaches for effective coverage, indicators of effective coverage in MNCAHN, and to develop future effective coverage research priorities. Via a series of consultations, the group recommended that effective coverage be defined as the proportion of a population in need of a service that resulted in a positive health outcome from the service. The proposed effective coverage measures and care cascade steps can be applied to further develop effective coverage measures across a broad range of MNCAHN services. Furthermore, advances in measurement of effective coverage could improve monitoring efforts towards the achievement of universal health coverage., (Copyright © 2020 This is an Open Access article published under the CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 IGO license which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In any use of this article, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organisation, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article's original URL. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: This article is part of a series proposed by Countdown to 2030 for Women’s, Children’s and Adolescents’ Health and the Partnership for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (PMNCH) hosted by the World Health Organization and commissioned by The BMJ, which peer reviewed, edited, and made the decisions to publish. Open access fees are funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and PMNCH.

Objective: Over time, we have seen a major evolution of measurement initiatives, indicators and methods, such that today a wide range of maternal and perinatal indicators are monitored and new indicators are under development. Monitoring global progress in maternal and newborn health outcomes and development has been dominated in recent decades by efforts to set, measure and achieve global goals and targets: the Millennium Development Goals followed by the Sustainable Development Goals. This paper aims to review, reflect and learn on accelerated progress towards global goals and events, including universal health coverage, and better tracking of maternal and newborn health outcomes., Methods: We searched for literature of key events and global initiatives over recent decades related to maternal and newborn health. The searches were conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE and the World Health Organization Global Index Medicus., Results: This paper describes global key events and initiatives over recent decades showing how maternal and neonatal mortality and morbidity, and stillbirths, have been viewed, when they have achieved higher priority on the global agenda, and how they have been measured, monitored and reported. Despite substantial improvements, the enormous maternal and newborn health disparities that persist within and between countries indicate the urgent need to renew the focus on reducing inequities., Conclusion: The review has featured the long story of the progress in monitoring improving maternal and newborn health outcomes, but has also underlined current gaps and significant inequities. The many global initiatives described in this paper have highlighted the magnitude of the problems and have built the political momentum over the years for effectively addressing maternal and newborn health and well-being, with particular focus on improved measurement and monitoring., (© 2019 World Health Organization. Tropical Medicine & International Health Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: A large number of indicators are currently used to monitor the state of maternal and newborn health, including those capturing dimensions of health system and input, care access and availability, care quality and safety, coverage and outcomes, and impact. Validity of these indicators is a key issue in the process of assessing indicator performance and suitability. This paper aims to understand the meaning of indicator validity in the field of maternal and newborn health, and to identify key recommendations for future research., Methods: This qualitative study used purposive sampling to identify key informants until thematic saturation was achieved. We interviewed 32 respondents from a variety of backgrounds using semi-structured interviews covering five themes: the meaning of indicator validity, methodological approaches to assessing validity, acceptable levels of indicator validity, gaps in validation research, and recommendations for addressing these gaps. Interview transcripts were analysed data using thematic content approach., Results: Three conceptually different definitions of indicator validity were described by respondents. They considered indicator validity to encompass meaning and potential to spur action, going beyond diagnostic validity. Indicator validation was seen as an ongoing process of building and synthesising a wide range of evidence rather than a one-size-fits-all cut-off in diagnostic validity tests. Gaps identified included assessing validity of indicators of quality of care and indicators based on facility-level data, as well as expanding studies to a broader range of global settings. The key recommendation was to develop a coordinated approach to summarising and evaluating research on indicator validity, including capacity building in appraising and communicating the available evidence for country-specific needs., Conclusion: The findings will inform future recommendations around indicator testing and validation., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.