AI Article Synopsis

  • - The current methods for measuring coverage in reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health (RMNCH+N) fail to account for service quality, making it hard to assess overall health improvements.
  • - A new six-step framework proposes a systematic approach to measure both crude and quality-adjusted coverage, identifying gaps between the two across various RMNCH+N interventions.
  • - A review of 8,103 articles highlighted a significant variability in methodologies and found that quality-adjusted coverage levels were considerably lower than crude coverage, emphasizing the need for standardization and better data collection in future research.

Article Abstract

Current methods for measuring intervention coverage for reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health and nutrition (RMNCH+N) do not adequately capture the quality of services delivered. Without information on the quality of care, it is difficult to assess whether services provided will result in expected health improvements. We propose a six-step coverage framework, starting from a target population to (1) service contact, (2) likelihood of services, (3) crude coverage, (4) quality-adjusted coverage, (5) user-adherence-adjusted coverage and (6) outcome-adjusted coverage. We support our framework with a comprehensive review of published literature on effective coverage for RMNCH+N interventions since 2000. We screened 8103 articles and selected 36 from which we summarised current methods for measuring effective coverage and computed the gaps between 'crude' coverage measures and quality-adjusted measures. Our review showed considerable variability in data sources, indicator definitions and analytical approaches for effective coverage measurement. Large gaps between crude coverage and quality-adjusted coverage levels were evident, ranging from an average of 10 to 38 percentage points across the RMNCH+N interventions assessed. We define effective coverage as the proportion of individuals experiencing health gains from a service among those who need the service, and distinguish this from other indicators along a coverage cascade that make quality adjustments. We propose a systematic approach for analysis along six steps in the cascade. Research to date shows substantial drops in effective delivery of care across these steps, but variation in methods limits comparability of the results. Advancement in coverage measurement will require standardisation of effective coverage terminology and improvements in data collection and methodological approaches.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6590972PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-001297DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

effective coverage
24
coverage
18
current methods
8
methods measuring
8
crude coverage
8
coverage quality-adjusted
8
quality-adjusted coverage
8
rmnch+n interventions
8
coverage measurement
8
effective
7

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!