Stillbirths including intrapartum timing: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.

BACKGROUND: An estimated >2 million babies stillborn around the world each year lack visibility. Low- and middle-income countries carry 84% of the burden yet have the least data. Most births are now in facilities, hence routine register-recording presents an opportunity to improve counting of stillbirths, but research is limited, particularly regarding accuracy. This paper evaluates register-recorded measurement of hospital stillbirths, classification accuracy, and barriers and enablers to routine recording. METHODS: The EN-BIRTH mixed-methods, observational study took place in five hospitals in Bangladesh, Nepal and Tanzania (2017-2018). Clinical observers collected time-stamped data on perinatal care and birth outcomes as gold standard. To assess accuracy of routine register-recorded stillbirth rates, we compared birth outcomes recorded in labour ward registers to observation data. We calculated absolute rate differences and individual-level validation metrics (sensitivity, specificity, percent agreement). We assessed misclassification of stillbirths with neonatal deaths. To examine stillbirth appearance (fresh/macerated) as a proxy for timing of death, we compared appearance to observed timing of intrauterine death based on heart rate at admission. RESULTS: 23,072 births were observed including 550 stillbirths. Register-recorded completeness of birth outcomes was > 90%. The observed study stillbirth rate ranged from 3.8 (95%CI = 2.0,7.0) to 50.3 (95%CI = 43.6,58.0)/1000 total births and was under-estimated in routine registers by 1.1 to 7.3 /1000 total births (register: observed ratio 0.9-0.7). Specificity of register-recorded birth outcomes was > 99% and sensitivity varied between hospitals, ranging from 77.7-86.1%. Percent agreement between observer-assessed birth outcome and register-recorded birth outcome was very high across all hospitals and all modes of birth (> 98%). Fresh or macerated stillbirth appearance was a poor proxy for timing of stillbirth. While there were similar numbers of stillbirths misclassified as neonatal deaths (17/430) and neonatal deaths misclassified as stillbirths (21/36), neonatal deaths were proportionately more likely to be misclassified as stillbirths (58.3% vs 4.0%). Enablers to more accurate register-recording of birth outcome included supervision and data use. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show these routine registers accurately recorded stillbirths. Fresh/macerated appearance was a poor proxy for intrapartum stillbirths, hence more focus on measuring fetal heart rate is crucial to classification and importantly reduction in these preventable deaths

Survey of women's report for 33 maternal and newborn indicators: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.

BACKGROUND: Population-based household surveys, notably the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS), remain the main source of maternal and newborn health data for many low- and middle-income countries. As part of the Every Newborn Birth Indicators Research Tracking in Hospitals (EN-BIRTH) study, this paper focuses on testing validity of measurement of maternal and newborn indicators around the time of birth (intrapartum and postnatal) in survey-report. METHODS: EN-BIRTH was an observational study testing the validity of measurement for selected maternal and newborn indicators in five secondary/tertiary hospitals in Bangladesh, Nepal and Tanzania, conducted from July 2017 to July 2018. We compared women's report at exit survey with the gold standard of direct observation or verification from clinical records for women with vaginal births. Population-level validity was assessed by validity ratios (survey-reported coverage: observer-assessed coverage). Individual-level accuracy was assessed by sensitivity, specificity and percent agreement. We tested indicators already in DHS/MICS as well as indicators with potential to be included in population-based surveys, notably the first validation for small and sick newborn care indicators. RESULTS: 33 maternal and newborn indicators were evaluated. Amongst nine indicators already present in DHS/MICS, validity ratios for baby dried or wiped, birthweight measured, low birthweight, and sex of baby (female) were between 0.90-1.10. Instrumental birth, skin-to-skin contact, and early initiation of breastfeeding were highly overestimated by survey-report (2.04-4.83) while umbilical cord care indicators were massively underestimated (0.14-0.22). Amongst 24 indicators not currently in DHS/MICS, two newborn contact indicators (kangaroo mother care 1.00, admission to neonatal unit 1.01) had high survey-reported coverage amongst admitted newborns and high sensitivity. The remaining indicators did not perform well and some had very high "don't know" responses. CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed low validity for collecting many maternal and newborn indicators through an exit survey instrument, even with short recall periods among women with vaginal births. Household surveys are already at risk of overload, and some specific clinical care indicators do not perform well and may be under-powered. Given that approximately 80% of births worldwide occur in facilities, routine registers should also be explored to track coverage of key maternal and newborn health interventions, particularly for clinical care

Neonatal resuscitation: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.

BACKGROUND: Annually, 14 million newborns require stimulation to initiate breathing at birth and 6 million require bag-mask-ventilation (BMV). Many countries have invested in facility-based neonatal resuscitation equipment and training. However, there is no consistent tracking for neonatal resuscitation coverage. METHODS: The EN-BIRTH study, in five hospitals in Bangladesh, Nepal, and Tanzania (2017-2018), collected time-stamped data for care around birth, including neonatal resuscitation. Researchers surveyed women and extracted data from routine labour ward registers. To assess accuracy, we compared gold standard observed coverage to survey-reported and register-recorded coverage, using absolute difference, validity ratios, and individual-level validation metrics (sensitivity, specificity, percent agreement). We analysed two resuscitation numerators (stimulation, BMV) and three denominators (live births and fresh stillbirths, non-crying, non-breathing). We also examined timeliness of BMV. Qualitative data were collected from health workers and data collectors regarding barriers and enablers to routine recording of resuscitation. RESULTS: Among 22,752 observed births, 5330 (23.4%) babies did not cry and 3860 (17.0%) did not breathe in the first minute after birth. 16.2% (n = 3688) of babies were stimulated and 4.4% (n = 998) received BMV. Survey-report underestimated coverage of stimulation and BMV. Four of five labour ward registers captured resuscitation numerators. Stimulation had variable accuracy (sensitivity 7.5-40.8%, specificity 66.8-99.5%), BMV accuracy was higher (sensitivity 12.4-48.4%, specificity > 93%), with small absolute differences between observed and recorded BMV. Accuracy did not vary by denominator option. < 1% of BMV was initiated within 1 min of birth. Enablers to register recording included training and data use while barriers included register design, documentation burden, and time pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Population-based surveys are unlikely to be useful for measuring resuscitation coverage given low validity of exit-survey report. Routine labour ward registers have potential to accurately capture BMV as the numerator. Measuring the true denominator for clinical need is complex; newborns may require BMV if breathing ineffectively or experiencing apnoea after initial drying/stimulation or subsequently at any time. Further denominator research is required to evaluate non-crying as a potential alternative in the context of respectful care. Measuring quality gaps, notably timely provision of resuscitation, is crucial for programme improvement and impact, but unlikely to be feasible in routine systems, requiring audits and special studies

Evaluations of biomarkers associated with 5-FU sensitivity for non-small-cell lung cancer patients postoperatively treated with UFT

The sensitivity to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) has been reported to be associated with target molecule thymidylate synthase (TS), fluoropyrimidine-metabolising enzymes such as orotate phosphoribosyltransferase (OPRT), and dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD). We performed an immunohistochemical study on the clinical significance of TS, OPRT, and DPD expression using 151 resected non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients postoperatively treated with a combination of tegafur and uracil (UFT). Eighty-two carcinomas were TS-positive, 105 carcinomas were OPRT-positive, 68 carcinomas were DPD-positive. No correlation was observed in the HSCORE between the TS and OPRT expression (r=0.203), between the TS and DPD expression (r=0.098), or between the OPRT and DPD expression (r=0.074). Regarding the survival of NSCLC patients treated with UFT, the 5-year survival rate of patients with TS-negative tumours was significantly higher than that with TS-positive tumours (P=0.0133). The 5-year survival rate of patients with OPRT-positive stage II to III tumours was significantly higher than that with OPRT-negative stage II to III tumours (P=0.0145). In addition, the 5-year survival rate of patients with DPD-negative tumours was also significantly higher than that with DPD-positive tumours (P=0.0004). A Cox multivariate regression analysis revealed the TS status (hazard ratio 2.663; P=0.0003), OPRT status (hazard ratio 2.543; P=0.0005), and DPD status (hazard ratio 2.840; P<0.0001) to all be significant prognostic factors for the survival of resected NSCLC patients postoperatively treated with UFT

"Every Newborn-BIRTH" protocol: observational study validating indicators for coverage and quality of maternal and newborn health care in Bangladesh, Nepal and Tanzania.

Background: To achieve Sustainable Development Goals and Universal Health Coverage, programmatic data are essential. The Every Newborn Action Plan, agreed by all United Nations member states and >80 development partners, includes an ambitious Measurement Improvement Roadmap. Quality of care at birth is prioritised by both Every Newborn and Ending Preventable Maternal Mortality strategies, hence metrics need to advance from health service contact alone, to content of care. As facility births increase, monitoring using routine facility data in DHIS2 has potential, yet validation research has mainly focussed on maternal recall surveys. The Every Newborn - Birth Indicators Research Tracking in Hospitals (EN-BIRTH) study aims to validate selected newborn and maternal indicators for routine tracking of coverage and quality of facility-based care for use at district, national and global levels. Methods: EN-BIRTH is an observational study including >20 000 facility births in three countries (Tanzania, Bangladesh and Nepal) to validate selected indicators. Direct clinical observation will be compared with facility register data and a pre-discharge maternal recall survey for indicators including: uterotonic administration, immediate newborn care, neonatal resuscitation and Kangaroo mother care. Indicators including neonatal infection management and antenatal corticosteroid administration, which cannot be easily observed, will be validated using inpatient records. Trained clinical observers in Labour/Delivery ward, Operation theatre, and Kangaroo mother care ward/areas will collect data using a tablet-based customised data capturing application. Sensitivity will be calculated for numerators of all indicators and specificity for those numerators with adequate information. Other objectives include comparison of denominator options (ie, true target population or surrogates) and quality of care analyses, especially regarding intervention timing. Barriers and enablers to routine recording and data usage will be assessed by data flow assessments, quantitative and qualitative analyses. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first large, multi-country study validating facility-based routine data compared to direct observation for maternal and newborn care, designed to provide evidence to inform selection of a core list of indicators recommended for inclusion in national DHIS2. Availability and use of such data are fundamental to drive progress towards ending the annual 5.5 million preventable stillbirths, maternal and newborn deaths.Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (CIFF)Swedish Research CouncilUnited States Agency for International DevelopmentSaving Newborn Lives/Save the ChildrenWHOBill & Melinda Gates Foundatio

Worldwide trends in body-mass index, underweight, overweight, and obesity from 1975 to 2016: a pooled analysis of 2416 population-based measurement studies in 128·9 million children, adolescents, and adults.

BACKGROUND: Underweight, overweight, and obesity in childhood and adolescence are associated with adverse health consequences throughout the life-course. Our aim was to estimate worldwide trends in mean body-mass index (BMI) and a comprehensive set of BMI categories that cover underweight to obesity in children and adolescents, and to compare trends with those of adults. METHODS: We pooled 2416 population-based studies with measurements of height and weight on 128·9 million participants aged 5 years and older, including 31·5 million aged 5-19 years. We used a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate trends from 1975 to 2016 in 200 countries for mean BMI and for prevalence of BMI in the following categories for children and adolescents aged 5-19 years: more than 2 SD below the median of the WHO growth reference for children and adolescents (referred to as moderate and severe underweight hereafter), 2 SD to more than 1 SD below the median (mild underweight), 1 SD below the median to 1 SD above the median (healthy weight), more than 1 SD to 2 SD above the median (overweight but not obese), and more than 2 SD above the median (obesity). FINDINGS: Regional change in age-standardised mean BMI in girls from 1975 to 2016 ranged from virtually no change (-0·01 kg/m2 per decade; 95% credible interval -0·42 to 0·39, posterior probability [PP] of the observed decrease being a true decrease=0·5098) in eastern Europe to an increase of 1·00 kg/m2 per decade (0·69-1·35, PP>0·9999) in central Latin America and an increase of 0·95 kg/m2 per decade (0·64-1·25, PP>0·9999) in Polynesia and Micronesia. The range for boys was from a non-significant increase of 0·09 kg/m2 per decade (-0·33 to 0·49, PP=0·6926) in eastern Europe to an increase of 0·77 kg/m2 per decade (0·50-1·06, PP>0·9999) in Polynesia and Micronesia. Trends in mean BMI have recently flattened in northwestern Europe and the high-income English-speaking and Asia-Pacific regions for both sexes, southwestern Europe for boys, and central and Andean Latin America for girls. By contrast, the rise in BMI has accelerated in east and south Asia for both sexes, and southeast Asia for boys. Global age-standardised prevalence of obesity increased from 0·7% (0·4-1·2) in 1975 to 5·6% (4·8-6·5) in 2016 in girls, and from 0·9% (0·5-1·3) in 1975 to 7·8% (6·7-9·1) in 2016 in boys; the prevalence of moderate and severe underweight decreased from 9·2% (6·0-12·9) in 1975 to 8·4% (6·8-10·1) in 2016 in girls and from 14·8% (10·4-19·5) in 1975 to 12·4% (10·3-14·5) in 2016 in boys. Prevalence of moderate and severe underweight was highest in India, at 22·7% (16·7-29·6) among girls and 30·7% (23·5-38·0) among boys. Prevalence of obesity was more than 30% in girls in Nauru, the Cook Islands, and Palau; and boys in the Cook Islands, Nauru, Palau, Niue, and American Samoa in 2016. Prevalence of obesity was about 20% or more in several countries in Polynesia and Micronesia, the Middle East and north Africa, the Caribbean, and the USA. In 2016, 75 (44-117) million girls and 117 (70-178) million boys worldwide were moderately or severely underweight. In the same year, 50 (24-89) million girls and 74 (39-125) million boys worldwide were obese. INTERPRETATION: The rising trends in children's and adolescents' BMI have plateaued in many high-income countries, albeit at high levels, but have accelerated in parts of Asia, with trends no longer correlated with those of adults. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, AstraZeneca Young Health Programme

Rising rural body-mass index is the main driver of the global obesity epidemic in adults

Body-mass index (BMI) has increased steadily in most countries in parallel with a rise in the proportion of the population who live in cities. This has led to a widely reported view that urbanization is one of the most important drivers of the global rise in obesity. Here we use 2,009 population-based studies, with measurements of height and weight in more than 112 million adults, to report national, regional and global trends in mean BMI segregated by place of residence (a rural or urban area) from 1985 to 2017. We show that, contrary to the dominant paradigm, more than 55% of the global rise in mean BMI from 1985 to 2017—and more than 80% in some low- and middle-income regions—was due to increases in BMI in rural areas. This large contribution stems from the fact that, with the exception of women in sub-Saharan Africa, BMI is increasing at the same rate or faster in rural areas than in cities in low- and middle-income regions. These trends have in turn resulted in a closing—and in some countries reversal—of the gap in BMI between urban and rural areas in low- and middle-income countries, especially for women. In high-income and industrialized countries, we noted a persistently higher rural BMI, especially for women. There is an urgent need for an integrated approach to rural nutrition that enhances financial and physical access to healthy foods, to avoid replacing the rural undernutrition disadvantage in poor countries with a more general malnutrition disadvantage that entails excessive consumption of low-quality calories

Trends in adult body-mass index in 200 countries from 1975 to 2014: a pooled analysis of 1698 population-based measurement studies with 19.2 million participants

Background Underweight and severe and morbid obesity are associated with highly elevated risks of adverse health outcomes. We estimated trends in mean body-mass index (BMI), which characterises its population distribution, and in the prevalences of a complete set of BMI categories for adults in all countries. Methods We analysed, with use of a consistent protocol, population-based studies that had measured height and weight in adults aged 18 years and older. We applied a Bayesian hierarchical model to these data to estimate trends from 1975 to 2014 in mean BMI and in the prevalences of BMI categories (<18·5 kg/m2 [underweight], 18·5 kg/m2 to <20 kg/m2, 20 kg/m2 to <25 kg/m2, 25 kg/m2 to <30 kg/m2, 30 kg/m2 to <35 kg/m2, 35 kg/m2 to <40 kg/m2, ≥40 kg/m2 [morbid obesity]), by sex in 200 countries and territories, organised in 21 regions. We calculated the posterior probability of meeting the target of halting by 2025 the rise in obesity at its 2010 levels, if post-2000 trends continue. Findings We used 1698 population-based data sources, with more than 19·2 million adult participants (9·9 million men and 9·3 million women) in 186 of 200 countries for which estimates were made. Global age-standardised mean BMI increased from 21·7 kg/m2 (95% credible interval 21·3–22·1) in 1975 to 24·2 kg/m2 (24·0–24·4) in 2014 in men, and from 22·1 kg/m2 (21·7–22·5) in 1975 to 24·4 kg/m2 (24·2–24·6) in 2014 in women. Regional mean BMIs in 2014 for men ranged from 21·4 kg/m2 in central Africa and south Asia to 29·2 kg/m2 (28·6–29·8) in Polynesia and Micronesia; for women the range was from 21·8 kg/m2 (21·4–22·3) in south Asia to 32·2 kg/m2 (31·5–32·8) in Polynesia and Micronesia. Over these four decades, age-standardised global prevalence of underweight decreased from 13·8% (10·5–17·4) to 8·8% (7·4–10·3) in men and from 14·6% (11·6–17·9) to 9·7% (8·3–11·1) in women. South Asia had the highest prevalence of underweight in 2014, 23·4% (17·8–29·2) in men and 24·0% (18·9–29·3) in women. Age-standardised prevalence of obesity increased from 3·2% (2·4–4·1) in 1975 to 10·8% (9·7–12·0) in 2014 in men, and from 6·4% (5·1–7·8) to 14·9% (13·6–16·1) in women. 2·3% (2·0–2·7) of the world's men and 5·0% (4·4–5·6) of women were severely obese (ie, have BMI ≥35 kg/m2). Globally, prevalence of morbid obesity was 0·64% (0·46–0·86) in men and 1·6% (1·3–1·9) in women. Interpretation If post-2000 trends continue, the probability of meeting the global obesity target is virtually zero. Rather, if these trends continue, by 2025, global obesity prevalence will reach 18% in men and surpass 21% in women; severe obesity will surpass 6% in men and 9% in women. Nonetheless, underweight remains prevalent in the world's poorest regions, especially in south Asia