↓ Skip to main content

Can a Village Headman Use an Electronic Village Register and a Simplified Community-Based Verbal Autopsy Tool to Record Numbers and Causes of Death in Rural Malawi?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Can a Village Headman Use an Electronic Village Register and a Simplified Community-Based Verbal Autopsy Tool to Record Numbers and Causes of Death in Rural Malawi?
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, September 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00246
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chimango V. T. Munthali, Sophie Kang'oma, Khazgani Nasasara, Lindiwe M. Zaina, Chawanangwa Lupafya, Jacob Mziya, Anthony D. Harries, Kudakwashe C. Takarinda, Martha Kwataine, Isaac Dambula, Simeon Yosefe

Abstract

Introduction: Most people in Africa die without appearing in official vital statistics records. To improve this situation, Malawi has introduced solar-powered electronic village registers (EVR), managed by village headmen, to record birth and death information for production of vital statistics. The EVR is deployed in 83 villages in Traditional Authority Mtema, Lilongwe, which is an area without electricity. In 17 villages, village headmen were also trained to use a simple verbal autopsy (VA) tool adapted from one developed by the World Health Organization (WHO). Study objectives were to (i) document numbers and causes of death occurring in 17 villages between April 2016 and September 2017, and (ii) assess percentage measures of agreement on causes of death as recorded by village headmen using a simple VA tool and by a team of health surveillance assistant (HSA)/medical doctor using the WHO VA tool. Methods: The study was in two-parts: (i) a cross-sectional study using secondary data from the EVR; (ii) primary data collection study comparing causes of death obtained by village headmen using a simple VA tool and by HSA/medical doctor using the WHO VA tool. Results: Over 18 months, 120 deaths were recorded by EVR in 14,264 residents - crude annual death rate 5.6/1,000 population. Median age at death was 43 years with 69 (58%) deaths being in males. Death occurred at home (75%) and at health facility (25%). Malaria, diarrhoeal disease, pulmonary tuberculosis, acute respiratory infection, and stroke accounted for 56% of deaths recorded by village headmen using the simple VA tool. Causes of death between village headmen and the HSA/medical doctor team were compared for 107 deaths. There was full agreement in causes of death in 33 (31%) deaths, mostly for malaria, severe anemia, intentional self-harm, cancer, and epilepsy. Unknown-sudden death and sepsis recorded by the HSA/medical doctor team were responsible for most disagreements. Conclusion: It is feasible for village headmen in rural Malawi to use an EVR and simple VA tool to document numbers and causes of deaths. More work is needed to improve accuracy of causes of death by village headmen.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 86 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 10 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Student > Master 9 10%
Researcher 6 7%
Other 5 6%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 32 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 9%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 32 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 September 2018.
All research outputs
#5,728,830
of 23,120,280 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#1,851
of 10,457 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,238
of 335,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#41
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,120,280 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,457 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,411 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.