Universal birth registration by 2030: progress and challenges

Hereward, Mark; Williams, Cornelius; Petrowski, Nicole; Cappa, Claudia

doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(19)33101-0

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Investment in CRVS systems in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is increasing [ 6 ]. Particular attention has been placed on birth registration, which is the term used to refer to registration of live births, leading to substantial improvements over the past decade, with three out of four children under the age of five worldwide now registered with civil authorities [ 3 , 6 – 9 ]. The majority (87%) of the estimated 166 million unregistered children under-5 years are in southern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa and wide socio-economic inequalities and gaps between urban and rural areas remain [ 3 , 10 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Birth, stillbirth and death registration data completeness, quality and utility in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study

Kasasa

Natukwatsa

Galiwango

et al. 2021

Popul Health Metrics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Birth registration is a child’s first right. Registration of live births, stillbirths and deaths is foundational for national planning. Completeness of birth registration for live births in low- and middle-income countries is measured through population-based surveys which do not currently include completeness of stillbirth or death registration. Methods The EN-INDEPTH population-based survey of women of reproductive age was undertaken in five Health and Demographic Surveillance System sites in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau and Uganda (2017–2018). In four African sites, we included new/modified questions regarding registration for 1177 stillbirths and 11,881 livebirths (1333 neonatal deaths and 10,548 surviving the neonatal period). Questions were evaluated for completeness of responses, data quality, time to administer and estimates of registration completeness using descriptive statistics. Timing of birth registration, factors associated with non-registration and reported barriers were assessed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression. Results Almost all women, irrespective of their baby’s survival, responded to registration questions, taking an average of < 1 min. Reported completeness of birth registration was 30.7% (6.1-53.5%) for babies surviving the neonatal period, compared to 1.7% for neonatal deaths (0.4–5.7%). Women were able to report age at birth registration for 93.6% of babies. Non-registration of babies surviving the neonatal period was significantly higher for home-born children (aOR 1.43 (95% CI 1.27–1.60)) and in Dabat (Ethiopia) (aOR 4.11 (95% CI 3.37–5.01)). Other socio-demographic factors associated with non-registration included younger age of mother, more prior births, little or no education, and lower socio-economic status. Neonatal death registration questions were feasible (100% women responded; only 1% did not know), revealing extremely low completeness with only 1.2% of neonatal deaths reported as registered. Despite > 70% of stillbirths occurring in facilities, only 2.5% were reported as registered. Conclusions Questions on birth, stillbirth and death registration were feasible in a household survey. Completeness of birth registration is low in all four sites, but stillbirth and neonatal death registration was very low. Closing the registration gap amongst facility births could increase registration of both livebirths and facility deaths, including stillbirths, but will require co-ordination between civil registration systems and the often over-stretched health sector. Investment and innovation is required to capture birth and especially deaths in both facility and community systems.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Birth, stillbirth and death registration data completeness, quality and utility in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study

Kasasa

Natukwatsa

Galiwango

et al. 2021

Popul Health Metrics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Civil registration and vital statistics (CRVS) are another important source of population‐level information on births. Although many countries are investing in these systems, coverage of birth registration remain incomplete in many LMICS, 9,10 only some capture information on birthweight and fewer include gestational age.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

National routine data for low birthweight and preterm births: Systematic data quality assessment for United Nations member states (2000–2020)

Okwaraji,

Bradley,

Ohuma

et al. 2023

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveLow birthweight (<2500 g) and preterm birth (<37 weeks) are markers of newborn vulnerability. To facilitate informed decisions about investments in prevention and care, it is imperative to enhance data quality and use. Hence, the objective of this study is to systematically assess the quality of data concerning low birthweight and preterm births within routine administrative data sources.DesignSystematic data quality assessment by adopting the WHO Data Quality Framework.SettingNational routine data system from UN member states.PopulationLivebirths.MethodsNational routine administrative data on low birthweight and preterm births for 195 countries from 2000 to 2020 were systematically collated, totalling >700 million live births. The WHO data quality framework was adapted to undertake standardised data quality assessments.Main outcome measuresAvailability, reporting quality, internal and external consistency of low birthweight and preterm data.ResultsMost United States Member States (64%: 124/195) had national data on low birthweight and (40%: 82/195) had data on preterm birth. Routine data system reporting was highest in North America, Australasia and Europe, where more than 95% live births had data on low birthweight and over 75% had data preterm births. In contrast, data reporting was lowest in sub‐Saharan Africa (13% for low birthweight, 8% for preterm births) and Southern Asia (16% for low birthweight, 5% for preterm births). Most countries collect individual‐level data; but, aggregate data reporting from hospital‐based systems remain common in sub‐Saharan Africa and Southern Asia. While data quality was generally high in North America, Australasia and Europe, gaps remain in the availability of gestational age metadata. Consistency between low birthweight and preterm rates were poor in Southern Asia and sub‐Saharan Africa regions across time. There was high external consistency between low birthweight rates obtained from routine administrative data compared with low birthweight rates obtained from survey data for countries with high data quality.ConclusionsSub‐Saharan Africa and South Asia countries have data gaps but also opportunities for rapid progress. Most births occure in facilities, electronic health information systems already include low birthweight, and adding accurate gestational age including with ultrasound assessment is becoming increasingly attainable. Moving toward the collection of individual level data would enable monitoring of quality of care and longer‐term outcomes. This is crucial for every child and family and essential for measuring progress towards relevant sustainable development goals. The assessment will inform countries’ actions for data quality improvement at national level and use of data for impact.

show abstract

“…Fifty-seven percent of them are in sub-Saharan Africa. 8 , 9 Ethiopia is one of five sub-Saharan African countries responsible for half of unregistered children under the age of five worldwide. Therefore, if progress is not accelerated, by 2030 the number of unregistered children will become more by 100 million.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Birth Notification and Registration: A Survey on Knowledge and Attitude Among Postpartum Women in Northwest Ethiopia

Alemu,

Wubneh,

Yute

et al. 2023

RMHP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Birth registration is the official and permanent recording of a child’s birth within a civil registry, according to the legal requirements of a country. Although the Sustainable Development Goal targets providing legal identity for all by 2030, birth registration levels remain critically low. Therefore, this study aimed to assess postpartum women’s knowledge of and attitudes towards birth registration and its associated factors in Northwest Ethiopia. Methods An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted from September 1–30/2022 among 422 participants who were selected using systematic random sampling. A pretested and structured interviewer-administered questionnaire was used to collect the data. Data were entered into EPI Info 7 and analyzed using SPSS version 25. A multivariable logistic regression model was fitted to identify the factors associated with knowledge and attitudes towards birth registration. Variables with a p-value of <0.05 were considered to be significantly associated with the dependent variable. Results Among the participants, 41.7% had good knowledge of birth registration. Less than one-quarter (22.6%) had a favorable attitude towards birth registration. Having a college and above educational level (AOR = 4.01, 95% CI: 2.3–8.4), being urban resident (AOR = 3.4, 95% CI: 3.1–7.4) and full exposure to media (AOR = 3.02, 95% CI: 1.5–5.7) were associated with knowledge of birth registration. Having primary educational status (AOR = 2.04, 95% CI: 2.96–8.31), being fully exposed to different media (AOR = 2.32, 95% CI: 1.22–11.36) and having four or more antenatal care visits (AOR = 5.10, 95% CI: 1.18–14.35) were associated with favorable attitudes towards birth registration. Conclusion Postpartum women had poor knowledge of and attitudes towards birth registration. Increasing educated women at all levels, awareness rising through different media and integration of birth registration with antenatal care is crucial for realizing the registration of all births by 2030.

show abstract

Universal birth registration by 2030: progress and challenges

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Birth, stillbirth and death registration data completeness, quality and utility in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study

Birth, stillbirth and death registration data completeness, quality and utility in population-based surveys: EN-INDEPTH study

National routine data for low birthweight and preterm births: Systematic data quality assessment for United Nations member states (2000–2020)

Birth Notification and Registration: A Survey on Knowledge and Attitude Among Postpartum Women in Northwest Ethiopia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About