The objective of this study was to compare the avoidability of infant deaths according to different classification methods. This was a descriptive comparative study from 2006 to 2013 in Espírito Santo State, Brazil, focusing on the classification of 5,316 infant deaths according to five different methods. The methods of the International Collaborative Effort on Infant Mortality (ICE) and the SEADE Foundation correctly classified the highest proportions of deaths as avoidable versus unavoidable (94.6% and 94.4% correct classification, respectively). Most deaths resulted from quality problems in prenatal, childbirth, and postpartum care, regardless of which classification method was used. There were also considerable numbers of deaths from "ill-defined" causes according to all the methods, suggesting difficulty in access or precious care in health services. Avoidability methods provide an important instrument for diagnosis of quality problems in health services performance and orientation of measures to reduce avoidable infant deaths. Thus, strengthening maternal and child care and investment in training and capacity-building for health professionals and services are priorities for public policies to reduce infant mortality.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 12 October 2019.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#1,321
of 1,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,190
of 331,880 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#32
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,854 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 331,880 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
