↓ Skip to main content

Use of Rapid Ascertainment Process for Institutional Deaths (RAPID) to identify pregnancy-related deaths in tertiary-care obstetric hospitals in three departments in Haiti

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Use of Rapid Ascertainment Process for Institutional Deaths (RAPID) to identify pregnancy-related deaths in tertiary-care obstetric hospitals in three departments in Haiti
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12884-017-1329-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew T. Boyd, Erin N. Hulland, Reynold Grand’Pierre, Floris Nesi, Patrice Honoré, Reginald Jean-Louis, Endang Handzel

Abstract

Accurate assessment of maternal deaths is difficult in countries lacking standardized data sources for their review. As a first step to investigate suspected maternal deaths, WHO suggests surveillance of "pregnancy-related deaths", defined as deaths of women while pregnant or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy, irrespective of cause. Rapid Ascertainment Process for Institutional Deaths (RAPID), a surveillance tool, retrospectively identifies pregnancy-related deaths occurring in health facilities that may be missed by routine surveillance to assess gaps in reporting these deaths. We used RAPID to review pregnancy-related deaths in six tertiary obstetric care facilities in three departments in Haiti. We reviewed registers and medical dossiers of deaths among women of reproductive age occurring in 2014 and 2015 from all wards, along with any additional available dossiers of deaths not appearing in registers, to capture pregnancy status, suspected cause of death, and timing of death in relation to the pregnancy. We used capture-recapture analyses to estimate the true number of in-hospital pregnancy-related deaths in these facilities. Among 373 deaths of women of reproductive age, we found 111 pregnancy-related deaths, 25.2% more than were reported through routine surveillance, and 22.5% of which were misclassified as non-pregnancy-related. Hemorrhage (27.0%) and hypertensive disorders (18.0%) were the most common categories of suspected causes of death, and deaths after termination of pregnancy were statistically significantly more common than deaths during pregnancy or delivery. Data were missing at multiple levels: 210 deaths had an undetermined pregnancy status, 48.7% of pregnancy-related deaths lacked specific information about timing of death in relation to the pregnancy, and capture-recapture analyses in three hospitals suggested that approximately one-quarter of pregnancy-related deaths were not captured by RAPID or routine surveillance. Across six tertiary obstetric care facilities in Haiti, RAPID identified unreported pregnancy-related deaths, and showed that missing data was a widespread problem. RAPID is a useful tool to more completely identify facility-based pregnancy-related deaths, but its repeated use would require a concomitant effort to systematically improve documentation of clinical findings in medical records. Limitations of RAPID demonstrate the need to use it alongside other tools to more accurately measure and address maternal mortality.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Student > Master 3 7%
Lecturer 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 13 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 10%
Unspecified 2 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 13 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 20 September 2022.
All research outputs
#2,062,131
of 25,396,120 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#521
of 4,787 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,319
of 325,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#14
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,396,120 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,787 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 325,276 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.